Google
This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at|http: //books .google .com/I
A DIGESTED INDEX
TO
HOWELL'S EDITION OF THE STATE TRIALS,
BY DAVID JARDINE, Esq.
OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE, BARRISTER AT LAW.
AN Index to HovveU's Edition of the State Trials has long been a
desideratum : amongst all classes of readers, and particularly amongst
members of the legal profession, it has been a constant subject of regret
that so valuable a repository of historical and constitutional information
should be almost inaccessible, as a book of reference, for want of a con-
venient Index. The publishers, having determined to close the Work
with the Thirty-Third volume, have much satisfaction in being able to
annoimce to the Public, that a digested Index to the whole collection
is now nearly ready for the Press, and will be published early in the
Year 1827, and form the Thirty-Fourth volume of the entire Work.
In making this Compilation, the object has been to furnish the general,
as well as the professional Reader, with an easy instrument of reference
to every thing contained in the collection ; and it has been considered
that the simplest method of arrangement will be best calculated to effect
this object The Index, therefore, merely consists of two Tables, alpha-
betically arranged ; the first being a Table of Names, with a short abstract
under each name of the Contents of the Work, so far as they relate to
the individual to whom the name belongs, and a reference to the passages
in which he is mentioned : the second being a Table of principal matters,
containing references to all the leading subjects, and all the incidental
circumstances, throughout the whole collection. The heads of reference,
in both Tables, have been made as numerous and particular as possible,
with a view to afford a large number of such points as may most probably
occur to the memory of the Reader, and by which he may be guided
directly to the object of his search.
COMPLETE COLLECTION
OF
State Trials
«
AND
PROCEEDINGS FOR HIGH TREASON AND OTHER
CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS
FROM THE
EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE YEAR 1783,
WITH NOTES AND OTHER ILLUSTRATIONS:
COMPILED BY
T. B. HOWELL, Esq. F.R.S. F.S.A.
S^ AND
CONTINUED
FROM THE YEAR 1783 TO THE PRESENT TIME:
BY
THOMAS JONES HOWELL, Esq.
VOL. xxxm.
[BEING VOL. XIL OF THE CONTINUATION]
57 GEORGE IIL...A. D. 1817 1 GEORGE IV....A. D. 1820.
LONDON:
LONGBfAN, REES, ORME, BROWN & GREEN; J. M. RICHARDSON; KINGS-
BURY, PARBURY, & ALLEN; BALDWIN, CRADOCK, & JOY; E. JEFFERY
& SON ; J. HATCHARD & SON ; R. H. EVANS ; J. BOOKER ; J. BOOTH ;
A»D BUDD & CALKIN.
1896.
• • *
Lmm OF THE
AUG 21 1900
T. C. HiMirif,
FriBlcr,
PatenuMSer-row Preih
NOTICE.
B Y the present volume^ this Series of State Trials (termi-
nating with the Reign of his late Majesty) is brought to a close ;
nor is there, at the present moment, any intention to continue the
publication of Modem State Trials to a more recent period.
Availing themselves, , therefore, of the opportunity which thus
presents itself, the Publishers have completed their arrangements
for the early appearance of a. Gei^ekal Digested Index,
embracing the contents as well of the First as of the Second
Series.
In selecting from the very numerous cases which fall under
the denomination of State Trials, those which form the Second
Series, care has been taken to reject none the omission of which
would be inconsistent with the genial object of the work. Of
those which have been omitted, some did not appear to be of
su^ffident importance to counterbalance the inconvenience of the
great eMension of the work which their insertion would have
occasioned; and others, in so far as relates to material points,
are f idly reported elsewhere.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TO
VOLUME XXXIII.
GEORGE THE THIRD, A. D. 1817.
Page
()98. Proceedings in the High court of justiciary at Edinburgh
against ALEXANDER M'LAREN and THOMAS BAIRD,
for Sedition^ a. d. 1817 • • •••• 1
699. Proceedings in the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh^ on two
successive Indictments^ raised by his Majesty's Advocate^ against
WILLIAM EDGAR^ for administering unlawful Oaths^ a. d.
1817 145
700. Proceedings in the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh^ on two
successive Indictments, raised by his Majesty's Advocate, against
ANDREW M'KINLEY, for administering unlawful Oaths, a. d.
1817 275
Proceedings against JAMES M'EWAN and others at Glasgow ... 629
701. Proceedings in the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh, against
NEIL DOUGLAS, Universalist Preacher, for Sedition, a. d.
1817 633
GEORGE THE FOURTH, A. D. 1820.
702. The whole Proceedings on the Trial of ARTHUR THISTLE-
WOOD, for High Treason, a. d. 1820 681
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
703. The whole Proceedings on the Trial of JAMES INGS, for High
Treason, a. d. 1820 ••• «• «.... 957
704. The whole Proceedings on the Trial of JOHN THOMAS BRUNT,
for High Treason, a. d. 1820 1177
705. The whole Proceedings on the Trial of WILLIAM DAVIDSON
and RICHARD TIDD, for High Treason, a.d. 1820 1337
ADDENDA to ihe Case of VALENTINE JONES, Esq., yd. x. of
this Continuation, p. 336 • •• 1567
STATE
I T
STATE TRIALS,
698. Proceedings in the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh
against Alexander M'Larek and Thomas Baird, for
Sedition^ March 5th — 7th: 67 George III. a. d. 1817.
flIGti COURT OF JUSTICIARY.
March 5, 1817.
Present,
Hl Hon. Bamd BmfU^ Lord Justice Clf^rk.
Lord Bermani*
IjardGUiies.
lAudPHmiify.
Lord Baton.
Countelfor the Croum*
. Rl Hon. Alejotider MataiuKMe^ Lord Adfo-
- cate [afterwards a l<»d of Session and Justi-
ciary, with the title of Lord Meadowhank.J
Janes Wedderktmj Esq. Solicitor^eneral.
H. H. Dmifwiondy Esq.
J. A, Maeonoekiey Esq.
H, Wmraukry Esq. Agent.
Coiamlfor Alexander M*Lat€n.
Jckn Clerk, Esq.
J. P. Grant, Esq.
James CamjieUy Esq .
Mr. JR. Morion^ Agent.
Counsel for Thomas Baird,
Thmas Jeffery, Esq".
Benry Cockbum, Esq.
X 5. Stewart^ Esq.
Mr. J. Campbell, W, S. Agent.
Xorrf Jftf^ior C2»r&. — Alexander M'laren
and Thomas Baird« attend to the indictment
against you, which the clerk of Court will read.
" Alexander m«laren, now or lately
weafer in Kilmamack, in the county of Ayr,
and Thomas Baird, merchant there, you are
indicted and accused, at the instance of Alex-
ander Maoonodiie of \Meadowhank, his ma-
jesty's' advocate, for his majesty's interest:
thai albeit, by the laws of this and of every
other well-governed realm, Sedition b a crime
of a heinous nature, and seveitly punishable :
VOL. xxxm.
yet true it is and of verity, that you the said
Alexander M'Laren and Thomas Baird are
both and each, or one or other of you, guilty
thereof, actors or actor, or art and part : in $o
far as, you the said Alexander M*Laren did,
at a public meeting, held at Dean-park, in the
vicinitv of Kilmarnock aforesaid, on the 7th
dajT of December 1816, or on one or other of
the days of that month, or of November im-
mediately preceding, or of January immedi-
ately following, which meeting was attended
by a great multitude of persons, chiefly of the
lower orders, wickedly and feloniously deliver
a speech, containing a number of seditious and
in&mmatory remarks and assertions, calculated
to degrade and bring into contempt the go-
vernment and legislature, and to withdraw
therefrom the confidence and affections of the
people, and fill the realm with trouble and dis-
sention ; in which speech there were the fol-
lowing or similar wicked and seditious expres-
sions : — " Tliat our sufferings are insupportable,
is demonstrated to the world ; and that they
are neither temporary, nor occasioned by a
transition * from war to peace,' is palpable to
all, though all have not the courage to avow
it. The fact is, we are nUed by men only so*
ficitous for their own a^randizement ; and
they care no farther for the great body of the
people, than they are subservient to their ac-
cursed purposes. If you are convinced of this,
my countiymen, I would therefore put the
question, are you degenerate enough to bear
it ? ShaJl we, whose forefathers set limits to
the all-grasping power of Rome; shall we,
whose forefathers, at the never to be forgotten
field of Bannockbum, told the mighty Edward,
at the head of the most mighty array ever
trod^ on Britain's soil, ' Hitherto shait thoa
come, and no farther;' shall we, I say, whose
forefathers defied the efforts of foreign tyranny
to enslave our beloved country, meanly permit,
B
31
57 GEORGE III.
Trial of Alexander McLaren
C4
{ii Our day, wifkettt a murmiir, a base oligaithy
to feed their filthy yermin on our vitals, aud
rule us as they will ? No, my countrymen.
Let us lay our petitions at the foot of the
throne, where sits our August Prince, whose
gtacious nature will incline his ear to listen to
tiie cries of his people, which 1^ is bound to
do by the laws of the country. But, should
he be so infatuated as to turn a deaf ear to-
their just petition, he has forfeited their allegi-
ance. Yes, my^ fellow townsmen, in such a
case, to helL with our allegiance." And you
the said Alexander MLaren did, shortly there-
after, deliver, or cause to be delivered, your
said speech, in manuscript, to Hugh Crawford,
printer in Kilmarnock, to be by him printed and
published. And you the said Thomas Baird
having been present at the said meeting, and
having heard the said speech, and others of a
similar tendency, delivered there, did, shortly
thereafter, and in the course of the said
months of December or January,, wickedly
and feloniously print, or cause or procure to
be printed, at the printing-office of the said
Hugh Crawford, id Kilmarnock aforesaid, a
seditious tract or statement, intituled, " Ac-
count of the proceedings of the public meeting
of the Burgesses and Inhabitants of the town
ofKifinainock, held on the 7lh of December
1816, for the purpose of deliberating on the
most proper method of remedying the present
distresses of the country, with a ftiU report of
the speeches on that occasion ;*' which printed
tract or statement did contain a number of se-
ditious and inflaipmatory remarks and asser-
tions, calculated for the purposes above men-
tioned ; and, in particular, a report of the
said speech of you tne said Alexander M'Laren,
with the passage aforesaid, in the same, or
nearly the same terms ; as also the following
wicked and seditious passages, viz. page ninth,
. — " And a House of Commons — but the latter
is corrupted ; it is decayed and worn out ; it
is not really what it is called, it is not a House
of Commons/' — Page tenth — " The House of
Commons, in its original composition, con-
sisted only of commoners, chosen annually
by the universal suffrage of the people. No
nobleman, no clergyman, no naval or military
officer, in short, none who held places, or re-
ceived pensions from government, had any
right to sit in tliat House. — ^This is what the
House of Commons was, what it ought to be,
.and what we wish it to be ; this is the wanted
change in our form of government — the Com-
mons House of Parliament restored to its ori-
ginal purity ; and this, beyond a doubt, would
strike at the root of the greatest part of the
evils we groan under at the present day."-*-
Page eleventh, " la it any wonder, my friends,
that this country is brought to its jpresent unpre.
bedented state of misery, when the rights of the
people have been thus wantonly violated 1'*-^
^age twelfth, " But let us come nearer home*.
J^ok at the year 1793, when the debt amounted
to two hundred and eleven millions, and the
annual taxation to about eighteen millions ;
when liberty began to rear her drooping head
in the country^ when associations were framed
from one end of the kingdom to another, com-
posed of men eminent for their talents and
virtue, to assert their rights ; when a neigh-
bouring nation had just' thrown off a yoke
which was become intolerable — ^what did the
wise mien of this coavtry do? Why, they
declaved war, not only against the French
nation, but also against the friends of liberty
at home.*' — Page twenty-ninth, " Our oppres-
sors have taxed the very light of heaven ; and
they seem surprised and indignant that we
should not bear the insupportable burden, with
which folly, corruption, and avarice, have
loaded us, without reluetance and eomplatnl?-*
— Page thirty-second, ** Their reverend hire-
lings would convince you that you are suffering
under the visitation of the Almighty, and
therefore ought to be submissive under the
chastenii^ atroke.''"-'Page thirty-fifth, ^ We
have these twenty-five years been condemned
to inceMant and unparalleled slavery, by a
usurped Oligarchy, who pretend to be our
guardians and repvesentatives, while, in fsLCi,
they are nothing but our inflexible and deter-
mined enemies.**—^' They have robbed ns oF
our money, deprived us of our friends, violated
our rights, ana abused our privileges.** — ** At
present we have no representatives ; they are
only nominal, not real ; active only in prose-
cutmg their own designs, and at the same time
telling us that they are agreeable to our wishes.^
— ^And you the said Thomas Baird having ob-
tained a number of copies of the said printed
tract or statement, cootaiDing the said falser
wicked, and sedKioufi nasaages, and othcia of
a similar tMidency, ana being altogether of a
seditious nature, did, in the coerso oi the
said months of December and January, and
of February immediately following, at your
shop in KUmamoek aimsaid, wickedly and
feloniously sell, publish, and circulate, or cause
to be sold, published, or circulated, many of
the said copies thereof, at the price of 'fourpence
each, or other small sum, one of which was
then and there purchased by Hugh Wilson,
weaver in Kilmarnock. And you the said
Alexander McLaren and ThoDM» Baird having
been apprehended and taken before WilUaai
Eaton, esq., sheriff-substitute of the county of
Ayr, did, in his presence, at Kilinamock, on
the 26th- day of Febraary 1817, both and each
of you emit and subscribe a declaration : which
declarations, being to be used in evidence
against each of you respectively, and the
manuscript of nineteen pages, and the half
sh^et of paper, tilled on the back, ** No* 5,*^
both referred to in the said declaration of
you the said Thomas Baird, being to be
used in evidence against you the said Hiomes
Baird, as also three copies of the printed
tract, or- statement, above mentioned, beie^
to be used- in evidence agaipst both and.
each of vou, will be lodged in due time in,
the hands of the clerk of the high court of
justiciary, before which you are to be trieif^
si
and Th&mas Bairdjbr S^khn,
A. D. 1817.
16
ttat ywx nay have sn opportunify of Mefn^
the tane. At letst, times and places foresaid
respectively, the said seditious speedi was
wickedly aod feloniously delivered, ooBttibibg
the said or aroilar wicked and seditious ex-
pressions : and the said seditious tract or state-
meat, coDtaioing the said seditious and in*
dammaioiy paasages, and others of a similar
tendency, was wicJkedly and felonioosly printed^
sold, pablished, and circulated, or caused or
procured so to be, as above mentioned : and
you the said Alexander M'Laren and Thomas
Baipd are both and each. Of one or other of
you, guilty thereof, actors or actor, or art and
pait. All which, or part thereof, beins found
proven by the verdict of an assize, beu>re the
lord justice general, the lord justice derk, and
lords commissioners of justiciary, you the said
Alexander M'Laren and Thomas Baird ought
to be punished with the pains of law, to deter
others from committing the like crimes in all
time coming.
" H. Home Dbumkovd, A. D.*'
LIST OF WITKK8SES.
1.
2.
William Eaton, esquire, sheriff-eubstitQte
of Ayrshire.
Thomas Weir, sheriff-clerk-^epate of Ayr^
shine.
3. Alexander Murdochj writer in Ayr.
4. Amirew Fmnie, merchant in Kilmarnock.
5. WUiiam Merrkj wrigbt there.
6. Hugh Crmrfordf printer there.
7. Thomas Murray, journeyman to the said
Hugh Crawford.
6. Jamer JohatsUme, muslin-agent there.
9. David Ramsay Andrews, writer there.
10. Hugh Wibon, weaver there.
11. Jamn Samson, weaver there.
12. David Bow, shopman to Thomas Baird,
merchant in Kilmarnock.
U. HoMx Dbummovd, a. D.
LIST OF ASSIZE. *
CoaMty of Edinburgh.
Jtanes Watson, of Saughton.
Charles Eraser, of Williamston.
Alexander Falconer, baker in Dalkeith.
William Crichion, glazier there. «
WUUam Watson, farmer, Middle-Ksnleith.
John Dodds, fanner, Saughton-mill.
John Drysdale, farmer, Clermiston.
Couttiy of Haddington.
George Remtie, of Fantassie.
Daoid JPringle, of Blegbie.
David Skhrving, farmer at £ast-Garleton.
Peter Sheriff', fanner at Drem.
John Hukp, junior, grocer in Haddington*
County of LinUthgow,
¥atm&n Shmrpy younger of Houston.
Jafei Stewart, of Birniy.
James Gardner, junior, merchant in Bathgate.
JbAit Colder, farmer at Drumcross.
John Buttell, farmer at Mosside.
CUy vf TAMnargh,
WUliam MoriWi^ jeweller, South-brjd'ge-dtrcet^
Edinburgh.
Walter Lamb, upholsterer in Edinburgh.
Archibald M'Kinlay, haberdaiihcr in Edin-
burgh.
John Baxter, confectioner there.
ShatTp Callender, clothier there.
William PiUtison, junior, haberdasher in Edia*
burgh.
Andrew Mellis, haberdasher there.
John Pollock, insurance broker there.
James Hbtc(/ini, jeweller tliere.
John Drtanmona, manufacturer there.
Alexander Andehon, general-agent there.
James Spence, perfumer there.
Peter Brown, hnen-draper there.
William Kennedy, glover there.
James Gilchrist, clothier there.
Charles Howden, shoemaker there.
, Edward XxUchrist, haberdasher there.
James Virtue, Button-manufacturer there.
James Richmond, insurance-broker there.
James Stoddart, wine-merchant there.
Andrew Wauchope, turner there.
Town ofLeith,
James Duncan, ship-owner in Leith.
James Harper, corn-merchant there.
Wm. Uumay, wine-merchant there,
/osaet JSkitmer, cooper there.
John Oowan, wood*4nerchant there.
Charles Murray, wright there.
John SomeruUle, tanner tliere.
Ad. Gillies.
D. MoKTFBNUY.
David DduoLAS^
I/frd Justice Clerk. — Alexander M*Lareti
and Thomas Baird ; What do you say to the
libel ? are you guilty or not guilty ?
Ptfne/i.— Not guilty.
The following Defences had been given in.
Depbvcbs for Alexander M'Laren, Weaver in
Kilmarnock, to the Indictment at the in-
stance of Alexander Maconochie of Mea-
dowbank, his Majesty's Advocate, for his
Majesty^s interest, for Sedition.
^'The panel has been employed horn his
early youth in his trade as a weaver. He has
always preserved the most sober and orderly
habits, and^ if necessary he could bring forward
complete proof of his uniform and steadjT
loyalty. He never was engaged in any riot or
disturbance whatever, and never was connect-
ed, or accused of being connected with any of
the societies, or combinations of men formed
for unlawful purposes, or whose objects have
been regarded with suspicion. He was a vo-
lunteer in the Glasgow Highland regiment
during the whole period of its establishment,
and when the volunteer system was put an end
to, he transferred^ his services to the local
militia. During the greatest part of his service,
he was a serjeant, a situation which he ob-
tained by Ids good conduct.
71
57 GEORGE III.
Trial ofAktander M'Lareu
C8
U
Of lale yeaiiytlu^mieliamoBgiiiaDyoUiierty .
lamented the distresses of the ceuotiVy from
which he himself had severely suiTerea in his'
situadbn and prospects. He tiierefore approv-
ed of the petitions, which were presented in
such numhers to his royal highness the Prince
Begenty and the two Houses of parliament, the
object of which was to obtain relief.
** A meeting was held near Kilmarnock in
the month of December last, at which a great
multitude of people attended, for the pnrpose
of considerinff of the expediency of petitioning
his royal highness the Prince Ilegent and the
Houses of Parliament, upon the present dis-
tressed state of the country, and the subject
of parliamentary reform. The panel was pre-
sent at that meeting, and made a short
speech, not in the terms alleged in the libel,
but in other tetms, which appeared to him
to be warranted by law in such a case.
The meeting was afterwards addressed by other
persons; certain resolutions were agreed to;
petitions were drawn out, addressed to the
Frince Regent, and to the two Houses of par-
liament. These petitions having been signed
by a great number of persons, were sent to
Ix)ndon and presented. The petitions ad-
dressed to the two Houses of Parliament were
presented, read, and ordered to lie on the table
of each house. In his speech, the panel did
nothing more than lawfully recommend the
said petitions^: and he denies that he is guilty
of the crime of sedition.
^'The panel took no charge whatever of
printing the pamphlet produced with the libel ;
and he finds that his own speech is inaccurately
reported.
** It is an evident misconception, that such
a speech, spoken at a lawful meeting for lawful
purposes, was calculated to degrade and bring'
into contempt the' government and legisla-
ture, and to withdraw therefrom the confidence
and affections of the people, and fill the realm
with trouble and dissentions. If there are
grievances or abuses, or such men as bad rulers,
or bad ministers, those who complain against
them, or petition against them, do only exer-
cise their legal rights. The panel, while he
was disposed to petition for redress of griev-
ances, was filled with the same reverence for
the legislature and all its different branches,
and for the government of the country as
established by law, that is impressed on the
mind of every good subject.
'* Under protestation to add and eik.
" John Clekk.
** J. P. Grakt.
" James Campbell."
LIST of exculpatory WITNESSES.
Hugh WiUon, weaver, Kilmarnock.
Jumet Samson, ditto, ditto. '
James Johnstofie, muslin -agent there.
John Kennedif, schoolmaster there.
John £/!ac^iMW(^ Vool-spinner there.
Dbfs«cs8 for Thomas Baiid, to'the IndicUnent
at the instance of his Majesty's Advocate
for the Crime of Sedition.
** The panel denies that he is guilty of the
crime diarged against him. He was not a
speaker at the meeting mentioned in the
indictment, and neither spoke mor v^rote any
of the words there set forth. He also denies
that he printed or published any of the said
words; and if any circumstances shall be
proved tending to connect him with the publi*
cation or sale thereof, he has no doubt, both
from the tenor of the said words and the nature
of his concern with them, that it will be
apparent that he is entirely guiltless of the
crime here charged.
*' Under protestation to add and eik.
•* F. Jeffrey.
** H. COCKBURH,
** J. S. Stewart.**
list of exculpatory witnesses.
John Andrews, chief magistrate of Kilmarnock.
DaM Hamsay Andrews, writer there.
WaJUer Andrews, writer there.
Andrew Finnie, merchant there.
James Johnstone, muslin agent there.
John Brown, writer there.
Baiiie William Brown, manufacturer there.
John WilUe, assessor of taxes there.
Bjoberi Howie, merchant there.
Tfiomas Murray, printer there.
The Rev. James Kirkwood, relief minister there,,
residing at Riccarton.
Lord Justice Clerk. — ^Have the counsel Cor
the panels any objections to state to the
relevancy of this indictment ?
Mr. Campbell, — I appear on behalf of the
panel, Alexander M'liiren. It is not my
intention to state any objections to ttie relevancy
of the libel, but to explain to the Court and
Jury the nature of the concern which he had
in the transactions now brought before this
Court. At the same time, it is proper I should
state, that we who are his counsel hold it to be
the undonbted law — and law which has never
been questioned in this part of the country —
that it is the province of the jury to consider
both the facts and the law of the case — that it
is for them to say whether the facts charged in
the indictment are proved in the course of the
trial, and if they find them proved, whether
these facts do amount to the crime charged.
And that being the case, we hold that we are
not deprived of the benefit of any pleas which
we may afterwards maintain, by any interlo-
cutor of relevancy now to be pronounced.
I conceive also, that in justice to the panel
and in justice to the opposite side of the bar,
(who always meet me with liberality, and whom
I wish to meet in the same manner), I should
at once and openly state the nature of the
defence we intend to maintain, and should say
something of the history and character of the
I panel.
^
and Timtu Bakd/or SeUition.
9}
Tlie paaely after learmng the tnde of m
*«reayer, to the coooty of Perth, went to
Glasgow, where be continued a good many
yean. He acted as assistant foreman in a
■lecrantile bouse, and during the whole of his
-engagement gave entire satisfaction to his
employer. Seventeen years ago he entered
into the Highland corps of yolunteers in tluit
city, and soon rose to the rank of serjeant, and
continued with the corps till it was disbanded,
and the volunteer associations were discon-
tinued. He next went to Kilmarnock, where
a great many weavers are occupied in working
lor the manufacturers of Glasgow ; and« at the
same time, he again gave his services to the
public, by entering into the local militia corps
of that district, in which corps |ie continued
down to 1812, when the period of its service
expired. And not only was there no complaint
against him during all these periods, as a man
either troublesome or quarrelsome, but he
maintained in Kilmarnock, during the period
of nearly eight years during which he lived
there, a character remarkable for sober habits,
attachment to good order, and to the govern-
ment of the country ; and last harvest, during
a riot which occurred about a scarcity of meal,
so far was he from taking any part in the riot,
that when a house was to be attacked, he put
himself forward along with two constables in
order to protect the house. He enjoyed the
same decent, respectable, and good character,
till this charge of sedition was brought against
him.
He does not deny that he attended the
meeting in December. His means of subsist-
ence, and those -of his neighbours about him,
had been graduslUy declining. They had ar-
rived, before the period I speak o% at, 1 hope,
their worst state of distress ; for he worked
fifteen hours a day for 5s. a-week, although he is
not only one of the best workmen, but so expert
as to be able to execute the best work in the
shortest time. And I will prove, that other
workmen who could execute as' good work,
bot who were not so expert and expeditious as
my client, were able to obtain only 3s. a-week.
The panel admits that in this distress he began
to think of the causes which had reduced his
neighbours and himself froin a condition in
which they were prosperous and happy to a
state in which they could scarcely gain the
means of subsistence ; he confesses he came
to be of opinion, tfiat the evils were partly
owing to toe excessive taxation which had
been imposed on the country; and he and
some othera thought it right to call a meeting
of the inhabitants of the place where he resided,
to consider the propriety of a petition to the
legislature on the subject of their distresii^ its
causes, and what appeared to them to be the
proper remedies;
Thev conceived, that to do this was their
nndouDted right ; and it will not be denied on
the opposite side of the bar, that such was
their right. There is no charge in the indict-
ni^t that the meeting was illegal. .It was a
A. D. 1817.
uo
I
legal neeting which they were entitled to
hold : it was for a legal purpose ; there was no
harm in going there; and every person waa
entitled to state the grievances he felt, and in
a manner that might induce the meeting to
take constitutional measures for what he con-
ceived would bring them relief. Tl^ panel
did not intend to take any part in the proceed-
ings, nor to open the meeting as he did. fiut
those persons who were to have opened the
proceedings, were not equal to the task wbea
the time came, and he was asked to undertake
what was refused by the others. He went into
a house in the neighbourhood, and hastily
threw upon paper some observations which he
wished to submit to the meeting. He did ad-
dress the meeting, but he did not submit to it,
— and there were not contained in that paper—
what are cited as offensive expressions in the
last part of the indictment.
As to tl^e passage about a corrupt adminis-
tration, which is cited in the indictment, it was
in the manuscript, but was not spoken in the
field. I admit that the manuscript afterwards
went into the hands of the committee of the
petitioners, at the request of the committee, in
order to be printed in an account of the pro*
ceediogs, but he had no concern in printing
that account.
With regard to the expressions which are
charged as seditiously directed against the
legislature, we shall satisfy the jury, and shall
show your lordships, ^hat giving them a fair
construction, they contain nothing improper
against any of the orders of the state, against
the King, the House of Lords, or H'ouse of
Commons. In sound construction, the ex-
pressions apply only to the administration for
the time, and every person at such a^ meeting
is entitled, if he thinks it right, to attack the
policy, and conduct of ministers. I need not
enter into the question, whether there has
been roal-administration or not; but every
person feeling himself aggrieved is entitled to
state his grievances, and more particulariy at
a meeting convened for the purpose of apply-
ing to the legislature for redress. This will
not be denied. And what was done in conse-
quence of this meeting, and of the speeches
which were made there? Every thing was
conducted in a regular and orderly manner;,
no injury was done to any property or to any
person ; the only consequence of the meeting
was, that three petitions were resolved on, one
to the Prince Regent, another to the House of
Lords, and the third to the House of Commons ;
which last petition, when presented to that
House, was ordered to be brought up and to
lie on the table. This i* proof that the peti-
tions contained nothing that was offensive to
the Prince Regent, nothing seditious, nothing
offensive to the Houses of rarliament. Every
thing that resulted was legitimate and proper.
Taking the whole circumstances into consi-
deration, it clearly appears, that th# first pas-
sage objected to, relates to the measures of
ministers ; and I will prove even by witnesses
11>
57 GEORGfi III.
Trial rfdUmnitr M*Liiren
112
for tlie cTOwn> th^t, bo fa» was my dtent from
employing any exprieasions disrespectliil to-
wards the head of the govemme&t, that he did
quite the reverse, and ftpoke with the titmost
respect of the Prince Regent.
This being the situation of the maCtefy and
my client having done nothing but what he
was entitled to do, we ^all show that the lan-
guage he used was no other than what he was
completely authorised* to use. In numerous
petitions to parliament, much stronger lao**
guage has been used, and found not only to
be not seditious, but to be not disrespectful to
the House. What was the language held when
Parliamentary Reform was llrst talked of at
the Thatched-house-tavem ? in the second
resolution of that meeting it was said, ** This
meetipg, considering that a general application
by the collective b(^y to the Commons Ilouse
of Parliament cannot be made before the close
of the present session, is of opinion, that the
sense of the people should be taken at such
times as may be con? enient this summer, in
order to lay their ^veral petitions before par-
liament early in the next session, when their
pmposition for a Parliamentaty Reformation,
wUhout ufkick neither the liberty of the natkm <wn
be preserved, n&r the permanence of a wise and
virtuous administration can be secured, may re-
ceive that ample and mature discussion which
so momentous a question demands/' * These
are strong terms, and imply, that, without le^
formation in the representation of the people,
the liberty of the subject is in danger ; and if
there is any doubt as to the meaning of the
passage, look to the letter written by Sfr. Pitt
to Mr. Froet, in which it is said, that Reform
'^ is essentially necessary to the independence
of parliament, and the liberty of the people.'' f
Down to this day strong language is always
used in petitions on that subject and never
objected to, except when the House of Com-
mons is denied to represent the people, or
matter is introduced against the House that is
not relevant to the object of the petition.
It has been laid down by constitutional
lawyers and statesmen, by lord Thurlow, by
Mr. Pitty and Mr. Fox, that where the language
is expressive of the grievance, however strong
it may be, it is justifiable. I therefore submit,
that, as it is competent to put such language
into a petition to parliament — ^as such lan-
guage has not been held objectionable in the
House of Commons, it cannot be considered
as seditious, or as tending to bring the legisla-
ture into contempt. If such language is law-
ful in petitions to parliament, then it must be
held lawful in the speeches and resolutions
made at meetings pi^paratory to such peti-
tions. For there would be an inconsistency
and absurdity in saying, that such language
might be lawfully used in a petition, which if
used in discussing whether it should be in-
serted in the petition would be unlawful. If
> ■ ■ ■ » 1 II I H III ■ .1 W^— —■ I 11 III ,11 .— .PW«— .^W^MMW^— — "
* 1 How. Mod. St. Tr. 493, note.
t 1 How. Mod. St. Tr. 494, note.
it should be neeessary, we shall make out to
the satisfaction of your lordships and the jury,
thatthe language, even as stated in the indid-
ment, does not amount to sedition.
Having stated thus much, I conceive I have
3«ned the nature of the defence we mean to
ead, at sufficient lehgth to make the oppo-
site sHle of the bar aware of the nature of^our.
defence, and I think it unneceisary to detain
your lordships any longer.
Lord Justice Clerk. — ^It is a perfectly fair
and distinct statement.
Mr. Mrey,'^! appear here in behalf of
Thomas JBaird. k suppose we are all agreed,
that it it the right and province of ^the jury to
take into consideration both the facts and the
law of the case; first, to find whether the fiicts
libelled are proved ; and then to judge of the
import of the facts so proved. We have no
desire to quash the trial in any prelimioaiy
stage of the proceedings ; and, notvcithstand*
ing some incorrect stater, ents in the libel, as
we do not wish to shrink f^om investigation,
we shall not trouble your lordships vriUi any
preliminary objections to the relevancy.
I have little farther to state in addition to
the written defences. Mr. Baird is a ^mer-
chant in Kilmarnock, and has always main-
tained, not only an irreproachable but a re-
spectable character in the estimation of both
his superior and equals. He also has served
his country in a military capacity, and held,
successively, commissions in different bodies
of volunteers. In the last corps to which he
vras attached, he served down till ihe dissolu-
tion of the volunteer system in 1813, when the
allowances which had been given to them
were taken «way ; and his conduct, character,
and sentiments, were always considered loyal,
respectable, and praiseworthy.
He also had entertained ideas, the wisdom
and propriety of which cannot here be made a
subject of discussion : But to what he consi-
dered as defects in the constitution, he wished
to apply none but constitutional remedies. A
spectator -of the general distress around him,
and a participator in it, he believed that the
evil was ascribable, at least in part, to a de-
fective representation in the Commons House
of Parliament; and he therefore thought it
proper to present a respectful petition to the
legislature on the subject. He attended the'
public meeting which assembled for that pur-
pose ; but he did not take any part in tlie dis-
cussion, not being gifted with powers of
oratory, nor wishing to obtrude himself on the
public notice. He did however attend the
meeting, and he heard the speeches — which
were not so violent as they have been repre-
sented.
Some expressions were at the time repit)-
bated by him, as tending to throw an odium
on the geneml cause of Reform ; and after-
wards, when it was determined that some
account of the proceedings should be publisbei^,
and the orators gave in t^if tpeeckes to the
131
and Thiuu Bamlfor Sidiliint.
A. D. 1817.
CM
commitee for pablieatioD, he repeated his oik
jectioDs ftgatost printing Mveral passagM which
appeared to him to be improper ; bttC he was
oTemikd by a majority ot the committee, who
wished a full publication of the proceedings.
As the fuoda of the petitioners were low^ it
eocurred to the committee that some small
pittance might be.c<41ected from the publiea-
tion, to defray the expenses necessary for the
pfepaiatioa dT the petitions. In this way, he
oonaemed to the publiealioRy but at the same
time protested against puUisluDg any impropet
ezpccssions ; but not hayiag any idea (as such
a oiscoveiy indeed had not then been made in
any quarter)^ that the expressions, tfaoagfa
censarable^ were of a naittre to infer criminal
Gonseqaeneesy be gare no critical attention to
the minute contents of the publication, nor
considered himself responsible for them. In
Older to forward the end in ?iew, which was
not to excite violence or sedition, but merely
to raise money, it was determined that the
members of Ae committee should distribute
and sell as many copies of the pamphlet as
possible ; and my client agreed to sell some of
^ibem.
Tbese are the facts of the case. As to the
leleTancy, mnch will depend on the interpre*
tation to be- given to the words libelled on.
We do not think it necessary at present to say
any thing farther on that point, as we shaU
prove that the expressions used were materially
aifierent from those lib^ed in the indictment.
When tba tets are disclosed in the evidence,
we shall have a fitter opportunity for remark*
ing on them.
Lord AdvoaUe. — ^It is unnecessary for me to
say any thing as to the candid statement
which has been made on the other side of the
bar. I admit that it is not only the right of
the jury, but that it is their bouaden duty to
hay upon their oaths, whether the natter
charged is sedition or not. In that I concur
with my teamed friends, and therefore I necfd
say ttodiing more.
Lord Juttice Clerk. — ^Your lordships have
heard what has been said on behalf of the pri-
soners, and what has been said by the lord
advocate. I have to ask your lordships, whe-
ther you have any observations to offer on the
relevancy of this indictment.
iiovd Hermand. — ^I am of opinion that the
indictment is relevant ; and I think there can
be little doubt on the point with those who
bear me. The learned gentleman who opened
the defence admitted, that an attack on parlia*
ment oonstitntes sedition; adding, that his
client did not apply his expressions to the
legislature, but to the ministers of the day. It
nay be so, but that is tiot what is stated in
this indictment, to which alone I can attend at
ptesent. Past of the chaige goes veiy deepv
They» iMt on pretence of a dntiful petition.
Sttch pretences ace always made. T^% your
lovdships will attend to what we find stated :
^ Ijdt Of lay onir petitiena at the fwit of &e
throne, where sile o«r august prince, whoso
gracious nature will incline his ear to listen to
the cries of his people, which he is bound to
do by the laws of the country." AH this is
extremely good ; but what follows ? " But,
should he be 80 infatuated as to turn a deaf
ear to their just petition, he has forfeited their
ellegiaace. Yes, ray fellow-townsmen, in such
a case, to h^U toUh ow aUtgUmce/' Is that not
sedition? Accompanied with an overt act,
would it not be high treason ? I have no hesi-
tation in saying it would.
Things may turn out differently on the proof
from what is represented in the indictment ;
and I should n^ice to find it so. But, with
regard to the speech and the publication, aa
here stated, is uiere not a direct attack on tho
legislature ? Another pflMsage is : ''A House
of Commons, but the latter is corrupted ; it i»
decayed and worn out; it is not really what it
is called; it is not a House of Commons.^
We are told this is only an attack on the mi-
nisters. It b an attack on the House itself.
Any petition containing such expressions, I
always understood, would be rejected by the
Houee of Commons. " At present we have
no representatives ; they are only nominal, not
real; actite only in prosecuting their own
designs, and at the same time telling us that
they are agreeable to our wishes.'' Is that not
a broad attack on the legislature T I shsll bo
glad if the facts charged are not made out^
They cleaity amount to sedition as they are
stated.
Lord GiUieSj-^-l concur in the opinion which
I have now heard, so far as to think the indict-
ment relevant. I have no doubt that it ia
relevant, and that the ordinary interlocutor
must be pronounced. The indictment states,
that at a meeting '* attended by a great multi-
tude of persons, chiefly of the lower orders,"
one of tae panels delivered a certain spee<^
which speech was afterwards ciixulated by the
other prisoner. »
As to the nature and objects of the meeting,
no information is given in the indictment ; I
must therefore hold it to have been a lawful
meeting. But the libel goes on to state, that
^ panel " wickedly and feloniously delivered
a speech containing a number of seditious and
inflammatory remarks and assertions, calcu*
lated to degrade and bring into contempt the
government and legislature, and to withdraw
Uierefrom the confidence and affections of the
people, and to fill the realm with trouble and
dissention.'' This is certainly a charge of
sedition ; and, if the expressions cited in the
indictment were delivered for the purpose
there statikl,. they must bo regarded as sedi*>
tiotM. I need deliver no opinion farther at
present, for the facta chaiged in the indict-
ment, an^f stUl more, the wieked and febniou»
intentione therein aseribed- to- them, are denied
by the panels. AJl these matters remain to be
the subject of proof; and I should be arvogiat-
ing to myself the province of the jury and Of
w
57 GEORGE IIL
Triid ofAlexatukf M*Larnt
[16
your lordship, if I said aaj thing farther at
this period or the trial ; for after the proof only
can any satisiactory opinion be given on the
subject.
Lord PitnttUy,—^Swm after the printed copy
of this indictment "was put into my hands, I
considered it with a view to the question of
relevancy; and although the counsel for the
panels have not disputed the relevancy of the
indictment, but reserved to themselves the
liberty of making such observations as may
appear to them proper after a proof shal) have
been led, it would have been the province and
the duty of this court to stop the trial at this
stage if it had appeared to us that the indict-
ment is not relevantly laid.
ThMefence has been very properly explain-
ed by the counsel for the panels ; and I shall
be happy if they make out that defence, either
in exculpation, or in alleviation of the crime
charged in this indictment. The only question
at present is as to the relevancy of the indict-
ment ; and I have no hesitation in saying, that
in my opinion, it is relevanf ; nnd that, there-
fore, the ordinary interlocutor should be pro-
nounced.
The major proposition of the indictment
charges sedition in general terms. This is an
unexceptionable charge, which has never been
objected to, that I know of, but in one case,
where the question reg^ding it was argued,
and the objection was repelled. I allude to
the case of Sinclair.* It is known to every
lawyer that sedition is a crime recognised by
the laws of this country. It is a crime, in-
deed, the trial and punishment of which must
be coeval with government.
It IS stated that the one panel made a speech
which contains inflammatory remarks and se-
ditious expressions, and that the other panel
circulated a pamphlet containing that and
other seditious speeches. Paragraphs of it
have been read, and I will not consume time
with reading or commenting on any^f them
at present. No person who reads them can
doubt, that the general nature of them is to
excite commotion, and to prepare the way for
resistance and for -overturning the government.
That this is the general tendency of (he facts
charged, no person can doubt. It would also
be wasting the time of the Court to read the
passages of the luminous commentary by Mr.
Hume on the crime of sedition, or to refer to
the authorities and the precedents which have
occurred in this court.
The counsel for the panels are correct in
stating, that it is the province of the jury ulti-
mately to determine, not only as to the facts of
the utterance and the publication of the ex-
pressions mentioned in the libd, but also with
regard to the law, whether the expressions are
to be held seditious or not. On that point
— ... 11 1..I 1 I M I ., I, I I ,1 III II I , I I
* See the debate on the Relevancy of the
Indiotment in Smdair's wse^ 2 Blow, Mod. St.
Tr. 784.
there can be no doubt; atid there never was
doubt as to it at any period of the history of this
court. The Court, however, in considering of
the relevancy, must determine in the first in-
stance whether the expressions complained of
appear to them to be seditions, and to amount
to the crime of sedition ; and on this subject I
cannot entertain the shadow of doubt.
Lord Retton. — I have no dpubt as to the re-
levancy of the indictment. We have nothing
to do at present with the truth of the state*
ments in it. The only question now is, whe-
ther the averments of the public prosecutov
are put in proper shape and terms in this
charge. The jury will decide not only on the
bare fhcts^ but on the legal import of them,
and will say whether the panels are guilty or
not of the crime of sedition.
I have no doubt of the sufficiency of the
averments made by the public prosecutor. He
has averred circumstancesy which, if proved,
amount to sedition. His averments amount to
this, that what was said and published was not
only calculated to produce pernicious conse^
quences affecting the government and legisla-^
ture, but must have been meant for seditious
purposes. The indictment states, that the pur-
r>se of the panels was vricked and felonious;
consider that the speech said to have been
delivered by one of tne panels is seditious in
all its parts, and tends to excite discontent in
the country. It was delivered in the open air,
before a multitude of the lower orders assembled
to hear it. The panel is alleged to have stated
that their sufferings were intolerable, and in
coarse and calumnious language to have said^
** A base oligarchy feed their filthy vermin on
our vitals, and rule us as they will.^' I consider
this expression as tending directly to vilify the
government, and weaken the affections of the
country towards its legislature. In this speech
he talks of successful resistance. He speaks
of the reformation, and of the resistance made
to the English when their progress was stopped
at Bannookbum. What were the feelings
meant to be excited in the audience ? He was
attempting to degrade the government, in
order to stimulate his hearers to resistance ;
and, to give them confidence, he mentioned
former instances of successful resistance. No
doubt he proposes that the petition shall be
laid at the foot of the throne ; and he pays a
compliment to t1|e Prince Regent. But what
does he add ? ** Should he be so infatuated as
to turn a deaf ear to their just petition, he has
forfeited theit allegiance. Yes, my fellow-
townsmen, in such a case, to hell with our
allegiance.** Is there no intimidation — is there
no threat intended by such language ? It is
true the expression ^* just petition*' is employ-
ed ; but who is to judge whether the petition
is just ? Were-4l)09e at the meeting to judge ?
It was in efiect, saying, if our petition is not
listened to, we are alMolved from our alle*
glance. If the expressions shall be proyed^
Uie language is seditious in a high degree. •
171
ttmi T%omag^i^irdfir SkdHwn.
A. D: 1817.
LIS
Lord Justice Clerk, — I entirdy concur in the
Opiiiiong which have been deliyered as to. flie
wofiaee and doty of the jury in a case of thi»
kod. It XI not necessary ror me to state any
tfaioff further at present, than that no douU
can he entertained that this indictment is rele»
TBnt.
Alexander H^ren and Thomas fiaird :
Attend'to'tfae interlocutor of the court as to
the relevancy of this indictmcpl.
VOL. XXXIII. »
But ibis pand is not only accused ef ex-
pressing himself in this seditions manner wfiile
in the beat «f addressing his audience, but he
is also said to hare delivered up Uie MS. of his
speech' in order to be printed. If thisbe proved,
then not only did he use seditious language in
the heat of his address, for which he might
have been in a certain degree exousablCy if
momentarily not master of himself, but he af-
terwards did the utmost in his power to circu*
late this sedition. It was not likely that the
speech would be heard of beyond the place
where it was delivered, witliout some eflbrt
yrete used to disseminate it, but he shewed his
anxiety to obtain for it a wider circulation.
The indictment is clearly relevant as to
M'Laren. It is likewise so as to Baird* He
was present at the meeting. I do not say the
purpose of the meeting was illegal. Baiid be-
came the trumpet of that meeting, and is said
lo have circulated an account of this very
speech, which is charged as having been de-
livered by McLaren. If the public prosecutor
proves his averments, he makes out that a di-
rect attack was made on the legislature, and in
strong terms oa the House of Commons. " No
nobleman— no clergyman — no naval or mili-
tary officer — in short, none who held places,
or received pensions from government, had
any right to sit in that House.*' And again,
** Is it any wonder, my friends, that this coud-
t^is brought to its presentunprecedented state
Of misery, when the rights of the people have
been thus wantonly violated?^' And in ano-
ther place it is said, ** we have these twenty-
five years been condemned to incessant and
unptoalleled slavery, by a usurped oligarchy,
who preteqd to be our guardians and represen-
tatives, while, in £act, they are nothing but our
inflexible and determined aienries." — ** They
have robbed us of our money, deprived us of
&aa friends, violated our rights, and abused
our privileges." — *• At present we have no re-
presentatives ; they are only nominal, not real ;
active only in prosecuting their own designs,
and at the same time telling us that they are
i^greeable to our wishes." If this is not a di-
rect attack on a branch of the legislature, I do
not know what can be an attack on it.
Our present business is only to judge of the
lelevancy of the indictment, and then a jury
w31 judge both of the law and the fiicts of the
case. If they think neither of the panels used
these expressions, or circulated them, or if tlrey
are of opinion that they are not inflammatory
and seditious, it is thenr part, not ours, to find
*^ The Loid Jaetiee Qezfc and lords com-
missioners of justiciary having considered the
crimifMd indictment, raised and pursued at ihe
instance of bis majesty's advocate, for his flKa«
jesty's interest, against Alexander McLaren
and Thomas Baird, panels, th^ find the in-
dictment relevant to iiifer the pains of law ;
but allow the panels, and each of them, to
prow all fecto and eiocamstances that may
tend to exculpate them, or either of them, of
alleviate their guilt, and remit the panels, with
the indictment as fouad relevant, to the know-
ledge of an assize.
« 0. BoTii, I. P. D."
The following persons were then named to
pass upon the assize of the panels.
James Watson^ of Saughton.
John Dodds, farmer at Saughton Mill.
John DrysdaU farmer, Ciermiston.
Daoid Pringle, of Blegbie.
J<^ Stewart, of Binny.
John Colder, farmer at Drumcross.
John Rusielf farmer at Mosside.
William Marshall, jeweller, South Bridge^
Edinburgh.
Archibald JMP^EmZtry, haberdasher in Edinburgh.
John Baxter, confectioner there.
Jamei Hawden, jeweller there.
William Kenne&f, glover there,
WUUam Umdsay, wine-merchant, Leith. .
John Gowan, wood-merchant there.
Jame$ Stoddart, wine-merchant, Edinburgh.
Lord Justice Cktk, — Are the dedaratioiis of
^e prisoners admitted f
lir. Oerk. — ^Yea, my loid.
SVIDEKCX FOR TB£ CaOWIT*
Andrew Tinnie sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Drummand,
You are a merchant in Kilmarnock ?— Yes.
Do you know the Dean Park in the vicinity
.of Kilmarnock ?-^I do.
How far is it firom Kilmarnock ? — ^About half
a mile.
Do you remember that a public meeting
was held at the Dean park on the 7th of Dec«
last?— I do.
Was there a great number of persons at it ?
—'I think about 4,000.
A great number of the lower orders?—
Yes.
Do you remember that speeches were made
at that meeting ?-~ Yes.
Who opene4 the business? — Alexander'
M*Laren. ^
Is that the person there? — It is.
He made a speech ?-^Yes.
What was the speech about, sir 7-^ About
the business that the meeting was called for^*
which was for the purpose of deliberating on
the best mode of petitK>ning for parliamentary
reform.
Do you remember any part of his speech
any of the words that he us^ ?— Tfothing par-
ticular, except one passage near the end. ^
C
r
19]
£7 GBORGE III.
7rMf qfAtumndfff M*Larem
[20
Repeat -thd passage as near as you rametDber
it?— «< We wiU lay our petidons at the foot of
the throne (or let us lay^ I do not remember
exactly which), where stts-our august prince,
whose generous - nature will incline his ear to
hear the cries of hi» people, which lie is bound
to d6 by tbe constitutional laws of the country ;
and we * are thereby^ •bound to give him our
allegiance. But if he should be so infetuated
as to turn a deaf ear to the ireneral cries of his
people (or Toiee of his people^ I do not know
which), to hell with allegiance.^
Is that the whole of the passage P — ^The
whdie of the- passage, as fur a» I recollect.
Lord AdoocaU.—! wish to know whether
M'Lareu in his speech stated that a number of
resolutions had been drawn up by the com-
mittee, which were about to be read' f— Yes,
about the close of his speech, after the expres-
sion I alluded to, I think.
Mr. Drummond. — Did he recommend any
body to be called to the chair of the meeting ?
— He said the committee unanimously recom-
mended Mr. Johnstone.
And did he propose him to be elected to the
chair ? — Yes, I understood so^
He was called to the chair ?— He was called-
to the chair.
Did vou see Mr. Johnstbae in the other room
to-dayr— Idid.
Did you ever see a printed account of
M'Laren's speech? — ^Yes.
Was' it in an account of the proceedings of
the meeting ?L— In a^ pamphlet.
Is that the pamphlet?
[The pamphlet wak* handed t^the witnessi]
That is one of them.
The rest are the same ?—I understood so.
Did you read McLaren's speech ? — ^YeS.
Did It appear the same as that delivered at
the meeting ? — No ; there was a difference par-
ticularly as to that passage.
L(trd JvUiee Cterib— You mean the passage
in reference to allegiaoee? — ^Yes, my lord.
l»Tr. Dr&mm(M<f.^~Wnr you point outtaus
particularly what is the difference between that
printed passage and what he said ?^— There is
one part which I think is omitted.
What is that ?r~" And we are thereby bound
t6 give him our allegiance.''
Do you observe any other difference? — I
thinK tnat instead^ of ** to their just petition,*'
he said, ** to the general cries or roice of his
people.*^
Lord JuUk€ Cierk.-^^Jvai petition" are the
words you see there ?'-^Yes, my lord.
Mr! I^rummond, — Any othfer ' difference?—
The words *' he has forfeited that allei^ance,"
were never mentioned that I beard ; and nor-
thing that 1 remember, but ^ to hell with alle-
giance.''
' Mr. Clmrk wisbed:tc^&iiow what the witness
had said*
Mr. Dnmmmd, — Tbe witness did sot hear
the words ** he has forfeited that allegiance.**
WUnen, — That is what I meant to say. ** To
hell with allegiance," is all that I heard at the
meeting.
Had you any charge as to printing tliat pam-
phlet?— I was appointed ta a charge about
thej^rintinv^ but I never acted to it.
Who had die charge along^with you T — ^Mr.
Bairdl
And who else ? — Mr; Walter Andrew.
A Writer?— Yes.
You took no charge though you were ap-
pointed to superintend the printing ? — I was
appointed, but never was at uie meeting called
for the purpose.
How were you appointed to that charge? —
By the committee.
Was Baird a member of the committee ? —
He was.
Do you know who printed the statement oC
the proceedings? — It was given in to Mr»
Crawford, I understood^
Cburf,— That will not do.
Mr. Drtdirmom^.-^Were you ever present at
the printing f — I was, in Crawford's shop.
Did you ever get any copies of the printed*
statement from Crawford ?^— I did- get from:
Crawford printed copies.
Court, — Did you buy them ?<— I was to pay
for them.
Lord Etrmand. — Then you did buy them ^
— I did not buy them particularly.
Mr. Drummond, — Do you know whether
Baird sold any of them? — ^He did.
t>id Baird ever tell you so i— He said hei
got quit of them ; but he did not say he sold '
ttiem.
Did he say he got quit of them all ? — ^He
said so.
Did he ever get any from you ? — ^About fonr
doxen.
They were of those you got from Crawford T
—They were.
Did you give him all you had ? — ^No, I had
eleven or thereby left.
Had you any conversation afterwards with
Baird about those remaining?'— I am not
certain if I had. I do not recollect at present
if I had.
I think vou said Baird mentioned he had got
quit of all his. Did he make any remark on
^ournot having got quit of yours ?— 'I said I had
still eleven or thereby; and he seemed surprised
as he had got quit of all bis.
Lord Hermttnd,—W\aX did you understand
by getting quit of them ? — Tlie committee had
liberty to ger what they wanted ; and copiea
ward given to them when applied for.
Cotir^— The witness does not understand
the question. Was any price taken for them f
— I understood they were to be 4d. each ; thai
this was fixed by the committee.
dil
wmi nomas Bairdjir SidHian,
A. D. I«17.
[33
Wtre tliey disposed of by sale or by gift ? —
I do not know woether Baird sold them or not.
He was to pay for them.
LordAdBoade. — Did you ever go to Craw-
ford's with fiaird to inquire after the .publica-
tion ? — I did.
What did yoo ask ?— We asked if any of the
pamphlets were ready.
Which Off you asked ? — I am not certain.
Yon both went for diat purpose } — ^Yes.
Andrew Fimde cross-examined by Mr. Jtffrejf
for Thomas Baird.
Yon have mentioned that yon (wo wese both
members of the committee for arranging about
this meeting? — Yes.
. Were there many other members ? — From 20
^ 30> I think.
• These were eonstituted before the meeting
was held ? — Part. There were moK added a!&
ierwaras*
. Was any notice given to 4he magistrates
about the meeting? — ^Mr. Baird and I were
nominated to call npon the magistrates^ toin-
£>rm them of the meeting.
Yon went ? — ^I did not. Mr. Baird said, he
went.
Did he report that the magistrates had no
-objeotions to the meeting ? — ^He did.
Tbere was no interference of the magistrates?
—None.
Were yoopresent at the meeting? — ^Yes.
Was Mr. Uaird there ? — ^He was.
Did he speak ? — ^No.
Did yon hear him make any remarks es-
-preasing satis&ction or dissatisfaction -on what
was said ? — ^I heard htm make a remark about
the fMosage I was talking of in Alexander
McLaren's speech coneemiDg allegiance.
What did he say? — He said it was a pity it
Jiad been spoken.
He disapproved of it ?— Yes.
Yon said, yoo, Mr. Andrew, and Mr. Baird,
were appointed to take char|pe of the printiug
«.of an account of the proceedings? — Yes.
Was any motive alleged for the pdoting^ —
At wasTor defraying me expenses attending
the meetiog.
Was there any discussion at the meeting of
the commitiee about the proprie^ or impro-
priety of printing the wnole of what had
been so stated at the public meetiDg ?»Yes,
there was.
Did any body object to the printing at all ?
— ^I think two were not for printing at all ; Mr.
Jolmston, and Alexander McLaren.
Was M'Lareo a member of Che committee ?
—Yes.
Did Mr. Baird take any part in that discus-
jnon ?^I do not remember that he did.
Was there any discussion ubout the propriety
«f pnnliog certain parts?— Yes.. .
Did Mr. fiaird take any part in that discus-
«on?— Hedid.
Was he for printing all the words ? — ^No, he
not
What words did he djeet tO| or what pas-
sage ? — ^I do not remember any other -passage
than that about allegiance in McLaren's
speech.
What did lie say as to that passage ? —
That he would be inclined to keep it out alto-
gether.
Did he say any thing ^Ise about it? — ^I do
not remember particularly any thing else ho
said.
Was that proposition of his adopted by 'the
committee or not ?— No ; it was not.
Did it appear to you, that Mr. 'Baiid ai>*
proved or not of that passage? — He disap-
proved of that- passage, and wished it to be l«t
out.
Did you understand that rii 4he members of
the committee were to take copi^es-of thisstnte-
ment, to forward the sale of it, and to account
for the 4i. for each copy? — ^Yes; the com-
mittee were at liberty to -get what tiumber
they wanted, 'for the purpose of defraying the
expenses.
bid they all get copies^?— <I do not •know
who did and who did not.
Mr. Baird keeps a shop ?— Yes.
Did aUlhe members of the -committee "keep
shops ? — No.
What kind of a shop is Mr. Baird's ?— A
grocer's shop.
Has there been any other generkl meeting
since this in Dean Park?—None that I know
of.
Certain resolutions were adopted which are to
be found in the printed statement, and peti-
tions 40 parliament were, in coikformi^ to them,
prepared and forwarded ? — Yes.
Was 'there any disturbance or tumult at
Kilmarnock since>that date? — I do not recol-
lect of any.
Do you recollect any disturbance recently
before that, a riot about meal ? — ^Yes. ^
Before the public -meeting took place, about
autuinn ?— Yes; I do not know the exact time
when it was.
Idond Aivooaie. — ^You said that Baird disap-
proved of printing the passage about allegiance:
do yon remember whether M'Laren said any
thing, and what did he- state about that passage?
— ^I think he said, that if the committee thought
there was any thing wrong, he would rather it
were kept out altogether.
' That was as to At passagein his own speech ?
—Yes.
When Mr. Baird objected to printing the
passage, did he stale his reasons why he
thought it an improper passage to be printed t
— The reason was not stated therei that I re-
member ; but when he and I were talking of
it by ourselves. ^
And what did he say ?— He said to me it was
a veiy indecent expression.
He slated liothing to the committee of his
reasons ? — ^Not that I remember.
Andrew Finme cross-examined by Mr. QtwU
for AbeKender McLaren.
I ask the witness to fook at the' printe4
33]
57 GEOKGIC HI.
Trial ofAtvumitr M'Latm
[34
Speech, and find tbese vrofds, '' The fact b, we
are ruled by mea only solidtoaa for their own
aggrandisement"? — I see them.
Were these words spoken?— I do not re-
member.
" And they care no further for the great
l)0dy of the people, than they are subservient tu
their accursed purposes.'' Was that spoken ?
I do not remember. I paid almost no atten-
tion to any part of the speech, except that about
allegiance.
How did it happen that you remember that
passive so particularly, and none of the rest of
the speech ? — ^It strudc me particularly.
Then you do not mean to pronounce aa
epinion as to aay thing that was uttered by
M'LareDy except the passage about allegiance?
—No.
Do you remember what passed about the
opeaiug of this meeting ? who asked McLaren
to open it? — I do not reipember who asked
him.
Did he rolanteer, or was he requested to
open the meeting ? — He was backward to open
the meeting.
And he was asked by the coomittee ? — He
was asked by the committee.
When was he asked ?->At a meeting of the
committee.
Lord Advocate. — How many days before the
meeting? — I am not certain.
It was some days f — ^It was some days, I
think.
Mr. Gerk. — Are you sure it was some days
before the meeting ? — I am certiun ; for imme*
diatefy or the night before the meeting, he
said he was in doubts whether he would do it
or not.
Did you use any particular means to keep
tlie passage about allegiance in your recoUec*
tion ?— It struck me so forcibly at the time,
the language was so ttrong, I kept it in my
memory.
You fipientioned other passages. What part
p( the passage do you allude to just now ? Did
you consider the whole passage strong ? — ^The
word hell struck me. That was the particular
part I thought was wrong. I did not consider
.any thing wrong in the rest of it at the time.
Did you write- down the passage P — No.
Are you quite confident of your recollection
of the whole of the passage f — I am quite oon-
6deat it was very near to what I repeated.
Whether the words, " cries," or " voice, were
used, as I said before, 1 am not sure of; but I
am confident as to the rest of the pasaage.
LordAdvoeate. — At the meeting, had McLaren
any paper with him ? — I saw none.
Did you ever see any paper with his speech
on it ? — Never.
Did you ever hear him speak of the terms of
it after it was printed ? — I recollect of him
iayiag repeatedly, that the passage about alle-
giance was a quotation fvom Shakespeare which
came into his mind.
When did he first say that— Was it at the
meeting of the committee ? — 1 do not recollect
of his ever saying that at the committee ; but I
have heard him repeatedly say so.
WUliam Merrie sworn. — Exaniined by
Mr. Drummond.
Are you a writer in Kilmarnock ? — Yes.
Do you remember being at a public meeting
held near Kilmarnock on the 7lh December
last ?— Yes.
Do you remember the speeches made at that
meeting ? — Part of them.
Who made the first speech? — Alexander
McLaren.
Is that the man behind me ?— Yes.
Do you remember any part of his speech ?—
Very little of it.
Do you remember aay words near the oon-
dttsion of it ? — Yes.
Can you repeat them ? — The hindmost part
of it was, ''^hell with," or '^Ibr such alle-
giance."
What allegiance was that be was speaking
about ? — If I remember right, he was wishing
the people to address their august soTereign ;
and he meant their allegiance to him.
Did he give any reason why this allegiance
was to go to hell ?
Mr. C/erfc.— He has not said that.
Mr. Dnamnomd, — ^Why did he apply the ex-
pression to such allegiance? What did he
say ? — If 1 remember right, it was, ** if he
tamed a deaf ear to the voice of his people."
Did he say any thing about petitioning ?-~
Yes, he winied ^e people to petition their
august sovereign.
What more do you say of this speech ? — I do
not remember more.
Lord Ilermaad.^He has ^plained enough I
think.
Mr. J>iiiiffiioni.—Do yen remember any
other part of his speech ? — No.
Did he use any words to shew what his
meaning was when he spoke of the voice of
the people ? — Not that I remember of.
Lord ^lAK)c«te.— You said he wished the
people to address their august sovermgn ; and
then you stated he said, ** if he turned a deaf
I ear to the voice of his people." Did he add
anything? — I do not remember wheUier he
added any thing or not.
After he used the words, ^ if he turned a
deaf ear to the voice of his people," did he say
any thing or not about " to hell with such aU
legianoe ?** — ^That came afterwards.
Lord Hermamd. — Did he mention in what
way the voice of the people was to be express*
ed ? — ^No, he wished the people to petition.
Lord Advocate, — Did you, after this meetings
see a publication called ** Account of the Pro-
ceedings of the Public Meeting of Uie buf>
yeiees and inhabitaatt of the town of Kil^ar-
95]
aid Tkomoi Baud fir
h, D. )«}T.
b»
nock, bftld on Ihe 7th December iat6» . for the
purpose of deliberating on the most proper
method of remedjing the present distresses of
^e conntTj, with a fnll report of the speeches
oa that oeeasion"?— I never saw it» except
•Be day Ijisgon the tdble before the sheriff.
WUHkm Menit GT0s»-examined by Mr. Grcmt,
Do yoa know wbat was the purpose of the
meeting ?— It was fot tbt purpose of petitioning
the aoTeieign.
Do you know, if in point of fact, petiliona
were drawn up and signed by the persons who
were at the meeting ?~I coiiLd not say.
Did yon sign any of the petitions younelf !
—No.
Did yon ondeistand from what passed^ thai
it was tiie intention of McLaren to induce the
people, and you as one of then], to petition the
legislatnre, or to excite violence and disturb*
lard AdooeaU. — ^I object to this queelioik
Idtrd Jutike GMc— The UBderstanding or
c^nion of any witness is not to be lutened to
in evidence.
Mr. GtmI.— What did vmi ooB«Bt tohe the
object of M^Laiea'tspeenl
luriAdoocaU. — ^If this course of examina-
tion go on, there can be no objectiopr to my
reexamining the witness. I did not finish my
examinatioD of him, but on the idea that I
could not put such questions.
Mr. Cferifc.-^We hare put a question, and
we should not be interrupted. 'ih» lord advo-
cate puts in his claim to put such questions. But
he must not interrupt us in older to make an
examination himself.
€010*^— He has no such intention.
Mr. QtmUj-^l put this other question : In
point of bet, did this speech excite tike people
to commotion or dietaminee ? — ^No.
Then was none upon that occasion f —
Hone.
Was it the tendency of.MliKien's speech,
from what yon observed, and from what passed,
to create eommotion or disturbance^ or to in-
doce petitions to be sent to the Prinoe Regent
nnd the two houses of parHament ?— -It wai to
indnoe the people to petition the Prince Regent
and the two houses of partiaraent.
Did he oxptesB himself in any way with re-
gard to the person of the Prince Regent in
tfant speech ?--Not that I remember of.
When he advised diem to lay their petitions
at the foot of the throne, did he say anv thing
uCttie angnst prineef-*I do not remember anv
thing of the throne; but he mentioned hn
aogost mhicc
hk what terms t-^In ihvourable terms.
In terms perfectly legal and becoming a good
snhjectT^Yes.
Euffk O-m^ord swoTn.-^£xamiDed by
Mr. SoUdtor Generai,
Are you a printer ai Kilmarnock ?-^Yes»
I De yoq remember a meeting hdd in De-
cember last in tbcneighbeuihoQdof thattewn)
—Yes.
Was a MS. aceount of the pfoeeediags at
that meeting afterwards beought lo yott t» btf
printed?— Part of iu
Did you attend the meeting ? — Ko«
Look at that ?
[Pamphlet handed to the witness.]
That was printed in my office.
Who brought it?— The part I saw was
brought by David Andrew, I think.
Was any body in company with him?— I
think not.
Courf .— Has Andrew any more names than
oa«?«-l do not know.
Mr. SoUcU&r Generai, — Did you see him in
the other room to-day ? — I did.
Who attended the press while this MS. wat
printed ? — I did not see, as the printing-office
IS at a distance from die shop, and 1 was only
occasionally there.
Did Thomas Baird attend the printing? — I
think I saw him once or twice ; I am certain
once.
Are you able to say whether this publication
is a true copy of the mS. that was Drought to
you ? — I cannot say.
"^ ^ it?—'
whom I employ.
Who printed it f— Thomas Murray, a man
Haye you been paid for the printing ? — No.
Who is to pay you ? — ^The persons who em*
ployed me.
who are thev ? — ^I look to Mr. David Ai^
drew, Mr. Andrew Finnic, and Mr. Baird.
Lord. Ad9oeate. — What was done with the
publication after the printing? — Cqpies were
taken ftom me in quantities : Mr. baifd got
a qoaatity, aad Mr. Finnie and others got
quantities.
Mr. jSsficitor Gfeneri/.^-How ' ttnoy co|nes
were printed ?— About 400 1 think.
How many did Baifd get ? — ^I cannol My.
Can yott say abauft what nnmbarP— iWa
might be four, five, or atx doien.
Lord Jdvocate, — Do you know M'Laren ?-*
Within this short time.
Did he ever complain of his speech being
Erinted inaccurately ? — No, J never i|>oke to
im in my life, to my knowledge.
Thomoi Murrmf sworn,— ^Eimmiaed by
Are you journeyman to Mr. Cmidbrd ? — Mr*
Crawford is my emplojer.
[The pamphlet vras shown to the witness.]
Was that printed at Mr. Crawford's printing
office ? — Yes.
By you ?— Yes.
Is it a correct copy of the MS. giren yon for
the pnipoae of being printAd ?^TI»ra ware
some alterations in the proofs.
Corrections of the. press ?— Yes.
«7]
57 GfiORGB m.
2Vm/ ofMuuMitr M'Laren
(a,s
What altenUions ?«-Typographical errors:
and peiiiaps in bodm sentenoes grunmatical
alterations.
Were there any alterations of the sense P —
None that I remember of.
Who gave in the MS. ?— The first part I re-
ceived fi^m Mr. Crawford.
Who gave you the rest ? — I received it at
different times.
From whom? — ^It was sometimes given in
when I was not in the oflice, and sometimes
when I was in it.
Who gave you any part of it? — Mr. David
Andrew.
Did Mr. Webster bring any of it? — Once, I
leoMmber*
^ Who came to superintend the printing, and
to inquire after it?— That person.
Any body else f — No.
Mr. Baiid ? — ^He was twice or three times at
the utmost.
For the purpose of inquiring about the pub-
tication? — He was several times in the office. '
What did he do when he came ? — ^He came
to the office along with Mr. David Andrew to
look over the first proof.
Did they make any alterations ? — One was
proposed 1^ Mr. BainL
What was it ? — ^I do not know.
Can you point it out in the publication f^—^
No, for I never had it in my hand but now and
before the sheriff of Ayr.
Was any alteration made in consequence ? —
None.
Why was it not made ? — ^It was a grammati-
cA alteration that was proposed, I thought the
alteration proposed was wrong, and I had a
right to make the pamphlet giammatical.
What became of the MS. from ^ich the
imbUcation was printed? — It went as all of
them do, it was destroyed ; I was not desired
to preserve it.
Lord ilANioale.— Look at the passage on
page r. " to — with allegiance,'' was that
Dlank in the MS. ? — If I remember rightly,
that part mt the MS. was erased, written over
again, then erased and interiin^; and I do
not know but I ordered my apprentice to
leave the blank, as I oonld not make it out
To make the sentence join properly, I left it
blank*
Did Mr, Baird, when he came and looked
over the MS., object to the blank, or state any
thing? — He never looked over it.
You said Mr. Baird came with Mr. Andrew
and looked over the first proof. Did he mdce
any observation about the blank thete left? —
That was not in the first proof; the proof I
spdce of was the proof of the first pages of the
pamphlet*
I%oma» Mmrmf cross-examined by Mr. Jeffrey
tor Thomas Baird.
- Weietheproof sheets tent to any one to be
revised ?— They were.
To whom?— To Mr. David Andrew.
Any to Mr.
brance.
f — ^Never, to my remem-
fPart of the MS. was shown to the witness.]
Mr. Drummond, — ^Did you ever see that be-
fore ?— I never saw it befi>re ; it never came
into my hands.
Thonm Myrr^ cross-examined by Mr. Greitf
for Alexander M^'Laren.
Was any part of the MS. pencilled ?— I do
not remember ; the MS. was very imperfect,
and was partly well and partly ill written ; it
was partly in quarto and partly in folio, in dif-
ferent bands.
Do you remember the part that contains the
blank, what size of the paper was there ? — It
was folio. I remember it quKe well. There
were two sheets of foolscap paper written on
without being folded.
Was it of die size of this, folded and written
on as this f —
[A sheet of folio paper shown the witness.]
Yes.
JeMci MmUme sworn. — Fjcamined by
Mr. SoUcUor General.
Do you remember a public meeting at Dean
park, near Kilmarnock r — ^Yes.
Do you know that there was a committee to
prepare and adjust the business of that meet-
ing ? — I do.
Of whom did it consist? — I really cannot
tell ; of a number of persons ; of myself for
one. .
Was Mr. M'Laren one ? — ^Yes.
Mr. Baird?— Yes.
Were any resolutions prepared before the
public meeting ? — Yes.
Were they read to the meeting which took
place ? — Yes.
You attended that meeting ? — I did.
Who first spoke ? — ^Alexander M*Laren.
Was there any meeting of this committee
after that public meeting ?--<Yes, that efen-
ing.
For what purpose ? — The particular purpose
was, to consider whether they should pnnt their
resolutions and speeches.
Who attended that meeting P VTere the
panels there P — I think so.
Was it resolved there to print the speeches
and resolutions ? — Yes.
The several speakers gave in copies of their
speeches P — I believe so, but I did not see them
given in.
Did you see any thing at all giren in ? — ^No-
thinff but my own speech.
Were you present when the prooft of the
proceedings were revised t— I was not present
at the revision of any of them.
[The pamphlet was shown to the witness.]
Is that the publication of the proceedings
which took place at Dean-park at the time yon
mention ? — 1 suppose so.
it9l
mad Tlumu B&hri/or StUtbm.
-A. D. I8I7.
C30
By ^vbom does it appear to be printed? — t
By Hugh CraiHM. !
Was it resolved' at the oommittee that he
sbcnild be the printer f — ^Not particularly.
Do yoa know the MSS. were sent to h'im ? —
I do not know.
Did yott never read the pamphlet?— No.
Not even yoor own speech? — No; I gave it
to Mr. Walter Andrew v> revise. i
Are these the resolutions that were read to
the meeting } — I have glanced at them. I can-
not say particnlarly they are the resolotions,
but generally I believe so.
Lord AdoocaU. — ^You are acquainted with
McLaren ?— Yes.
He was a member of the committee? —
Yes.
YoQ have, of coarse, had conversations with
him about the meeting and the publication ? —
Yes» in a general way.
Did yon ever hear if Baird or he complained
of inaccBiacy in the statement given of the
proceedings ? — ^Yes ; Alexander M'Laren.
What did he say? — That one sentence at the
end of his speech in the printed account, and
cited in the indictment was not in the original
M3« He said it runs in this way : speaking of
the petition being presented to tne Prince Re-
gent, ''he hoped he would lend his gracious ear
to it, as he was bound to do by the constitu-
tion ; but if he did not do so, then to hell with
allegiance.^ I think he said this was not in
the original speech.
Did yon hear his speech ? — Only the sound
of it.
Did you hear any of the words of it daring
the meeting ? — I cannot say I did.
What did M'Laren say was the inaccuracy P
— He complained of the latter part of the sen*
fence altogether being in it at all, because it
was not in the MS.
Did be complain of the word ^ hell T
Mr. CierL^l object to the question. There
is DO such word in the publication.
[Ibe witness was ordered to withdraw.]
Xord .ideooafe.— The drift of the eiamina-
tion I vras carrying on at the time was, to
bring out of the witness what was the conver-
sation between him and McLaren — whether
McLaren objected to certain parts of the pub-
Ucation which he is alleged to have done. The
witness said he never read that publication. I
am entitled to put the question, in order to
ascertain the witness's recollection ; and par-
.ticulariy, whether M'Laien complained of any
word bein^ in the MS. I submit that the ques-
tion I put IS competent, viz. whether M'Laren
complained of *' hell to allegiance^' being in
the MS. The thing, I admit, is now irreme-
diable, because my learned friend has instruct-
ed the witness by stating that there is no such
word in Ac publication ; Vat I say it was ir-
regnlar in my learned friend to intormpt me
and thus to prepare the witness.
Mr. CterL— Nobody is more oompetent to
{mt regular questions to witnesses than my
ord advocate, but I cannot permit him to
proceed irregularly. What was the question
put? Whether McLaren complained of hell
being in therMS. That was implying that
the words were in the printed pam|)hlet, and
nobody is entitled to suggest a fidse fiict to a
witness. No fact must b^ assumed in putting
a question to a witness.
Lord Advocate, — ^I wish the Court to keep in
recollection what the question was to whidi I
wished to get an answer — whether or n#
M'Laren complained of being misrepresented
b^ '* heir being in the printed copy. My
friend now admits that the question was not
irregular.
Mr. Clerk. — ^The question is not as it was
put originally.
Lord Advocate. — ^I put it to the Court that
such was the question.
Lord Jmtke Gerk,-^! do not see any thiofp
out of form here.
Lord Adoocatej^^Tbe opposite counsel were
out of form in interrupting me, and they have
rendered the question useless. If they again
interrupt me, let them first desire the witness
to be removed.
[Witness brought back.]
In«whatvray did he say he was misrepresent-*
ed ? — ^I did not say so. I say he complained
of the latter part of the sentence being ^put in,
because it was not in the MS.
Then he did not complain of being misrfr^
presented? — Yes, in one word that he did no^
pronounce the word ** their," or ** our,"wfai^
comes in before *' allegiance.''
You are looking at the printed statement
Did vou not say that you had not seen it be-
fore f— I did not say I had not seen it; I said
I had not read it.
Lard JuUke Clerk, — He says M'Laren com-
plained of being misrepresented with respect
to a word before ^ allegianee/' and he is en-
titled to look at the pamphlet.
WHnen. — As ftr as my judgment leads me
to take notice, he complained of any thing w
tervening between the word ^ to" and " alle-
S'ance," because it was not in his original MS.
e never intended to say it; it was merely a
word of some Play that oconrred to his memory,
and he let it out.
Mr. Solicitor G^teraL—jyid he tell yon,
then, how the passage should have been
printed ? — He told me the identical words he
used. The last words of the sentence were,
^ to hell allegiance."
Lord Advocate. — ^Did he complain of the
passage as stated in the indietneat ?— Yes ; he
gave the indictment to me to read.
Lord Jmtkc Oerfc.— He said tlie passage
Ml
57 GEOltGl m.
Trial -qfAlttMnider M'Larmt
tss
was not toiTCcdy giv^ ekher in tke indielfDeot
or the priDt«d account t — Exactly.
Lord AdoQcote.^^}htw long is it since be
«ade this complaint to yon ? — I think the very
day he received the indictment.
Jama JMiutoM'tevoss-^xamned by Mr. Jeffrey
for Thomas Baird.
Yoi^ mentioned that both of the paneb were
members of the committee with you. Was
JUr. Baird at the pnUic meeting f — ^Yes.
Did yen then* or al any •ther time, hear him
make any ffemacks upon McLaren's speech ?— >
No,-
Did y«tt ttot hear him at any odier time
.loake any revtfks 7— Yes, I have heard him
several times complain, and say it was a pity
the last sentence had been put in.
Spoken, ot put in ? — It was a pity it had
been spoken at all.
Were yon present at the meeiiag about the
printing ? — Yes.
Was any objection made to that passage ? —
*! was'agamst the printing altogether^ not that
with belter timas. What were then the
neral wages ? — Abont 12«. a week, from 12«. t#
Us.
I ne^ not therefore aak if there was th#
greatest possible distress at Kitmamock f -^
There can be no doubt of it.
Yon talked of the meeting which was held
near Kilmarnock. What was its object f —
Solely to petition the Prince Regeift, and boA
Houses of Parliament, to consider the grievances
of the country. It was enr opinion, that one
irrest reason of them was the defective state of
the representation, more particularly in our
part or the country ; and therefore we partictk-
farly recommended attention to that.
Were any other objects in view besides pe-
titioning, any other means thought of in order
to obtain redress of these grievances ? — ^None.
Was any conversation ever held in youy
presence by M^I^ren that tended to any
other purpose than what is in the petition ? —
None.
Did you ever hear from him any hint, that
induced you to believe he entertained disloyal
I thought there was any thibg wrong in the | opinions, or seditious intentions ? — Never
^ttblicatAOB ; but judging Ifrom my own, I sup- {
|M)sed aA- the speeches weoe made up in a hun-
ffied way, and wooU not stand the scmtiny of ,
4ihe public eye.
Do you remember Mr. Baird making any
objections to the publication ?— -I do not par-
ticularly.
. - Do yon know any thmg of ilie reasons stated
far ot agttnst the psinting ?«^The pnblication
w&s le defeay the eipenses inenntd at €xe
public meeting.
■ Was the sale of the ^blkation intnsted to
any ^riiaolar pefS4»sf«-3k> she eommiMee in
foserflil.
[The MS. of the witness's speech was shown
to him.]
Was that written More or after the maei-
ing t — Before.
You ofl^iated as chairman at the meeting ?
—Yes.
•Jenflf Mmione ei088««xsnrined l>y Mt. ihwM
for Alexander McLaren.
You are a muslin agent ? — ^Yes.
For any of the Glasgow houses i — Yes.
From that oivcunstaooe, have you an op-
portunity of .being much acquainted with the
situation of the manufacturers in Kilmaroook ?
,— I think so.
At present now, what may the most active
weaver be able to clear in the course of a
week?— At present things are ratheir better
than they were some time ago. From a cal-
- culation I hare made, an active weaver may
^t present gain about 5t. 6d. a week.
What might he be able to gain a week on an
•nei^ge of Uie last year? — From 4s. to 4s, 6J.
Hsrw many hours work a day was necessary
to gain this. snm?-^At least^ fioia 14 -to 1$
hours.
You hare compared this period of dbtress
Have you occasion to know whether lie was
of a peaceable and orderly disposition and
habit of life ? — I never heard or saw any thing
to the contrary. '^
How long have you been acquainted witii
him ? — ^These eight years.
Does it consist with your knowledge thathd
was a member of a volunteer corps at ulasgowt
^I have heard that he was.
Do you know of his being in the local mi-
litia, or Kilmarnock volunteer corps ? — lie was
in the rifle corps at Kilmarnock. ^
' Was the public meeting conducted in aik
orderly and peaceable manner ? — I considered
it so. It was with no other intention I underr
took the management, and that any gentleman
will see from my speech.
What was the state of fhe weather? — It
was Tery coarse. There was hail^.and wind,
and snow.
Perhaps that was the reason you did not
hear the speech ?^TbBt was the reason ; I just
heard the sound, but not the words.
It was not vreatber well calculated fbr -^y
person hearing a speed) distinctly ?*>->It vnd
very bad indeed.
Yon said you wert present at a meeting of
the committee, when it was proposed to print
die proceedings, and that M'Laren was there,
and that you objected to the printing. Did
any other peraon object? — Mr. M'Lsu«n ob-
jected particularly to the printing of his
speech.
What passed upon that occasion? — ^There
was a great deal of altercation as to the print*
ing ; and it was at last agreed that those who
had made speeches should give them to a
committee appointed to superintend the print-
ing.
Did Mr. McLaren still object to his speech'
being. printed f — He said, though the restweilv
printed, he did not see any reason for printin|f
amd nomoi BaMJbr SmUe^.
asf\
and that be bad no mteation tkat monitng of
•pcaktDgitaiL
Were jon present at any meeting of the com-
mittee prerjons to the pnblic meeting, for ar-
lansiog about the public meeting ??— Yes, I was
•t them ail, I think.
At a previous meeting were any steps taken
as to appoiatiBg a person to open the pro-
oeedingsat the pubtic meetiDg?— -It was dis-
cussed ; and after a great deal of discussioB,
M.*Jju2m agreed, thai if no other person came
forward, he wonld do it ; and he raenfeioned to
ae since the meeting, he had no idea he should
open the business, as another person had given
a kind of promise to do it, ana that person not
appearing on the field, he went to a public-
house uid prepared some ebsenrations. I saw
him the ai^ befofet he raeelingi, when be
tohl me he had hopes another person would
openiL
Do yon know who that other penon was ? —
Tes, M'l^ren told me.
Was the name of that other peiwm publicly
mentioned ? — No, it was not.
Was either of ypu a member of the com-
mittee that superintended the printiag? — ^None
of us.
Do yon know anything o^ a distonbanoe that
iDoJc place about meal previoos to the meeting ?
— I heard of it.
Were yon atKilmamoek atthe time 7— I was
about two shops from it at the time. I did not
eoQSider it a mob or distnrbanee.
Have you occasion to know how MlaiPen
condneted himsidf upon that oooisionf— No, I
faav<enot.
You said you hare known him eight yean*
Did ynu erar know him to be oolinected with
any body of men assembled for any seditious
or illegal purpose f— Never, so ^ as I knew
him, otherwise I would never have kept com-
paa^ with him.
You ar^ an extensive agent?— Itleri are some
much more extensive than I am.
Have yoa ever heard MfLareh wet a member
of any society for any purpose t"<-Of none )»%
^' ittea.
A. D. 1817.
[34
Cswf .^Does this comnuttea stiU contimie i
— Hoy the committee does not continue.
Mr. GntAt^'WwB tfaia committee open for
an^ person to go to ?— We never had a meeting
imA wat noc op«B ; and there were always
Sana ocben present besides the members of
the committee. Any one was asked to attend.
Wase a»y pieeaaiions taken to Iceep your
mceeding^ secret firom tha magistnoes f—
None.
Was it emir hiaftad or proposed that it would
be twcasaaiy to keoD the psooaedangs seotat
finnn the magistrates r — ^Never.
la point of lao't, were the raagisttales made
M^iatad with the intention of the meeting >
—I believe so. I «aUed and told Mr. fiaird I
«ohll not 'attend unless the magisttates were
nade acquainted with the intended meeting<
V0L.1XXIII.
Be was anpomt^ ^o tell th«m. Mr. Ba!«
said he had criled on the magistrate^ but had
not found him, and he said be would go agaiti,
and I understood from him he did go again.
Was there, according to your knowledge,
any obstfuction offere4 by the magistrates tb
the meeting?— I saw nbtle.
Do you kno^r whether, in point of fact, pe-
titions, founded on the resolutions adopted a:t
that meeting were prepared to the Prince
Regent and the two Houses of Parliament ?-^
They were.
Did you read them over?— I think nearly.
I heard diem all read.
Does it consist with your knowledge that
they were forwarded ?— I was toW so by Mr.
Baird. I read in the public papers that they
werepresented.
If 1 were to show you a printed copy of the •
petition, should you remember it f
Lord Advocate, — Nothing iasaid in the in-
dictment >about the petition.,
Mr. CMr^Mach will be said in defence
upon this veiy fact about which we are
examining the witness.
Lord Adooeate, — ^Defences have been given
in for the panels, and no notice is taken in
them of productions being to be made. Your
lordships will take notice of this. I only wish
you may keep this in view.
LordJugUee Clerk. — We must receive what-
ever may go to exculpate the panels.
[The account of the petition in a printed copy
of the Journals of the House of Commons
was handed to the witness.]
«
Mr. Gran/.*-* Were these the terms of the
petition 7 — ^As far as my judgment serves ma»
that is the substance of the petition.
Have jrouany doubts whether this is the
slme petition? — I have none at all. Nona
can suppose my memory is such as to say these
are the identical words.
Your answer is quite proper. I have put a
cross at the margin. Say whether you recollect
particularly that the words there form part of
the petition ?
lord iMNKote.-—! consented toa fawqoes-
tions being pvt to the witness, hot I now ob-
ject to any farther questions that are not cross.
Mr. Grant, — ^I am just finishing this part of
the examination. I have only to read a pas-
sage, and ask the witness whether he remem-
bers it. '' When we came to discover those
alarming facts, our hearts stood appalled, as if
we had trod on a volcano : We looked around
for the -cause, and we found it in the very
corrupt and defective representation of the
people in parliament. We found, that the
Commons House, whose members ought to bcL
chosen annually by the peopfe — should be the
organ of the people^s voice — ^the guardians of
their rights and of - the public'purse — had lost
all control over the sarvants oC the Crown, atid
D
35] 57 GEORGE in.
Trial qfJlkxander McLaren
[39
had become aubserrieoi to the will of the
minister of the day : That the great body of
the people are excluded from their elective
fraochise — that a majority of your honomrable
House are returned to parliament by proprietors
of rotten boroughs^jlhe influence of the Treasury
and a few other indiYiduals; and that seats
therein are bought and sold like tickets for the
Opera."
Were these the words in the petition ? — I
think these identical words were in the petition
which was forwarded to parliament, and or-
dered to lie on the table, I believe.
You remember being shewn this printed
publication. You said M'Laren complained
of the latter part of his speech being inserted
because it was not in the manuscript ? — ^Yes, I
did.
Say what part was not in the manuscript? —
I cannot say what were the words he spoke at
the meeting. What he said to me was, that he
concluded with a line of a play, and it was ** to
hell allegiance/'
Mr.' CA^Ae.-^Did he say that any part of the
passage before that was not In his manuscript ?
— He just said the latter part of the sentence was
not in. the manuscript.
You said you haa a conTersation with him
when he shewed his indictment, and that he
complained as you have stated. Had you any
other conversation with him on the subject
than on that occasion ? — Perhaps there might
be two or three, but to the same purpose.
Did he attempt to influence you as to what
evidence you should give at this trial? — ^Neither
of us considered I should be called on to give
evidence. I did not know what he had spoken,
nor about the selling of the pamphlets.
Lord Advocate, — We have had a very elo-
quent petition read. By whom was it com-
posed f — I do not know.
Did any member of the committee compose
it? — The committee for superintending the
printing were appointed to compose it, namely,
Thomas Baird, W. Finnic, W. Andrew,
D. Andrew, and W. Webster.
They produced it to you as their own com-
position r— It was produced and read at the
meeting.
Did they say anything that led you to suppose
that it was not their own composition P — I do
not think they did. •
Did they not say from whom they got it 7—
They did not. There was some amendment
made upon it.
Upon vour oath can you state that none of
them said to you anything about the getting
of the petition f ~I heard nothing of it.
Did any member of the committee give you
to understand they had not drawn up that pe-
tition, but sot it (^m another quarter? — It
would be ridiculous for a man to speak posi-
tively to a thing he does not recollect of.
Hugh Wibqn sworn.— Examiued by
. Mfk Jjnttfff^ond,
Were you at a public meeting in Dean-park,
about the beginning of Detember P — ^I believe
it might be about Uiat time.
Who was the preses of the meeting ? — James
Johnston.
Who made the first speech? — ^Akxaader
M.'Laren.
Did you^read an account of the raeech ?-?>
Yes.
Was it correct ?-^I do not remember.
Did it appear correct or incorrect, generally
speaking ?— -Yes, it appeared correct. .
Did you see anythmg that was incorrect ? —
I cannot say that i did.
Doyou know where it was sold ? — ^At Thomas
BairdV
[Pamphlet was handed to the witne9s.J
Did you buy this copy in Baird's shop ?— -
Yes, I believe I did ; I am certain I did.
Do you see your subscription there?— Yes.
Where did you write it? — In Mr. BrownV ■
Who was in the shop when you bought it ? —
I do not recollect.
Lord AdvooaU.-^ATe there any booksellers in
Kilmarnock ? — ^Yes.
Hugh WiUon cross-examined by Mr. QraiU
for Alexander McLaren.
What was the object of the meeting? — To
consider the propriety of petitioning paniament
for a reform.
Had the meeting any other object ? — ^None^
that I know of.
Did any person recommend aaything else ^
^Not that I heard.
Did you hear the panel McLaren speak upon
that occasion ? — ^Yes, I was there at the time, X
heard part of his speech.
Was it a very stonny day P — ^Veiy stormy.
Was there hail?— Yes.
Were many umbrellas up? — ^A great num-
ber.
Was any noise made by the pattering of the
hail upon them so as to prevent you from
hearing ? — ^Yea.
Was every thing conducted in an orderly and
peaceable manner? — Yes, they did.
Did you sign the petitions to the legislature ^
— Yes.
Do you recc^ect what the terms of the pe*
titions were ? — ^No,'
Are vou well acquainted with the panel
Alexander McLaren ? — ^Yes. -
How long have* you been acquainted withr
him? — ^A great many years; five or six, or
better.
What character has he possessed as to peaee-
abledemeanourandloyalty ?— A good character^
as far as I know.
Has he had the reputation of being seditious
and troublesome, or loyal and peaceable ?—
The latter.
Was he ever connected with any sod^7 —
I do not know ; he was a member of fSe com--
ipittee for. petitioning for reibrm. > ^ , -
But with none other ?^With no other thail
knowo£
d7]
ttiuf Tkomat Batrdjbr SetUtioH,
A. D. 1817.
[38
Do yon think joa would probably have
lieard of it if tlM fact had been so t — I think
so.
HaTejoD erer heard him iklk of the measores
of government ? — Yes.
What waj did he express himself? — ^He used
to approye of the measures of government.
um you eyer hear any arguments between
him and others on politics ? — Yes, he took the
government side.
Do yoQ know of his having been a member
of any miUtary body? — I believe he served in
the Local Militia, in the Rifle corps.
Did you look on him as a man of a sedi-
tious turn of mind, or as a friend to the go-
vernment?— ^As a friend to the government.
Did jou ever hear any imputation to the
contrary cast on him? — I do not remember
-ever hearing any.
Do yon know any thins about his objecting
to his speech being printed ? — No.
Lara Advocate, — ^Do you know
the petition? — No.
Did yon ever read it? — ^Yes.
you know who drew
Dand Bow sworn. — Eiamined by
Air. DrwnnoHdm
What is Mr. Baird?— He has a grocer's
shop.
Were the pamphlets sold at Mr. Baird*s
shop? — Yes.
Many of them? — ^Many. I could not say
as to the number.
Some doaens? — Yes; some dozens.
Fifty copies? — I believe there mif^U
What were they sold for? — ^Fourpence each.
DaM Bom cross-examined by Mr. Jeffity
for Thomas Baira.
Do you know if they were sold any where
^e? — ^Yes.
LordAioocaU, — Where? — Different persqns
of the committee got them.
Mention who got them? — Mr. Finnie, Mr.
Johnstone.
How do you Imow that? — Because I saw
them given away. They were given to be sold
by Mr. Baird.
Besides thpse given to the members of the
committee, several dozens were sold in your
shop ? — ^Yes.
Jamtt Sainton^ sworn, — Examined by
Mr. Drummond,
[The pamphlet was handed to the witness.]
Qave you seen this pamphlet? — ^Yes.
Have you seen in it the statement of a
speech said to have been made by you ? — Yes.
Have yon read it? Is it a fair account of
what von said ? — ^It is near about it.
Did you corop6se the speech yourself?-^
No.
Where did you get it? — From Mr. Baird.
• Before the meeting!— Yes.
Did you speak or read it ?— 'I read it.
James iSamfoii cross-examined by Mr. Jeffrey
for Thomoi Baird. .
Look at what is written before the beginning
of that speech, where it is stated, that a Mr.
Burt and a Mr. White could not attend, but
had transmitted addresses to be read to the
meeting. Yours was given in the name of
Mr. Burt, and you understood it was Mr.
Burt's speech you read? — Mr. Baird said Mr.
Burt haa sent it to him.
It was not Mr. Baird's writings but Mr.
Bun's?— Yes.
The following Declarations of the Panels
were then read.
Declaration of Alexander M'Laren^
At Kilmarnock, the 26th day of February
in the year 1817, in presence of William
£aton, Esq. Sheriff-substitute of Ayrshire,
appeared Alexander M'Laren, weaver in
Kilmarnock; who being examined, de-
clares. That he is a native of Perthshire,
and in April next he h^s been eight years
in Kilmarnock. Declares, That ihere was
a public meeting held at the Dean Park,
near Kilmarnock, on the 7th of Decem-
ber last : That that meeting was for the
purpose of petitioning Parliament for a
reform of gnevances. Declares, That pre-
vious to that meeting there was a com-
mittee of certain individuals in Kilmar-
nock, for the purpose of bringing about
the said meeting : That the declarant at-
tended that committee, and David Itam-
say Andrews, writer in Kilmarnock, Tho-
mas B{drd and Andrew Finnic, merchants
there, also attended that meeting, and the
declarant has reason to suppose they were
members of it as well as nimself. De-
clares, That the declarant first appeared
on the hustings and opened the meeting ;
and being shewn an ''Account of the
Proceedings of the Public Meeting of the
Burgesses and Inhabitants of the town of
Kilmarnock/' and wherein is engrossed,
on part of the fifth page, sixth, and part
of the seventh page, what the declarant
said at opening the above meeting. De-
clares, That the declarant has perused
said speech, and it is near what the de-
clarant said on the above occasion, except
what is said about the middle of the se-
venth page about allegiance> which the
declarant thinks he did not deliver in the
words as expressed in the publication.
Declares, That on the morning of the
above meeting, the declarant put into wri-
ting what he must say at the opening of
the meeting : That he afterwards gave his
part of the manuscript to those who were
appointed by the committee to superii^
tend the printing of the proceedings, that
the same might be published along with
the rest.' .Declares, That James John-
stone, muslin agent tn the Waterside of
IIOJ
57 GEOBGE UI.
Trial o/Akxamdtr U'Lare*
L49
Rilraarnock, was called to the chair, and
on that occasion he made a nteech, vhkh
was much approved of hj those present.
Declares, That the resolutions, as engross-
ed in said publication, are the same that
were read at the public meeting, and the
manuscript was read to the committee,
previous to the meeting, by Thomas
Baird, merchant in Kilmarnock, one of
the members. Dechu^s, That Hugh Craw-
ford, printer in Kilmarnock, was employed
to jpnnt the proceedings of the meetmg,
which were utetwards sold at fourpence
a-piece, to enable the committee to de-
fray the expenses. Declares, That the de-
clarant attended « meeting of the commits
tee, when those who spoke gave in their
manuscripts for printing, and the decla-
rant thinks the foresaid Thomas Baird was
present : That a committee was appointed
to superintend the printing, and the said
Thomas Baird and Andrew Fionie were
«f that committee. And being shtewn
the printed report before mentioned, de-
"clares. That he heard none of the authors
find fiiult with any thing that is therein
contained; and the said publication is
doqueted and signed by the declarant and
•Sheriff as relative hereto. Declares,
That the words on the sixth page, '* The
fact is, we are ruled by men only solici-
tous for their own aggrandizement, and
they care no farther for the great body of
the people than they are subservient to
their accursed purposes,** were in the ma-
nuscript wrote by the declarant, but were
not repeated by him at the public meeting
when on the husting^s as above. And the
foregoing declaration being distinctly
read over, he declares that it cont^uns the
truth. In witness. Sec. &c.
Declaration of Thomas Baird.
-AX Kijmamock, the 26th day of February
in the year 1817, in presence of William
Eaton, Esq. Sheriff-substitute of Ayrshire,
appearied Thomas Baird, merchant in
Kilmarnock; who being examined, de-
clares, That there was a meeting of several
persons in the town of Kilmarnod^ in the
month of November last, for the purpose
of taking Into consideration whether or not
there should be a general meeting for the
purpose of petitioning the Prince Regent |
and both Houses of Parliament for a re-
form : That the declarant was preses of the
first meeting only: That there were seferal
•after meetings, some of which the declarant
attended, and the 7th of December last
was fixed for a general meeting at the
Dean Park : That the declarant attended
•that meeting, and Alexander M'Laren,
"weaver in iLilmarnock, mounted the
hustings, and opened the meeting. with« a
speech : That Jaxnes Johnstone, mslin
•ngent in KUmamock, ^p^a^ called to the
vhair^ and read a 9peeo|^,tQjhe mating
from a memorandum book. And being
9hown a manuscript consisting of nine-
teen pages, declares. That he is pretty
certain that it as the same that he read
to the meeting, and which the declarant
saw some days afterwards in. Walter
Andrew's office, and which is doqueted
and signed as relative hereto. Declares,
That the proceedingn were ordered to bo
printed, and the declarant was appointed
Dy the committee, along with several
others^ to superintend the printing : That
Uie declarant assisted ii^ correcting the
grammatical errors in the Manuscript,
along with the said Walter Andrew, and
the declarant assisted a little at the print-
ing-office in correcting the proof copy.
And beiog shown a half-sheet of paper^
tided on the back '< No. 5. Mr. Burt'a
letter/' declares. That said words ace of
the declarant's band-writinp^ and the said
halMieet of paper was given in hv the
declarant to the printer, along witti the
rest of the manuscripts ; and said half-
sheet of paper is doqueted and signed by
the decnrant and sheriff-subMttnte as
relative hereto. Declares, That the pro-
ceedings of said meeting were printed
by Hugh Crawford, and a great Mmber
of copies were sent to the declarant's
•hop, and be reuiled liheni at fourpence
a-piece; and being shown a cop^p e€
the publication, declares^ That it is a
copy of the proceedings whieh weie pub^*-
lished and circulated as above, and is
doqueted and signed as relative hereto ;
all which he decides to be true. In- wit-
ness whereof, &c. &c.
SVIDBXCS tZI BXOULrAflTION.
Jamm. Smmrn swom.-^-Examined; \ff
Mr. 'Crani,
* _
Yon remember a public meeting at Kilmar-
nock last December. Was it for the purpose
of petitioning parliament ? or what was th«
object ? — To petition parliament.
Were von a membier of any committee re-
garding that meeting ? — Yes.
Are you well acquainted with the objects of
those who were concerned in that meeting ?-—
I know as to any meetings I was^ at of the
committee, what I heard there.
What was its object then?—- Entirelyto pe-
tition pariiament.
Do you know who were proposed to open
the business ' of the meeting by a speech ?^^
Different, persons.
Do you remember any of their names^?-*!
could not say I entirely recollect,, except him -
that did it ; bnt I know that others were pro-
posed.
At what time was it proposed that Infr.
H'Laren should open the meeting? — About a-,
weelf. before jthQ.paeetiog took ris^i *
Hid he accept readily thi^.mfi^ of • ofteMg
the meet]i^9.J-«lie did la^
4 >
41]
awB juMMMf BnnLjw Sttknon^
A. B« i«n*
CM
Did te dqtet to doiiif it?— Y«ik
Did lie mtggm toy one ebe to do ttf—
Whom f— Mr. Blackwood.
Did be suggest any other penon? — He was
for imposing it on me.
Did you consent to do it? — Ho,
What was the last time he urged yon f —
ilboM an kQw befinrt the meclkkg took
Mace*
Did he state he was Mtpawd or unnre-
pared ? — I did not know ttuA he had anjthinff
orepared ; but he said he wei not a fit hand
It wi» on ironr refusal that he undertook the
office himself? — ^Tes.
What was the object of the petition ? What
was it about? — ^To obtaid a reform in parlia-
Was there any conf ersation as to what was
to be done in case the petitions were not as-
sented to ? — Yes.
Whafwas to be done? — ^Tb petition again.
Did you hear Mr. M'Lau-en make his
apeedi ?— I was present and heard some of it^
but I did not hear it distinctly.
From what cause ? — One reasod was> that I
was behind him, and the wind carried the.
aoand of his voice to die other side ; and as X
knew I had to read a speech myself, I was a
late? Did be oppoM those ttiat mm% mi tile
Opposition side WYes.
Was he a man ^yen to riototti prooeedings,
or was he industrious sC his business, and quiM
in his tonduct?— 'He was indnstrioQl ^ Ui
bnsinessy and quiet in his conduot.
Was he ever connected with any aoefittfv
except this coannitlee ? — No, n«TW.
Is he a sober man, or is he given to ciwpiiliy
and liquor ?-^Not that I know of ; hois a sober
FioiB the general import of die epe«c1s dM
ywigatbeaiu purpose WaS|loetoite riot end'
dbturbance, or to induce People to come fy^
ward to sign this petition ? — Tiie latter.
Do you know that petitions were proposed ?
--lfc>ttlQS&. The resolutions wei« roid and
approved of, and the petitiOtiff were to be ae-^
cording to the spirit or these resolutions^
Wb^ ste^ were taken for preparing the
petitions?—) could not say positively t^ut
tbat«
Did you ngn^ any petitions ? — Yes.
How many? — -Tbree, I think.
To whom were they addressed ?^-To the
Prince Regent, the House of Lords, and the
House of Commons.
Do you know whether they were forwarded ?
— ^I beliere they were.
Were you ever molested in^ consequence of
having signed any of these petitions ?-^No.
Did you overhear of any 6ne being mo*
tested?— No.
Hftve-you known Mr. M*Iiaren a long time f
— A considerable time.
In yoor opinion what was his character as to
qinetness of demeanor and loyalty ?-^He was
regarded as one of the loyalest men where he
lived previous to this charge of sedition^
Have you ever oonverawl with him on poli*
tieal questioBS r-*SometiineB' about thv doors ;
and I have heard him disj^ute withothei% and
support the side of administration.
How lon^ ago i» it* since -you heard bin eat-
pteM his opmkn on saeb subfeeMi ?(«-«More than
a^rm^iafieii
In disputing with others what M%^46A^ hi^i
Were yon present at At coianittee when
there was a talk of printing tba proceedings J**^
zcs.
Did yon see, or hear read before the oom^
mittee, a manuscript nurporting to be a speech
of Mr. McLaren? — It was not at that com-
mittee I think ; it was at a previous one.
There was a sobeeqaevt ooxBnrtttee?-«Y6S.
And you heald read eivev wlwt f«ifovted
to be a speech of Mr. McLaren ? — Yes.
[fThe pamphlet was handed to the vritneaa^}
Dkl yo« ever read this pulditeatio»?-^Y4^
De you sedoHeet a passage m the p¥ulfed
speech about allegiance? — I could aal sa^; I>
think so.
Look at these words. Da ytta riUVeiiib«iF
bearkig die manueeript read? and do ybu
recollect in it the words at the end diour
allegiance, and* so on, which are nbw in* that
prittled piper V-I eoaM not say they* W€re
there.
Can you say they werr Ae<i there T-^ttley
were not there, X thinh^ when he-delivered the
pwper.
Say what was not there ?— I think the tW6^
or three last lines were ttot ia the manuseript :
*' Yes, my flellow countyyittfepM^^ imp sa^h> a casi^
to -^^^ with' our allegian4l«<i''
Do you recollect the app^iVttOft of tKtf
manuscripr!-^! thlnk4VWttS<roMedii«if a^nditi-
row strip Ulie a ^heet* folded^ over agi^iii;
It had been folded, I think, before if wtiiM
written o&t
Was the papM foldod thur?-f A?^e«l Of*
foolscap-paper shown to the witness folded ia
octavo.]'^ lea,, it was folded in that manner.'
Waa it written bookwise F-^Ves, t thinl^<
so.
I do not ask' you who did what I am going;
to mention, but did any body at that-comnii"
tee, not Mr. Whuehj. make aav pencil mark*
ing ou that p^per ? — YesyX think tliey did. It*
was not Mr. M^ren.
Do you know what theeO' marks Were?>*-L
did not see the marks*
Did you hear any persoaread tbe alteratioa
made by the marks ?-^Ye9»
Was this correction imntediately^ read ?-^
Yes.
Did the person who read that conrectionvead •
it as a correction he had made withthese peadL
marks P^-I think ho did,
WhK^ was the puqKwt oCtbat cofreoiioal-^
It is now at the end of this'printed sMOth.
You 8iglMd<.tli« p^litioa'to' iM»«HoaSfiM>f
431
£7 GEOROE lU.
Trial tjf Alexander M'Laren
[44
. Commons : should you know the purport of it
if you saw it r — I think I should.
Look at that ? Jpage 82, of the printed yotes
of the House ot Commons.] — I cannot re-
collect eyery word or sentence. I think that
is the petition. I see sentences that were
there.
You recollect the words where you see a X ?
r~I could not say positlTely.
• Do you recollect any of them ? — One part
ahout " indemnity for the past" in the sentence
— [The passage which Mr. Grant read was
pointed out to the witness.]
Do you remember that passage ? — I cannot
remember it.'
James Samaon cross-examined by the
Lord Adoocate,
Who were present when these pencil marks
were made on the manuscript speech } — ^I for
one.
I suppose so. Who more? — ^John Ken-
nedy.
That is two. Any more ? — Archibald Craig.
That is three. Who else was there ? — I do
not recollect any.
Do you say there were no more present ? —
There were others.
Let us hear the names of some more of them ?
—Mr. Baird was there.
Was M'Laren ? — He was there.
Was it by any of those you haye named
that the pencil marking was made ? — Tes.
Which of them?— Mr. Baird.
You have the book lying before you, tell us
what was altered? — The latter clauses or
clause.
Was any thing put in or> left out ? — It was
put in the manuscript by Mr. Baird.
Did he give his reason for putting it in ? —
Yes; because the manuscript deliyered was
not complete according to the way in which
the speech was spoken, and therefore Mr. Baird
put it in. . ,
Did Mr. M'Laren make any objections to
this alteration ? — I did not hear.
Mr. Grant. — ^We would haye brought seve-
ral witnesses in addition to those for the
crown, to testify as to the character of the
prisoner McLaren ; and it is my duty to inform
you of a mistake by which we haye been de-
priyed of this opportunity. The letters of
exculpation, with instructions to cite witnesses
to proye the good character of the prisoner
'^M'Laren, were, by a mistake of the proprietors
of the coach at Kilmarnock, forwarded to a
person of the. some mane as that on the address
on the parcel in a Afferent town^ aiui not re-
turned till the night of Thursday before the
trial, which circumstance we are m condition
to proye to your lordships; and we have
therefore nothing we can legally produce in
addition to the testimony given of their cha-
racters. But we haye certificates which your
lordships may perhaps allow to be read.
Lord JuUice Ckrkt-^Hoi at preseut; you
may state the import of them in the address to
the jury ; but they cannot be put in here in
evidence.
Lord Adoocate, — If apy statement had been
made to me of a wish that the trial should
have been delayed, I would have willingly
conceded the delay.
Mr. Grpnt, — ^Tbe thiAg was not ttiought of
sufficient importance, and the mistake did not
appear till last night.
Mr. Clerk, — Your lordships have heard some
evidence which shows that the meeting was
for the purpose of petitioning the Regent and
the two Houses of rarliament. And you have
heard that a petition was forwarded to the
House of Commons ; and reference has been
made to a paper, which' we state to be a copy of
the printed votes of that house.* We wiidi
to produce evidence of this, and of some others
of the same description, for the purpose of
showing what sort of language is permitted to
that House. I need not state how necessary
it is for our plea to show you what language it
is lawful to use in such cases. lu preparing
the petitions, and in debates on the subject,
such language must of course also be permit-
ted. We can have the productions proved by
Mr. Grant.
Lord Advocate, — I think it competent to ob-
jtet to these productions, and to the evidence
proposed to be brought as to the accuracy of
them.
Mr. C/crA:,— Doyou admit them?
Lord Adoocate. — \ have not read them, and
I know nothing of them.
Lord Justice Clerk, — The lord adyocate only
admits that it is the practice to print votes oif
the House, and that these offei^ in evidence
have the appearance of being copies. It is
not usual to call on counsel to be evidence in
the trial. As an agent for the prisoners could
not be admitted as evidence, I think it would
be better to call on some other person than
Mr. Grant.f I observe a noble lord present
whose testimony might be given.
Lord Gilliet, — Mr. Grant can^be examined
as a hayer.
Ljrd Advocate, — I go so far as to say that
I haye no reason to doubt the genuineness of
the copies.
Mr. Clerk, — I conceive you haye been in
the use to receive papers from agents, and to
examine them as havers of these papers. An
agent does not give parole evidence in the
' * £yen the printed Journals are not, in Eng-
land, ^evidence. 8 How. Mod. St. Tr. 685;
1 Phil. Ey. 406.
f Mr. Grant the proposed witness, was one
of the counsel for the panel M'Laren ; he was
at the time of this trial a member of the House
of Commons^
451
and Tkotttttt Btttrdfm Sedition.
A. D. 1817.
[46
cause, but only gifet his testimony to the au-
thenticity of a pgper in his poflsesBion; that is
all that Mr. Grant would be asked to do. Mr.
Grant can certify, not only that he believes
them to be the printed Totes of the House of
Commons, but |also that he lecetyed them
under cover from the Vote-office, certifying to
him that they are the votes of the House of
Commons.
Lord Adoocate. — The evidence would not be
complete ; Mr. Grant can only explain how he
came by these papers.
Jjord JvMtice Clerk, — In a legal sense what
Mr. Grant could certify would not make them
evidence. The question of their being actually
the votes of the House would remain to be
established.
Mr. Gerk. — After they are made public,
they are matters of notoriety, which any per^
sons may refer to before your lordships.
Lord AdvocaU.^I admit my belief of their
genuineness.
John JndretDS sworn. — Examined by Mr.
Jeffrey for Mr. Bidrd,
Are you chief magistrate of Kilmarnock ?—
Yes.
Were you in that office in December last ? —
Yes.
Do you recollect a public meeting in the
Dean-park ? — I do.
Did you receive any notice or application
regarding that meeting } — ^I think I aid ; one
or two days before it took place.
Who waited upon you? — Mr. Baird met me
in the street, and told me of the meeting a few
days before.
Wliat did he state to you ? — ^That he was
appointed by the committee to wait on me, to
inform me the meeting would take place if I
would allow it^ and that if I would not he
wrguld give up the intention of holding it ; I
said I did not approve of the meeting, but I
thoiwht I eoold not prevent it.
VT^M it a numerous meeting P — I could noi
say, I was not there.
Does it consist with your knowledge that
the conduct of those at the meeting was
orderiy or otherwise ? — ^There Was notmng of
riot or disturbance that I heard of.
No breach of the peace ? — ^None.
Have there been any since? — I know of
none ;' I recollect none.
Was there any kind of disturbance recently
before ?-^In September, I believe.
You are acquainted with Mr. Baird ?— >Yes,
I have been long acquainted with him.
He is in a respectable way of life ? — ^Very
respectable.
11 'he a* quiet and peaceable person, or
tomnltnous . and disorderly? — Always peace-
able.
Doel it <$OBsist vftith^your. knowledge that he^
hdd a military cominission in a volunteer or*'
local militia cdrps ?^I 'generally uiuierstood he
^|s a captain.
Have you seen him acting in that capacity ?
— ^I think I have.
Down to what time did he so act 7 — I could
not say.
WaUer Andrew sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Cockbum,
What are you ? A writer ? — ^Yes.
Do you know Mr. Baird ? — ^Yes.
Do you rerpember the meeting held at Kil-
marnock in December last? — ^Yes.
There was a committee for arranging the
business? — Yes.
Were you a member of it? — ^Yes.
Was Mr. Baird ?— Yes.
You have seen him at the committee ?— I
have.
Do you recollect any discussion after the
meeting about printing the speeches delivered
there ? — ^Two or three days after the meeting
Mr. Baird called on me with the manuscript
of a speech which was delivered there. I said
I thought indecorous expressions were in it^
which ought to be kept out. He urged that
objection at a meetmg; but the objection
was overruled.
What were the precise expressions which yon
called indecorous or vulgar ? Do you remem-
ber the expressions ? — I could not repeat the
words : the passage was the same in the ma-
nuscript, as in the printed pamphlet, where I
read, *^ which he is oound to do by the consti-
tutional laws of the country; but should be be
so infatuated as to turn a deaf ear to their
just petition, he has forfeited that allegiance^
Yes I my fellow-townsmen, in such a case to
with allegiance.''
What was it you objected to f— What I have
read.
And Mr. Baird concurred in that objection,
but he was out-voted ? — ^Yes.
Was there an^ other speech, to the printing
of which he objected ? — ^The last in the pam-
phlet ; the speech of Mr. Kennedy.
What was his objection to Kennedy's speech ?
— ^He said it was nonsense.
Did he object to any of the. othen ?--^To
part of Mr. Burt's.
What was the objection to it P— He said it
would have been letter if it had been clothed'
in milder language.
From your conversation with^him, did you
understand him to be the author of that speech ?
-^No. He expressed regret that some of it
was not expressed in milder language.
Did you ever hear him express a desire to
have every thing dgne quietly, so as to give
oiTenca to nobody ? — ^Yes.
Was there any riot at the meeting?— Not-
that I heard of.
Did he ever express to you any desire tfant
government should be. overawed ?7-No.
He wished regularity of prokjeeding? — ^He
said, the only object was to petition constittf-
tionally, so as to give offiince to no one. . .
What was the object of printing the pro-
ceedings?—To defray the expenses intenrred.
4ffi
1 ^HB^ass in.
Wtf ^^fumiv NflMm
r4e
Rer. JAmef IGr ihooorf sworn ^ — fixumined by
Mr. Jeffrey.
Are yoa acquainted with Mr, Baird?*-rl
have had that pleasure for nearly two years.
Do you know him intimately? — Very inti*
mately. No one more so.
In the course of yi>ur aoquamtanee with Mr.
Baird, have youlnd ODQTeraatioiis with hira
•a political sttfagects ?— I have.
Has he ei^prnsed hH^ sentiments with apptr
rept .sii^cen]^ 4n4 eon?i^an?— rWith the
greatest I have no doubt.
Did he express 9n attaoUoieiit to the ooasti-
tution as established by laW) or a doiix* to
have it altered ? — He. eiipressed % desire (hat
the popular part of the constitution shouU be
fUieB^thened an4 inen^gsi^* MTer that the
constitution should be ov^rlQXted*
He wished some r^fomnstion of the rcpfe-
aentation of the Hojase 9f Comwiaiis f— Yea.
Did he ever* eif^l^^ by what means he
thought ^lis )ihott]4 be ^yitenqpled? — I have
oft^n h/eard him say h? w^ anxious that any
thing Uke viol^nqe sho^ < be avoided, aad
that none but constitutional meaaur^a ^ouM
\/e taken.
Does Mr. Bair4 attei^i your congnegatioD 7
—Yes.
Is he a man of peacfoaSle an4llK>i9li.con4uct?
i^-To the best of my knowled^ he ie sow
Did he ever discover any ^onjew^y lo rioteus
or disorderly cooduot ?-rrl %Md^'Obiirted ajiy
ti^Dg or that kind i« him*.
He is a peaoeable jam WI think 4P»
Has he si^y f}imil|[)-rHei haa «#iref«l chilr
dren.
Dp you Ihink Mm Q9^bb) of : i|»tonlionaI1y
exciting tumult or violence among the people?
—I should cei^tajiily think he it itog^iheff in-
capable of designedly doing so.
John WyUie syfon, — Examined by
Mt. CoMum,
Do you hold anr officer ^t^f gtHrarmnent ?
—I am surveyor of tiM^fflr.t)i« thiWI diatiiet of
Ayrshire.
Do you hold any military; eeiminisaioD ?-*-(
ifraa in thei Volpm^erp till 1609, %iid Istill hold
^ooromi^sion m^ I^o^al HtliUtia.
I need hardly ask you if y^ eve a Mm re^
fe^mer yoursrtf fr-J imm 9/im^^.mfmtins»
%! auch purpiwHS*
. Yo>iare r^tbeir.iiLiQifteriaUy ineUn^dC I |W^
•ome. Do yp^,kn^vt Ml • JM^ ?— Y<es.
What app«ar«4 to* be hif politieal aei^ti-
i|j9^8 Ff^ue je^DMd.W be a. ftieB4 tothe cdiih
etitution, but wished a refiuia 19 tb^ repreae»-
t«|ion.
He had no desire to overturn thoi dOPItita*
tian^—I h^ve.h^aid bii%. wa^ly. e;rtol the
oonstituticuu
Xa he a :<|^|.iiiani^Ye9» h« baa beea. ao
ei^ ^^ I kMiFbiqiy and th^t> h tb^ gteatM.:
part of hiaiife.;
lahe.reapfjiBtlMe in pfiiot of sHlMtioiil^
Htre YOU temd idciig wKk bhn is ny
eorpa ?-^I was anbalteniy and he was mcaptan
in the Apshire.
Did his oonduoC as an officer give satida^
tioo ?— He was a ^^try active officer.
Do you know of a aseeting held at Kil-
mamodL in Deoember last ?^-I beard of it.
Had you any conversation with Mr. Baiid
about it? — ^Yes, once or twice. I beard %.
{gentleman read an account of the proceedings
m a company from a Glasgow paper.
■* Did you ever hear Mr. oaird say any thing
about the speeches ? — I never heard him make
any remarks on them.
Do you know Mr. M'Laren ? — ^Yes.
Was he in that corps you spoke of? — ^Yea,
in my company.
Did he behave well ? — ^As far as I know,
sir.
John Brovm sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Jeffrey,
Are Tou a writer in Kilmarnock ?— Yea^
Have you a partner in business ?— Yes, the
town-clerk.
Are you acquainted with Mr. Baird?— Very
well.
Is he a respectable man ? — One of the most
so in, the town.
Has he a family ? — He is a widower, vridi
four or 4ve children.
Do you recollect a meeting in December
last for petitioning parUament ? — ^Yes, I do.
Do you know wheiher a oommittee met be-
fore and after that meeting } — I believe one sat
several days befoue the meeting.
Were yon a member of it t — ^No> nor vras I
ever at the meeting.
Did Mr. Baiid ever etunmunicate to you
what was passing?— Scarcely a day passed in
which we did not converse on the oocotrenees
of the meeting ; and I was in the habit of adu
ing what passed at the committee.
What did be state as the object of the peti-
tioners ? — ^To prooire a reform in parliament*
By what means ?^^By constitntional means.
Did he disavow violence or other means ?*—
MostdiMincftly.
You know Mr. Baird was at the pvblio
meeting: Did he give you any aoeonnt of what
took place there ?-*Yes^he told me who spoke*
When the proeecdings were pnUished, I was
amrpcised at seeing a pacagiaph which I did
not look for, and I told him it was a pitjr it
was there. He sud he disapproved of it him-
self, and was against printing it at aU^ but thai
a vote was taken on the subject by the com-
mittee, and they determined to print it, as they
didnot wiah i^gaibled statcmeirt of the prO'
ceedings to go before the public.
Did he make, obaorvations ott any of the
other speeches?— He pointedly, o^eoted ta'
McLaren's speech.
Did he object to any of rtbe^ oAem ?— *He
diaararoffed of one ov.two, n baring lan^ag* >
t»ft treeni and 'disHwpaetiul.
Does it consist with your knowMf%4bat \^*
4«]
and Thomas Btttrd fir Sedition,
A. O. 1817.
1 50
haa held comnusnoos in militaiy iy>rp8 ?-^He
commanded a compaDj of rifle Tojunteers for
'some time.
Did he give satisfaction in his military ca-
pacity ? — ^I Defer heard any complaint against
nim. I always conceived he behaved like a
gentleman.
Was he lately amwinted a commissioner of
police of the townr— Yes, at last annaal elec-'
tioo.
From what you know of him was he sincere
in his sentiments in favour of constitutional
modes of proceeding for obtaining redress of
grievances? — ^There is no question of that.
He never approved of any other than constitu-
tional modes of redress. I have known him
intimately these eight or ten years.
Was he likely to say or do any thiog to pro-
duce discontent ? — I conceive he would be the
last man in the world to be guilty of any thing
of the kind.
Are youderk to the road 'trustees? — ^Yes.
Did you understand Mr. Baird objected to
these expressions not as being improper in
themselves but as likely to lead the persons
.who uttered them into a scrape ? — He did not
appear to be apprehensive of any coesequences
to result from them, but he objected to them
. as improper expressions.
Are yon acquainted wi^ MILaren? — ^A
little. I have met him on business.
Do yott know anything of his character f — ^I
never heard anything against him.
Ijord AdvocaU, — Gentlemen of the jury ; you
have heard from the indictment th^tt tne panels
are charged generally in the major proposition
with the crime of sedition, a crime well known
in the law of Scotland, and with the general
description of which you must be already fa-
miliar, but with which, at all events, you have
had addiuonal means of being made acquaint-
ed, ttcfOL the luminous and satisfactory judg-
ments of their lordships, delivered this morn-
ing in tlie commencement of ^h&trial. I ^hall
not, therefore, in this part of the observations
which it is incumbent upon me in discharge of
my public duty to adoress to you, sav any
thing in further explanation of the law of sedi-
tion, whidi — as a crime calculated to unsettle
the-order of society, and to introduce tumult,
anarchy^ and ..bloodshed into these realms,
which, for upwards of a century have enjoyed
the highest oegree of freedom that ever fell to
the lot of any people-r-is one of the most dan-
.gerous whicn can be committed against the
state. Before, however, concluding the re-
marks with which I shall have .to trouble you,
it may be necessar^r for me to draw your atten-
tion to the application of the law to ue charges
prefierred against the paneb. In ^e fir?t in-
stance, however, I shall confin.e myself exclu-
sively to the evidence which has been adduced,
in order to establish that the acts at least, a1-
. leged in the indictment to have been committed
. by the prisoners, have been brought home to
.tibem.
VOL. xxxin.
Tou will observe, then, that in the minor
proposition of the iiidietment, the prisoileri
are charged — McLaren with having, at a public
meeting, on the 7th of last December, held in
the neighbourhood of Kilmarnock, and attend-
ed principally by the lower orders of the peo-
ple, used- certain seditious and inflammatory
language, in a speech which he then deliver-
ed— a speech calculated to degrade and
bring into contempt thef goverment and legis-
lature, to withdraw therefrom the confidence
and affections of the people, and to All the
realm with trouble and dissention. For the
precise expressions which he then employed, I
shall beg leave to refer you at present to the
copies of the indictment which are before you,
in which the passages of the speech are detail-
ed at length, and to which I shall hereafter
be obliged more particularly to call your
attention.
The other panel, Baird, is charged with
having published his speecli, and with having
been accessary to the printing and circulating
a seditious tract or statement, purporting to be
an*' Account of the proceedings of the public
meeting of the burgesses and inhabitants of
the town of Kilmarnock, held on the 7th of
December 1816, for the purpose of deliberat-
ing on the most proper method of remedying
the present distresses of the country, with a
full report of the speeches on that occasion."
Then follow particular passages contained in
that publication, which are alleged generally
to be seditious, tending to inflame the minds
of the public against the constitution of the
kingdom, and which, it is affirmed, were pub-
lished by him with the wicked and felonious
purpose of exciting sedition against the Go-
vernment, and of withdrawing" the affections
of the people from the established order of
things in the country. The publication has
been duly authenticated, and although I shall
afterwards more particularly refer you to some
of its most striking passages, the whole, I trust,
will receive your full and deliberate considera-
tion.
In the conclusion of the indictment both
prisoners are charged with being accessaries
to the crimes committed by each. From this
you will understand, that if, from a full consi-
deration and investigation of the proof which
I have laid before you, you should be of opin-
ion that the prisoner Baird was accessaiy to
making the seditious speech delivered by
M'lAren, or that the other panel, M'Laren, was
accessary to publishing or circulating the sedi-
tious libel, stated more particularly to have
been sent into the world by Baird, then you
. will have to ifind, supposing you are of opinion
that the speech and publication are seditious,
that both are guilty art and part of the crime
laid in the indictment.
. In consideriug this part of the case as' a
question of evidence, I do not think that it is
necessary for me to go very deeply into the
import of the depositions of the witnesses \ for
I conceive, that wh^le you are calleil upon to
E
513
57 GEORGE III.
Trial afAUtanitr M'Laren
159
discharge a most important duty, in declaring
the guilt or innocence of the panels as to the
crimes libelled, and which may depend on
considerations altogether unconnected with
the mere fact of the deliyeiy of the speech by
the one, or the publication of the libel by the
other, you can have no difficulty in forming
an opinion, that both, and each of them, at
least, did commit the acts which are charged
against them in this indictment. You can
have no difficulty in being of opinion, that it
is proved that M'Laren did deliver a speech at
,the meeting, and that the speech did contain
the expressious which are cited in thi^ indicts
roent : Neither, in my apprehension, can you
doubt, that the publication in question was the
work of Baird ; that he not only superintended
the printing, but assisted in preparing the
manuscript for the press; and that he sold
and distributed this libel, prepared under his
own eye, with the utmost diligence, indefati-
gable zeal, and persevering activity. In like
manner, I, at least, cannot see where a doubt
can ezisty that it has been legally proved that
M'Laren was art and part in the publication,
and that he is now bound to answer for that
publication which was thus sent forth into the
world, be its qualities what they may.
But though that is the impression on my
mind, and although I have no doubt that the
same has been made upon the minds of all of
you, it is, notwithstanding, my duty to go
over th^t evidence, and to endeavour to point
your attention to its different parts, as appli-
cable to the charge against the panels sepa-
rately,— distinguishing, as I have said, the
bare facts of the case from the view which I
am afterwards to take of the nature and im-
port of the expressions.
In the first place, then, you will attend to
the evidence, by which it is proved that the
speech in question was actually delivered by
the prisoner M'Laren.
Upon this branch of the case, I shall call
your attention to the statement given by the
prisoner himself in |iis declaration emitted be*
tore the sheriff. But, before doing so, it may
be proper for me to state to you distinctly, that
in considering this part of the evidence,
you must remember, that nodiing contained in
this piec^ of evidence can inculpate the oCher
prisoner, but can only affect the party by
whom it was emitted. Neither, I will fidrly
tell you, is it to be taken as conclusive evidence
even against him. It is, however, a very strong
circumstance of presumption against him,
ioQAde, as it has been adnutted to have been in
this case, voluntarily, while the prisoner was
sober and in his sound senses, deliberately
andseriooaly. I shall submit to you, there*
fore, that when the admissions made in this
declaration axe taken with the parole proof,
no doubt can be left upon your mind of the
Mth of the allegations made in the iodict-
fnent) in point of fact^ regarding the' prisoner
H^Laren.
In the first place, then, the declaration of
M'Laren states, ''that there was apnbUc meet«
ing held at the Dean-park, near Kilmarnock,
on the 7th of December last : that that meeting
was for the purpose of petitioning parliament
for a reform of grievances. Declares, that
previous to that meeting there was a commit-
tee of certain individuals in Kilmarnock for
the purpose of bringing about the said meet-
ing: tnat the declarant attended that com-
mittee, and David Ramsay Andrews, writer
in Kihmumock, Thomas &ird and Andrew
Finnie, merchants there, also attended that
meeting : and the declarant has reason to sup-
pose that they were members of it as well as
himself. Declares, that the declarant first ap-
peared on the hustings, and opened the
meeting ; and being shown an * Accocnt of
the proceedings of the public meeting of the
burgesses and inhabitants of the town of
Kilmarnock,' and wherein is engrossed on
part of the fifth page, sixth, and part of the
seventh page, what the declarant said at open-
ing the above meeting, declares, that the de«
clarant has perased said speech, and it is near
what the dedarant mad on the obooe oocoiioii."
He next, no doubt, makes an exception as to
the inaccuracy of that speech, ^ except what is
said about toe middle of the seventh page
about alleffiance, which the declarant thinks he
did not deliver in the words as expressed in the
publication.''
Tikis, you will observe, is not denying the
purport of the passage in the libel, but onlV
the words in which £e import was conveyed
to the multitude, and we shall see afterwards
whether the prisoner be correct in this part of
his statement. *
He next declares, " that on the morning of
the above meeting, the dedarant put into i&rtt-
ing what he naat $ay at the cpemn^ of the meet-
ing: that he qfterwardt gaoe hs part of the
nuamtcripi to thote who were apfomted (y the
committee to mferintend the printing of the pro^
ceesSngt, that the tame might he pMUhed wmg
with the rett. Declares, that James Johnstone^
muslin-agent in the waterside of Kilmarnock
was called to the chair, and on that occasion
he made a speech, whidi was much approved
of by those present. Declares, that the re$o»
bitiontj at engroued in taid piMcationf are the
tame that were reed at the public meeting, end
the manmcrift wot read to the committee prevUme
to the meetmgy by Tfumat Baird, merwmt hit
KilmamoAf one of the membert. Declares, that
Hugh Crawford, printer in Kilmarnock, waa
employed to print the proceedings of the meet-
ing, which were afterwards sold at fourpenee
a-piece, to enable the committee to defray Ate
expenses. Declares, that the declarant attend- _
ed a meeting of the committee^ when those'
who spoke gave ih their maauteripts fSor print*
ing; and the declarant thinks the fdfesaid
Thomas Baird vras present :^That a committee
was appointed to enperintend the printing,*
and the said Thomas naird and Andrew Fin-
nie were of that committee. And being shewn
the printed report before mentioned, dedares
ana Thomas Baird^fir SedUicM.
9^1
^k^ kt heard mm 0f the mdhonfadfadt wUh
«iy tkm^tlud it Aaron caUmned; and tbe said
SublicatioD is docqueted and signed by the
eclazant aod sheriff as relative hereto.'' And,
before condiiding, be" declares^ that the words
9D the sixth page, 'the fact is, we are ruled by
men oaly soUcitbus for their own agmndize-
menty and they care no farther for uie great
body of the people than they are subservient
to their accursea purposes, * were in the manu^
xripi wroU hy the dedanmt, but were not re-
pe^ed by him at the public meeting when on
the busting as above."
Now, this is the declaration of the panel, and
it must, as it will, be supported by other evi-
dence, before, as I have told you, it can have
full authority with you as establishing the &ct
j^ainst the prisoner. You will, therefore, ob-
serve, that in this declaration be admits, gene-
rally, that all the parts of his speech as given
in this printed paper, are accurate, with two
exceptions.
Ihe first exception is, that there is something
inaccurate in the words at the passage regard*
ing allegiance ; but he does not state, or allege,
in what particular these expressions are inac-
curate ; neither does he deny that they convey
the import of what he had delivered. And, no
doubt, there is an inaccuracy in the printed
account of this passage ; because, you will ob-
serve, that one monosyllable, of very great im-
port, is cautiously omitted, which, it is proved
Dy the rest of the evidence, beyond all doubt,
the prisoner actually employed. The word
*' heu^ is omitted altogether ; and while the
prisoner refrained from stating what words
were incorrectly given, I shovld be entitled to
infer that it consuted in this omission ; and, if
so, it is of no importance to the general result.
Indeed, itk enough for my purpose that he
admits general^ the accuracy and authenticity
of tbe pubUoOion ; because I have the means
of supporting the strong evidence afforded by
this general admission, by other testimony
which supplies whatever is wanting in his own
declaration.
The second exception which he makes is,
that some words, which are mentioned at the
end of ihe declaration, are printed, which he
did not deliver at the hustings ; but you wjU
observe, that he admits that those words were
in the copy of his speech which he gave to be
printed, and that he does not allege that he, at
any time, ever objected to the publisher, or to
. the committee, that his speech as delivered vras
not accurately given, but, on the contrary, that
he acquiesced, down to the hour of his emitting
this declaration, in its being the true and
fiur account of the speech he had miAe on that
occasion.
Let us now attend to tbe parole proof, by
which this declaration has been amply con-
firmed.
Of the two witnesses who were first examined,
jotthaveFinnie. who swears that the speech
' which he heard McLaren deliver on that occa-
sion contained, these words t ''We wUl lay/'
A. D. 1817.
L&4
or ** let us lay, our petitions at the fdot. of tbe
throne, where sits our august prince, whose
generous nature will incline his ear to hear the
cries of his people, which he is bound to do by
the constitutioiud laws of the country; and we
are thereby bound to give him our idlegiance :
But if be should be so infatuated as to turn a
deaf hear to the eeneral cries'* or ^ voice of
bis people, to hell with allegiance.*' That is
the express statement given by a person who
himself attended the meeting as a party, who
cannot be supposed to be very unfavourable to
the prisoners, and whose testimony, indeed, was
given in a way that must satisfy your minds he
did not intend to press the case mor« than it
would bear against either of them.
Next we have tbe witness Merrie, whT> ex>-
pressly swears (though his memory is not dis-
tinct as to the whole passage), that McLaren
made the first speech. He remembers the
words ** to hell with" or " for such alle-
giance.'' He says M'Laren '' wished the
people to address their . augnst sovereign, and
he meant their allegiance to him.** Then he re-
members the words, '* if he turned a deaf ear
to the voice of his people ;^' and after that came
the words ** to hell with allegiance."
Besides the testimonies I have now referred
you to, I might, if it were necessary, go over
the evidence of many more of tbe witnesses ;
but this must be superfluous. You will, how*'
ever, keep in remembrance the evidence of
Samson, who, when called back and examined
for the prisoners, deposed, that be attended the
meeting of the committee when the speeches
were given in for publieation 'by the aifferent
persons by whom they had been delivered at
the public meeting ; that M'Laren was present
at tnat meeting of the committee, and that
when be produced his manuscript, there was a
correction made on it by Batrd, which was
read to the meeting; and that the pencils
marking made by Baird were those Very words
I have referred to which are given in this
speech, and copied into the indictment which
is l^ng before vou. He states, that the words
which were added by Baird with the pencil
are, ^ which he is bound to do by the laws of
tbe country : But should be be so infatuated
as to turn a deaf ear to their just petition, he
has forfeited their allegiance. Yes, my fellow
countrymen, in such a case to hell with our
allegiance." These are the words which with
a pencil Baird added to M'Laren*s speech in
his own presence. Now why, I will ask, ac-
cording to the prisoner^ own friend Mr.
Samson, were they added } Why, because tbe
committee wished to give a true account of
what took place at tbe meeting, or, to use his
own words, ** because tbe manuscript delivered
in was not complete according to tbe way in
which the speech was delivered.*' The com-'
mittee did not wish to garble the proceedings,
but to give i^minnte, true and accurate account
of what happened ; and the passage therefore
was inserted. All this, you will remember,
took place in McLaren's presence ; and did he
55]
57 GEORGE III.
Trial ofAkxander M*Laren
LS6-
object to this .addition being made? No; on
the contraiy, he agreed that the passage should
remain there, because it was an accurate account
of what he had said* Some feeling of pro-
priety, no doubt^ prevented the committee from
putting in one word which had been used by
M'Laren, and there is a blank accordingly in
the printed paper; but the witnesses who
were examined fill up the word, and tell you
what is wanting. You have McLaren's ad-
mission, therefore, in his declaration, of the
general accuracy of the printed account of
hia speech; you have the parole proof;
you have this statement of Samson's; and
you have M'Laren*s virtual admission in the
committee, that these were the expressions he
used. It does, therefore, appear to me to be
unnecessary to go further in examining evidence
on this part of the subject. I think it is clear
that these words were used by M'Laren, and
that of this it is impossible you should doubt.
I may now, then, put the prisoner McLaren
aside altogether, in so far as the mere fact of
the speech having been delivered by him is
concerned ; and it is exclusively to that I am
speaking at present;
As to the prisoner Baird, we must also look
to the terms of his declaration. He declares,
*' ihat the 7th of December last was fixed for a
general meeting at the Dean-park : That ^e
declarant attended that meeting, and Alexander '
M'Laren, weaver in Kilmarnock, mounted the
l!iustlnffs,aQd opened the meeting vrith a speech :
That James Johnstone, muslin-agent in Kil-
marnock, was called to the chair, and read a
speech to the meeting from a memorandum-
book. And being shewn a manuscript con-
sisting of nineteen pa^es, declares. That he is
pretty certain that it is the same that he read
to the meeting, and which the declarant saw
some days afterwards in Walter Andrew's ofiibe,
and which is docqueted and signed as relative
hereto. Declares, 'fhat the proceedingi were
ordered to be printedy and the dedarant wot ap-
pointed by the committee^ along with $everal othen,
to gji^permtend the printing : That the dedaramt
atmted in correcting the grammatical erron in the
mdnuscriptf along with the said Walter Andrew,
and the declarant assisted a little at the printing
office in correcting the proof-copy : And being
shewn a half-sheet of paper, titled on the back,
** No. 5, Mr. Burt's letter," declares, That said
words are of the decIarant^s hand-writing, and
the said half-sheet of paper was given in by
the declarant to the printer, along with the rest
<>f the manuscripts, and said half-sheet of paper
is docqueted and signed by the declarant and
sherifl*-substitute as relative hereto. Declares,
That the proceedings of said meeting were
printed by Hugh Crawford, and a great number
of copies were tent to the dedarant't thop,andke
retaikd them at 4d. a piepeJ*
The result of this declaration seems to be,
that the prisoner admits that he was one of ^he
compaittee appointed to. superintend the pub-
lioation complaioedof— iha^he assisted in cor-
recting die manuscript to'Sft it for going to the
printing-house — that he did superintend the.
printing of it, assisting even in correcting the
press, and that a great number of copies
were sent to his shop which he retailed and
distributed.
Accordingly this admission, vrhich, I hare
said, is, in point of law, a strong circumstance
of evidence against the prisoner, is amply con-
firmed by the depositions of the witnesses, by
several of whom it has been proved that he at-
tended the meeting upon the 7th of December,
and that he heard tne speeches' contained in
this publication delivered or read by the per-
sons to whom they are attributed. By others
it has been proved, that he was one of the com-
mittee appointed to superintend the pubtica^
tion ; and by one of that committee it is estab-
lished, that m the matter of publication he took
a most active concern, perusing at least the
manuscript of some of the speeches as they
wete given in by the authors or reputed
authors; and tliat such was his vigilance,
in providing that none of the precious
matter which had come before the public
meeting should be lost, that the passage
which is chiefly complained of in the first
charge against M'Laren, having been omitted
in the manuscript, he himself took his pencil,
and, for the edincation of the public, to whom
the pamphlet viras addressed, actually wrote it
down on the press copy.
In like manner, you have it proved by
Murray, Mr. Crawford's journeyman, that
Baird attended at the office during the time
the publication was printing — ^that he examined
the first proof, and suggested at least one, it
not more corrections.
Again, as to the fact of pubUcatioii, it is
proved by the prisoner's shop-boy, aikd by the
vritness who bought a copy at his shop, as also
by one of the members of the committee
appointed to superintend t he publication, and
who delivered great numbers of the pamphlet
for the purpose of being sold and distributed,
that Baird was the principal hand by whom
this publication, be its ments or demerits whait
they may, was sent out upon the world.
When you consider this body of evidence,
therefore, I cannot entertain a doubt that you
must be clear that the fact of the publication
by Baird is incontrovertibly established.
Upon this part of the question, therefore,
I have only furlhet to remark, that there can
be as little ground for doubting, that the pri-
soner M'Ls^n, besides being bound to answer
for delivering the speech, whidi in this indict-
ment is charged with having been seditious,
must also answer for being an accessary to
printing and publishing the pamphlet upon the
table. The facts of his having given in the
manuscript copy of his own roeech fi)r the
purpose of being published, ana that he was m
nember of the committee of publicatioQ — facts
which are proved beyond all contradiction by
the witnesses io whom I have already refetree,
as virfll as by his own admission — can leave no
manner of doubt upon this subject.
5T3
and Thmat Bmrifor Sediiion.
JLJX mi.
[Aft
I Kp^frAaoAf iher^any that yon mitt now t
concur with me in bolding it to be ettablished [
by the proof, 1sl» That McLaren detirered at I
the jmbUc meetiog that speech, of which parts
are quoted in the indictment ; 2ndly, That the
puMication porportinf to be ** Account of the
proeeedings of the public meeting of the Bur-
gesses and Inhabitants of the Town of KiU
maiuock, held on the 7tb of December 1816"
&e. was printed and published by the prisoner
l^iidy who was active in its sale and aistribn-
tion ; and, drdly. That the prisoner McLaren
was also an accessary to the fact of pnblica*
tion.
Upon this part df tfie case, therefore, which
mnst in fact form the foundation of the opinion
which yon aie to make up, and of the verdict
yon are to retnm, there neithercan be any groond
of difference between my friends on the oppo*
site side of the bar and myself, nor, I am con-
fident, can there be a vestige of doubt in your
minds.
But that part of the case which requires
yonr utmost deliberation still remains to be
considered. In the commencement of the trial
you heard an admission upon my part, that it
would be competent for the prisoners, not only
to dispute the truth of the facts charged in the
indibonent, but to plead to you, that suppos-
ing those &cts were brought home to both of
them, the speech and publication in question
did not amount to the crime of sedition. To
that admissiott I still most heartily adhere. It
has always been in this country, and I trust
always will be, the province of the jury, in
every question of this description, to 6nd in
Aeir verdict, whetherthere was a criminal iiiten<»
tioo entertained by the prisoneis-^whetber a
crime has been committed or not—and whether
that crime amounta to sedition.
In order to enable you, therefore, to make
up your opinions upon this subject, had it not
been for tne deliberate judgments of the Court
which you had an opportunity of hearing at the |
commencement of the trial, it might have been
expected of me to enter into some details of
the history and of the nature of this offence, —
one of the most various and comprehensive,
and at the same time one of the most danserous
and flagitious known to the law of Scotland. But
as you heard the unanimous opinion of their
lordships, that the allegations contained in this
indictment, if established against the prisoners,
would amount to the crime of sedition, I shall
confine myself to such a statement of ihe sub-
ject as is barely requisite for enabling you to
Mlow the oondusions which I find it mj duty
to draw from the particttlar passages m this
publication urtuch 1 have been called upon to
bring under your eoneidemtion.
Seditiim, Gentlemen^ is a crime by the com-
monkw of Scotland; and it has been laid
down by our writers, and by Ihe decisions ef
this court, that it readies- to practices ;of every
description, whether by deed> word, orwiitinR,
which^tfecaSeulatedand'iBMnded to distuA)
the Iranquilli^ trf the state, by exciting disaf*
footionlD the ttindfrof the people against the
established government of the country, to pro-
duce resistance to its authority, or to lead to
its ultimate subversioo. -
Allow me, however, to guard myself against
misconstruction as to the use of the terms,
** the established Government,'' which I have
now em]d(^ed. By those terms, you will not
by any means uhderstand that I refjer to that
which, in ordinary parianoe, is commonly so
termed, I mean his majnty's nunisten. You
need not be told that it is competent and law-
fed for the subjects of this realm to canyass all
the measures of his majesty's ministers,— ^o
state that they are contrary to law, and to the
interests of the country ; — ^that their prooaed*
ings should be interrupted, and the autliors of
them dismissed from office : in talking, thsire*
fore, of raising disaffection to his majesty's
government, you will understand that I do not
mean exciting disaffection to his majesty's m^
nisters. Far be it from me to contend th«t
this is against law, or that courts of law ought
to interfere to punish practices, words,, or writ*^
ings, calculated to produce that effect. Bot
by the established government, I mean the
constittttion of King, Lords, and Commons, as
established at the period of the glorious Revo*
kition of 1688 ; and, in this sense of the term^
I state to you, that any thing which tmds to
produce public trouble or commotion,*— any
thing which moves his msjesty's snlgects to the
dislike, subversion, or distuibaace of hu ma»
jesty's government, amounts to the crime of
sedition. Any speech or writing that is calott*
hued, and intended to vilify and traduce Um
sovereign in his capacity of Head of the State^
or aa a branch of the legislature— any speech or
writing calculated and intended to vilify and
traduce the House of Peers^^ny speech o
writing calculated and intended to vilify th(
House of Commons, stating, for instanee, that
it is not the House of Commons, that it is
the mere nominal and pretended repre^
sentative of the people, and does not repre«
sent them, — ^tbat it has become corrupt;-**
writings or speeches inculcating all, or any of
those things, fall under the crime of sedinon.
In like manner, either a speech Or a writing
exhorting the people to throw off their allegi-
ance, under any particular contingency which
may arise from any one branch of the Isgislap-
ture either doing an act, or refusing to do an
act, which may, or may not be within its par-
ticular competency, will amount to the crane
of sedition.
Allow me, also, to observe to you, that in
all cases of this description, the time when the
particular act complained of is committed, the
state of public ofttiiion, and the political rein*
tsons of the country, internal or external, wiU
often be essential to the constitutidn of the of*
fence. For instance, to use am illustration that
I believe was given by an eminent person, who,
in the year 1795, held t])e situation which my
I' -honourable friend near me now holds. Had,
in the year 1745, any niunberof iadiriduaa^
89]
57 GEORGE UI.
qfAlumiitr. htJLttttn
i90
lKvw^T«r fewy with whke OM^ato id tMr
faats^ tnd moflkets Id their huids, repiired to
ili6 Castle-hill, ahovtiDg out the name of the
Pretender^ they would have heen guilty da
trime probably not fhort of the highest that
could be committed against the state; but were
the same act to be done new, they could be
legaided in no other light tluun as madmen.
Various other illustrations of a similar nature
might be sUted, but I deem it sufficient for me
Co submit to you generallyy as being dear law,
that if at any time publications or speeches
are oompkined of as seditious, it will always
be of im]>ortance to consider the state of ^e
public mind at the period the act alleged tp
constitute the prime has been committed, in
Older duly to appreciate their nature and im*
port With this view, and before concluding,
It will be my province to submit to you, in a
sinsle sentence, that the state of the country
«t me time when this publication issued from
the press, and when the spcm^ was dehrerad
by McLaren at the public meeting, must enter
deeply into your consideration in forming your
veraict upon this indictment.
Upon this subject I have only farther to state
that the crime of sedition is one ¥rhidi tUs
court, and the law of this country, has viewed
as one of the hi|^est and most flaoitious de«
scription. Its object is to introduce dissention,
trouVlesy and bloodshed into the kingdom, —
to subvert the laws, and to dissolve the bonds
of society. It is the duty of government, therfr-
fore, to resist and extinguish it in ihe veiy outset ;
and if, in the present instance, I have any
thing to regret, it is that this, and perhaps
other cases of a similar description, have not
been brought sooner before a Jury of the
conntry.
We come now to consider whether the terms
of the speech, ts deliversd at the meeting by
McLaren, or the terms of that speech and of
the other speeches in the publication after-
wards given to the worid by the prisoneis,
amount to the dme of sedition, according to the
description of that offence which I have now
had the honour of giving you.
And first, as to the speech. In it you will
recollect, that McLaren stated, ** That our su^
feringsare insupportable is demonstrated to
the world; and tnat they are neither tempo-
rary, nor occasioned by a transition from '' war
to peace," is palpable to all, though all have
not the courage to avow it. The &ct is, we
are mled by men only solicitous for their own
aggrandizement, and they care no furtiber for
the great body of the people than Uiey are sub-
servient to tlieir aceuised purposes.^
• In this passage the term rulers, you will ob-
serve, is employed; and this, it may be said,
applies to his majesty's ministers, and notto the
^vemment in the more comprehensive mean-
ing of the phrase; but it does no such. thing.
There is no limitation, you will remark, intro-
duced by the speaker. Even taking the term
generally, and in its extensive sense, undoqht-
,cdly it oompieheads ^e wliole order of our
Omremon^ -^King» Loidi and Covunons : but
in an afiier part of the speech^ it is explained
that this last is actuallj^ the sense in which it
was employed, llie statement therefore is,
that the King, Lords and Commons, are cor-
rupt;—that they are solicitous only for their
oWn aggrandizement ; that they care no further
for the body of the people, than as th^ are
subservient to their accursed purposes. Now,
I ttk, is not this statement calcniated to bring
the government into contempt, and to excite
disaffection to the established order of things ?
Does it not tell the people, that they have no
interest whatever in the stability of the state;
and is it not odculated immediately to lead to
disturbance and commotion? It is for you,
gentlemen, to answer the question, and it seems
to me impossible to doubt that that answer
must be in the affiimative.
But In this passage allusion ia made to the
distresses of the people, and these are made
the instrument for giving greater effect to this
seditious libel upon the rulers of the country.
This^you cannot doubt, enhances the crime of
the prisoner, by having employed that under
which his hearers were suffering, and which ho
must have known their rulers could not re-
move, as an engine for promoting the disaffec*
tion he was endeavouring to excite. God
knows, that I by no means wish to under-rsite
the distresses .which the persons attending that
meeting were labouring under in common with
their brethem in different parts of the coun*
trv* No one who was at that meeting, no one
who hears me now, can be more sensible of
the great distress which the lower ranks in this
country have suffered, and none can more
deeply deplore it than I do. While, however,
I folly appreciate the extent of those distresses,
and applaud the patience with which they
have been endured, I can only urge the use
which is made of them in the passage I hare
read, as tending to prove the wicked and mar
lidous intention of the prisoners, who could
have had no other object in referring to them
tnan to excite disaffection and sedition*
The prisoner's speech then goes on to states
''If you are convinced of this, my country-
men, I would therefore put the question, Are
you degenerate enough to bear it t Shall we,
whose forefiithers set limits to the all-grasping
power of Rome ; Shall we, whose forefathers,
at the never-to-be-forgotten field of BannodL-
bum, toki the mighty Edward, at the head of
the most mighty army ever trode on Britain's
soil, 'Hitherto shalt thou come and no fur^
ther;' — Shall we, I say, whose forefathers de«
fied the efforts of foreign tyranny to enslave
our beloved countryy meanly permit, in our
day, without a murmur, a base Oligarchy to
feed their filthy vermin on our vitals, and rule
us u they will 7"
« Upon this passage I shall merely say, that
you have heard the only comment which I
think it can foiriy admit o^ put upon 4t in the
judgment of one of their lordships* in the
- , -■ - ' -^ ^ . — « -.
* loid Reston; ^ds^ mUj p. 16. •
6U
lui flkmat Bamtjor SeikioM.
A. D. ItlT.
[ds
eaily port of this tml, * Ton most be satisfied
thai the object of the orator here it, to reoom-
mend resistance, and to encourage it by calling
to the leootiection of his hearers the popular
allusion to the batde of Bannockbum: Ac-
cordingly he goes on to state that which must
leaTc Jl donbt of his intention in this passage
out of the question, ^ Let us laj our petitions
at the foot of the Throne, where sits our ao-
r Prince, whose gracious nature will incline
ear to listen to the cries of his people,
which he is bound to do by the laws of the
country. But should he be so infiituated as
to turn a deaf ear to their just petition, he has
forfeited their allegiance. Yes, my fellow
townsmen, in such a case, to hell with our
allegiance.^
In Older felly to understand the seditious
import of this passage, it must be taken in
connection with that which I previously com-
mented on, and a passage in the resolutions
of die meeting, which I am fairly entitled,
under all the circumstanees of the case, to
tabs as part of McLaren's speech. In page
36 of &e publication, it is stated, ^Bemg
therefore impressed with the truth of these re-
solutions, the meeting resolve to present peti-
tions to his Royal Hif^ness the Pnnoe Regent,
and to both Houses of Parliament, requesting
his Royal Highness, in particular, to assemble
Pariiament without delay ; to call upon it im*
mediatdy to adopt such measures as mav tend
to restore to the people their undoubted right
in the representation ; to order, in the name
of the people, an immediate reduction of the
taxes, and the standing amy,^* the abolition of
all unmerited pensions, sinecures, grants, and
other emoluments, as the surest way of esta-
bfishing, on a firm and lasting basis, the rights
of the Crown, and the privileges of the peo-
ple : And that, in all time coming, no person
who has an office or place of profit unaer the,
ISiogf ^ receives a pension from the Crown,
shall be capiMe of serving as a member of
die House ca C<»nmoos."
Now, the meaning of all this taken toother
is, that unless the Prince Re^^t shall carder
the Pariiament to reduce the taxes |nd the
standing army, and to do all the tnings
which are there enumerated, he has forfeited
our allegiance, and that the allegiance of the
meeting is to be thrown oif, and to be sent to
hdl. fiat, you are not to be told that the
Prince Regent hasno such power that —
Mr. Clerk, — ^That is not the meaning of the
r.— If my interpretation of the
pamage is wrong, my leamed'ftiends will after-
wards hatve the meant of correcting me. It
would be better if at piesent th^ would re-
frain from intemipting me. In n^ view, it
deariy impofts the meaning wfaidi I have du%
upon it. The Prince Regent is to amemVle
me FMament, and to call upon it to leitora
fo the people tifcir n^gbt of repnseatation;
b«t^ in the seeond place, he is to order aU the
otfier things to be done by the IMisnen^
which it is not within his oooapetence to do, ,
or he is to order them to be done of his owik
authority; and if he does not do so^ then what
is the penalty ? No less than the forfeiture of
our allegiance, and, as he says, ^in that ease,
to hell with our allegiance.'^ Here, then, Oea-
tlemen, the miseraUe and distrMsed people, -
goaded by their privations and afilictiona, who
were surrounding the prisoner, were in this
speech excited to make demmids upon the
Sovereiffu and the Legislature, iHiich, if they
were renised,no less a result was to fellow than
the forfeiture and throwing oif of their atte*
giance.
Now all this I state to yon to infer the crime
of sedition. It was sedition to alienate the
afihctions of the people from the Government,
in the manner which was /done in the first part
of tho speedi. It was sedition to tell the
meeting, in the second part of it, that if the
diffsrent reforms there called for were net
granted, and if the evils complained of were
not removed, their allegiance was forfeited, and
to exhort them in sodk a case to throw it of.
The next point for consideration is the pub-
lieation itself. But here I am saved repeating
the commentary upon one part of that pro-
duction, the speech of Mlaren; fer it must
be manifest to you, that if the speech when
delivered was seditions, it cannot be less so
when reduced into the form of a publication ;
and every tfaing^, with one exception, which
wu ddivered vha voce, is to be found in the
printed report. There is a blank before alle-
gianeey-~the word ^keW is left out. It is
your province^ however, to fill up that blank.
And, after the evidence laid before you this '
dajr, you oan have no difficultv upon this
point. You heard that one of the prisoneii,
in the presence of the other, wrote out the
vrhole- of the passage upon the manuscript
when preparing Uf or the press. The propria^
of inserting the passage wu afterwaids die-
cussed, and doubts were entertained upon the
subject by the committee. With the feet of
that passaae beingaotnally in the hand-writtns
of Baird, looking him in the fruie, my learned
finend (Mr. Grant), rather strangely in my op»-
nion, pressed upon his witnesses to prove that
Baird, in particular, was awave of the indeoeney
of its character; for, under such circumslaiices»
the fact of pubUottion only made his o^
fence the* greater. Aecoffdiai^y, it is proved ,
to you^^iat the prisoner, whether convinced of
its indeoency-or not, still he^ the publisher and
coneotorof the press, sends it to be printed;
and out it eomes with the word only left blanky
affinding,! should think. Id your oonvictioB,
the fellMt and most complete evidence of his
guilt
But let us proceed Id ooosider the other
parts ti the publication. In pa^e 3, of the
mdietmant there is this passage : ** But let us
cone nearer home: look at the year t79l»
when the debt amounted to two hundred and
fkifm nHlionB, and the annual taxation to
631
£7 GEOBQE m.
Trid i^jU$iMmdvr M'Laam
m
abcml MgbtMii mUiaiii; mhea liberty began
to rear her dioopine head in the eountry ; when
asaooiatiooa were rormed from one end of the
kingdom to another, oompoeed of men eminent
for their talents and virtne, to assert their
rights; when a neighbouring nation had jost
tltfown off a yoke which was become intoler-
able,— ^What did the wise ralers of this coun-
try do? Why they declared war, not only
been nnblusbini^jraElftimpied to be justified Jliy
reason ef its avowed fr^ueacy and notoriety.
The meeting, therefore, haTB no hesitation
in asserting, the debt can never be said to be
national, nor the present taxation just^ seeing
the fonner has been contracted by men who
do not represent the country, and the latter
raised 'without consent of the tait-payer ; and
it is contrary to the laws and constitution cf '
against tlie French nation, but also against the- t^iis and every free country, that no man can
- friends of liber^ at home."
No¥K, I think it is impossible for you to read
this passage, without Ming of opimon that its
object was, to impress on the minds of the pub-
lic an admiration of the proceedings ox the
French nation (polluted lis it was at the time
• by treason, by blood, and by crime of evety
description which it ever entered into the mind
of man to conceive),— and of those who were
•termed "the Friends of Liberty at home" in
the year 1793, its imitators and admirers >— to
hold out that the sssooiations of that peripd
were formed for the purposes of promoting
liberty,, but which all of you know it was de-
cided by Jurymen sitting in that box where
you «r9 now placed,-^orymen to whose in-
telligence and vigour the gratitude of this
coniltry must be for ever due, — that they were
formed for the purpose o£ exciting disaffection
to the government, of introducing turbulence
and -commotion, and of overturning the Con-
ttitntion. In short, the object of the publica-
tion was to call upon the people to imitate
what was so worthy of aomiration; and it
would be wasting' time to persuade you, that
if this was the ol^ect, one of a more seditious
description, when tsken in conjunction with
•the other passages in- the publicaticm which I
•have: already emkI, or am now to read, cannot
be conceived.
The publication then proceeds in direct
terms to state, ^'tfaatthe House of Commons
is not realty what it is called,— it it noi a
Boute ofCammoiu." And hem it is necessary
for me to* read several passages to you, in order
to prove the seditious nature of the publica-
tion, and which I shall do wiliiout commen-
tary, beekuse I am persuaded, that nothing
ihat lean add. could «arry thejconviction more
strongly to* your minds of its pernicious sud
^minei import tiian the very sentences them-
' selves which i am to bring under your oonri-
deradon.
In page 38 of the publication you will find
it stated, ** that the debt, now amounting to
nearly 1000 millions, has been contracted in
the prosecution of unjust and unnecessary
• wars, by a corrupt administration, uniformly
'Supported by a llonse of Commons^ whicd
- cannot be said, with any justice, to be a fiur
and equal representation of the country, but
which for the most part is composed of men
means, have contrived to return a majoci^ of
members of that House ;<-« &ct which has not
only*beeu:a(teitted on aU hands, but whtchhas
be taxed but with his own consent, or ^ith
the consent of his agent or representative.*'
Again at page 35, there is the following
passage : ** We have these twenty-five years
been oondenmed to incessant and unparalleled
slavery by a usurped oligarchy, who pretend
to be our Guardiant and RepresaUatwa, while,
in fact, they are nothing but our ir^lejnUe,and
determined enemiet. But happy, happy am I
to thinks that you have met this day to declare,
' that you will suffer yourselves no longer to
' be imposed upc^." And a little lower down
it is stated in express terms : '' At present
we have no rmeientativet ; they are onty
fiomtno/, not reoi; active only in prosecuting
their own designs, and at the same time telling
us that they are agreeable to our wishes."
And again, at page 38, '' A set of pensioned
seat-buyers in the House of Commons have
deprived you of all your rights and privileges.
They hold both emoluments and seats in that
house, contrary to the express precept of our
glorious constitution, which says, * that no
person holding any emolument can have a seat
m the House of Commons.' Our constitution
also allows parliaments only to be of one year's
duration, and that they are to be chosen an-
nually by the people ; but they have elected
themselves, and by their own assumed and
arbitrary juithority have made parliaments,
first, of three years, then of seven years dura-
tion ; and with the same lawless power they
may make them perpetual. Alarming to ref-
late, they have disregarded our constitution,
they have scoffed at her equitable precepts,
they have trampled her and her sons under
their foet; I would now ask you where is your
freedom ? Where is your liberty ? When we
reflect on such usage, it is enough to excite us
with ungovernable indignation. They are, re-
cording to our glorious constitution, culpable
of treason, and justly merit its reward. Will
a nation which has been so long famed for its
liberty and heroism, suffer itseV to be duped
any longer by a gang of impostors? No, it
will not The unanimity of our sentiments
and exertions, agreeably to the constitution,
will once more dispel the doud which eclipses
the resplendent and animating rays of liberty ;
and will again make her sl^ne forth in this onoe
happy country with unimpeded eflhlgence.'*
In order to remedy all this, universal sof-
put in by a borough faction, who have nsofped ^frageandannual filaments are recommended-
the rights of • the people, and who, by undue
Thus the publication states, (page 10.)-: *^ The
House of Commans, in its original compoas*
tion, consisted only of commoners, chosen
a»mia% by tie umiarial miffhuge qf tie people.
M]
fliMt i%9mai Bmdjwt Smlkiutt.
A. }J. 1917
4»
1^
No ' noUtmiv no dtiigmaBy do natal or
tMlitary officer^ in sbort, none who bald pUoa^
or receiTed pe9$umtjrcm govemmaUf bad aoj
rigbt to sit io that House. This is what the
House of Conunons was, what it ought to
be^ and what we wish it to be. This is the
wanted change in our form of gOTernment,-*
the Commons House of Parliament restored to
kM ofiginal purity ; and this, beyond a doubt,
wouJd strike at the root of the greatest part of
the evils we g[foan under at the present day.''
At page 34. it state% " that the only effeotunl
■Mans that can be adopted to relieve the nation
in some measure from its present distresses^
are, l^ Testoringibeimpreacriptible rights of the
nauooyby a remrm in the representation of the
people in the House of Commons, aod by an*
Bual partiaments; imd until the$e tike pUwej tk$
fteple ctM e»i€riam no mamuibU txptiuUum ^
ever kmiag tkur eondUion mpraoed, But»
aiiould tbeso salutary measures be adopted,
they are confident that such a Parliament would
always act for the good of the nation, and
ensure the leopeot, eonftdence^ and support
ef Ae whole body of the people. Ana it i$
not without justice that the meeting ascribe
to the want of a iair and equal representation
of the people in Parliament* all the wars^ and
their oonse<iueoces, in whid) the people has
been engaged for half a century past; for if,
at the commencement of the first Aroerieaa
war, this eoontry had been blessed with a
Hetiae ef Commons chosen by the free suf-
fiage of the tax-payers> would they have acted
eooiisteatly with the constitution of their own
body, to have gone to war with a people of
the uuae origin and language, merely to Ibroe
taxes upon them . without their consent ? Or
would tlicy have opposed 4he straggles of tbe
French nation, in endeavouring to obtain that
fteadom which eve^ Briton cherishes as liis
birth-eight ? And of ultimately forcing upon
them a haled Dynasty, oontrary to the wishes
of nine-tenths of the people ? The idea is
Inly preposteRMS." In page 26> they explain
whaift they mean by the ta>-pa]fen. " Consi*-
dering that of two millions of inhabitants^
only 2f700 have a rigbt of voting for Membeia
ef FarliasBenC, the remaining 1,997,360, al-
though tax-payers, directly, or indirectly, hav-
ing no more right of voting, than if thej were
an impertation of Slaves from Africa."
After going through all this long detail of
giievflaces^ you will recolleoty that unless the
aeiNaia e^led for are granted, and the evils
eempleined of are redrmed, the people were
told that theic allegiance was to bo thrown off;
•■d If allegiaaoe be thrown off, rel^Uion must
lettew. ne lesult, therefore, of the whole
tbat I have lead ii, that .as the condition of
tbe pee|>le never ecmld be improved till uni*
▼esaal suffrage and annual parliaments were
obtained, so unless all this was granted, resist
■use must be iaade» and insurrection against
the Oovemmeot and the laws must be the
eeneequence. But you know that in this
coumnr, to reaiit, tBuM UDSvMd suffrage be
voL xxxm.
obtained iS/ in pther words, to reaist until the
British constitution be fuudamentally over*
thrown.
I am not now prepared, — and it would be
out of place for me, — to enter at leogth vpon
this important subject, on which so many per^
sons have been so gross^ deluded, finl I
cannot avoid pointing out, in a few sentences,
that at no one period, either in England or
Scotland, did universal suffrage ever prevail ;
and in Scotland, in particular, from the great sub-
division of property, the elective suffrage was
never so extenaed as it actually is at the pre-
sent moment. It is matter of notoriety, that
the history of the British constitution is to be
found in the feudal system, and that the con-
stitution of Parliament in particular, while k
sprung out of that system, has ever retained
features which strongly mark its descent. Tbe
immediate vassals of the crown, the great
Barons who held of the King ^* in ca^^^ were
the first members of Parliament. Originally
there were no persons who possessed seats in
Pariiament as representatives of others; nor
were any such introduced into the Legislature
until the great estates, to which tbf duty of
attendance in Parliament was incident, having
been divided, and that duty had actinJly be#
come a burthen upon the small proprietors,
the foundation of the representative system
was thus naturally laid. The first step in Uie
progress which seems to have been made was
this, that charters of exemption from Parlia-
ment were frequently solicited and obtained,
but those were declared to be illegal. Acoord-
ii^S^y* it would seem next to have grown by
degrees Into a law to oblige the great barone
only to attend in person, and to permit the
lesser to attend by their representatives. This
is in truth no mattei of conjecture ; for by c
statute of our Parliament, passed in 1427, the
smaller barons were excused fifom coming to
Parliament piovided they sent oommissioneit
from tbe shires.
In like manner, it i# proved l^y the intro*'
duction io the laws of Robert III., that those
burglis alone which held property tn f^^ of
the crown, had the right of being represented
in Pariiament It is, therefore^ a delusion to
state, that universal suffrage ever made part
of our constitution, or indeed that the right of
the elective suffrage waa ever broader or more
extensive than at present. In foot, I know ef
no country in which universal suffrage, or any
thing hke it, ever existed, but one, and that
was France in the year 1793. At that period,
no doubt, there was an assembly elected by
Bometbing like universal suffrage, and what
was the result? The degradation of the no-
bility,— the dethronement and murder of the
Sovereign,— the overthrow of the chuRh,^and
the extinction of religion. Is it those things
that these prisoners would recommend! I
have already told you, that liber^r, as it waa
practised in France in 1793, has been held up
ny them as an object of admiration ; and tf
you look to what is sUted in the gdd page
F
iB7l
57 GEORGB HI.
Ttiat tf AUxmder M*Larat
i^
of their pubUcatioD^ tott will fiod, that while
they hola up to reprobatioo the higher orders
of the State, the revolutionary &te of the
€hurch does not seem to have been altogether
out of their contemplation. *< Their reverend
hirelings,^* say they, ''would convince you that
you are suffering under the visitation of the
Almighty, and therefore that you ougjht to be
submissive to the chastening stroke.** This
allusion has a direct application to the esta-
IMisbed church, — ^its object is not more to dis-
suade the people from submission under their
distresses than to bring the clergy and religion
into contempt. It is to tell the people, that
while their rulers were corrupt ana oppressing
them, the ministers of religion were not less
base nop more worthy of consideration'.
But while liie peophs are thus told in plain
bnguage to throw off their allegiance,— while
they are urged on to resistance to the exe-
cutive government, — ^to overthrow the Legis-
lature, and degrade the ministers of religion,
the publication proceeds Ho hold out the most
direct encouragement to rebellion. Look to
the passage about the army in pace 32.
''Your infatuated oppressors may harden
themselves against your requests; they may
consider themselves as fortified behind a
veteran army, which, they may imagine, will
be always ready to support them, though in an
unjust cause^ and by wnich they may conceive
it possible to awe a nation into silence and
submission. But let them recollect that the
army is still composed of men and of BrUom^
And shall they — though they have exerted
their valour in the cause of fanaticism, —
though they have been led to fight the battles
of oppressors, and establish the thrones of
tyrants ; shall they, in violation of the privi-
leges of freemen^ — forgetful of the glory [of
their country, — ^forgetful of all that is dear to
themselves,— contemptuous of all that they
Ibve, and regardless of the fete of posterity,
— shall they turn their arms to destroy the
constitution of their cx»untry ? What 1 after
displaying such feats of valour that has immor*
talised them for ever,— will they stoop so low
as to become instrumental in thetuin of their
country, fot. the sake of a faction which has
oast a deep shade of disgrace over all the
splendour of their victorious achievements?
I appeal to the army itself for a reply. I hear
h burst like thunder from man to man, from
line to line, from camp to camp, — No I Never I
Never ! We fight not for the destruction, but
for the preservation of the rights and privi-
leges of our beloved country 1*^
You will please here to remember, that you
are told, in the outset of the publication, that
under the eireumstances stated, allegiance has
become forfeited, and is to be thrown off; but
in the passage I have just read, as if the
readers might have the army in view to restrain
their patriotic fury, their fears are removed,
and they are encouraged with the hope^ that
the army will not fight against them, but will
'^u ^d co-operate with their projects of in-
surrection. Can any thing more insidioiis,^'
any thing more wicfced, — any thing more sedi-*
tious be conceived or imagined f I vrill fairly
teMyou, that, in my opinion, no pubticatioa
has ever been^ brought before this court of a
more vricked and pernicious tendency, none
better calculated to produce turbulence and
commotion, than that which I have read to you.
Look to the publication for which Palmer*
was tried at the circuit court at Perth in the
year 1793; and was tntosported to Boixay
bay; and although these times ai% not of a
description to render it necessaiy to inflict the
same degree of punishment upon the prisoners
as was awarded in that case, ^ere is not any
thing in it nearly so inflammatory, so sedittooa,
tending so much to excite discontent against
the government, or to introduce turbulence
and commotion, as there is in the paper which
is this day brought under your consideration.
That paper I think it my duty to read toyoti
from the records of the court. It is in these
terms:
'• Friends and feIlow-citisen9;^You, who
by your loyal and steady conduct, in these
days of adversity, have shown that you are
worthy of, at least, some small portion of
liberty, unto you we address oor language and
tell our fears.
^ In spite of the virulent scandal, or mali*
cious efiorts of the people's enemies, we will
tell you whole truths ; they are of a kind to
alarm and arouse you out of your lethargy.
That portion of liberty you once enjoyed is fast
setting, we fear, in the darkness ot despotism
and tyranny! Too soon, perhaps, you who
were the world's envy, as possessed of some
small portion of liberty, will' be sunk in the
deptb of slavery and misery, if yotr prevent it
not by your w^l-timed efforts.
** Is not every new day adding a new Unk
to our chains ? Is not the executive branch
daily seizing new, unprecedented, and unwar-
rantable powers P Has not the House of Com-
mons (your only security from the evifa of
tyranny and aristocracy) joined the coalitioa
against you? Is the electioti of its members
either fair, free, or frequent ? Is not its inde-
pendence gone, while it is made up of pennons
and placemen !
** We have done onr duty, and are deter-
mined to keep our posts, ever ready to assert
our just rights and privileges as men, the chief
of which we account the right of ilniversaA
suffrage in the choice of tliose who serve ia the
Commons House of Parliament, and afirequcnt
renewal of such power.
** We are not deterred or disappointed, by
the decision of the House of Commons coa-
eeming our petition. It is a question we did
not expect (though founded on truth and rea*
son) would be supported by superior numbers.
— Far from being discouragea, inre are more
and more convinced that nothiag can save this
nation from ruin, and give to the people that
• 3 iiow« Mod. St. TV. 237.
^
mMi namat Btirdjw Stdilm.
A. D. 1817.
17«
Iw^pptneaM wlud^ tli^ liare a right to look for
vxXex govenmieBty tet a refonn in the House
of Omudods, fiHiiKied apon the eternal basis
of juatioey faiz^ fiee, ana equal.
« Felloir-citiiena; — The time is now come,
when y9m ammi either gather roond the fabric
of ]ibcr^4o •uppori it, or, to jour eternal in-
iumjt let U &U to the ground, to rise no more,
huiiivg along with it every thing that is vala-
aUe and dear to an enligbtened people.
** You' are plunged into a war bj-a wicked
ministrj and a eompliant pa^iament, who seem
caielesa and unconoemed for your interest,
the end and deaign of which is almost too
horrid to lelale, ue destruction of a whole
people merely hecanne th^ will be free.
^ ^ it your eoaunerce is sore czan^d and
almost mined. Thooaands and ten thousands
ofyow fellovF-dtizena, from being in estate
ef prasperi^, are reduced to a state of poverty,
au8eijr> and wretchedness. — A list of bank*
lupleieiy ^ineqnalled in any former times,
fionns a part in the retinue of this Quixotic
expedition ; your taxes, great and burthen-
some as -they are, must soon be greatly aug-
mented; your treasure is wasting fast; the
blood of your brethren is pouring out, and all
this to fonn chains for a free people, and
eventually to rivet them £qt ever on yourselves.
^ To the loea of the invaluable ri^its and
privileges which our fstther's enjoyed, we im-
pute tUs barbarous and calamitous war, our
ruinous and still-growing taxation, and all
the wyyt"— and oppressiops which we labour
under.
^ Fellow-eitizens ; — ^The friends of liberty
call upon j<»9 by all that is dear and worthy
of possessing as men ; by your own oppres-
sions; by the miseries and sorrows of your
suffering brethren; by all that you dread; 1>y
the sweet lemembrance of your patriotic an-
eestois; and by all that your posterity have a
ri^t to expect from yon, — to join us in our
exertions for the preservation of our perishinff
libnty, and the recovery of onr long lost rights.^'
Gentlemen, this is the publication which
was held by a jury in 1793 to be a seditious
libel; and 1 ask you, whether from the be-
ginning to the end of it there is anv thing
more offensive, any thing more calculated to
alienate the minds of his majesty's subjects
fern the government and constitution of the
country, any thing better imagined for leading
the people to the use of physical force and to
open reoeUion, than is to be found in almost
every passage of. the publication lying on the
table f Sure I am, that there is not to be
found from the beginning to tlie end of
Palmei^s Address, a direct recommendation
to the people to thow off their allegiance, —
that there is no incitement to actual rebellion
— that there is no encouragement held out to
the people,. that if thejf rose to enforce the ac-
compliAment of their purposes, the army
would ioin them. But in the pamphlet upon
your iMe, all this is done in the most plain
and direct texms. The House of Commons is
said to be corrupt, and not to be the represen-
tative of the people : the whole rulers of the
country are stated to be corrupt, and while
guihv of the most gross oppressions on the
people, caring for nothing but their own base,
soroid, and tyrannical purposes. The clergy
are said to be hirelings, mlsely deluding the
people with the notion of their distresses ori-
ginating with Providence ; and while the
people are called upon to throw their alle-
giance to hell, they are encoumged with the
certain hope of Uie support of a brave and
victorious army.
It seems impossible in my mind, therefore,
to doubt, that if the publication in Palmer's
case was seditious, that now upon the table
can be otherwise ; that if the one merited
punishment, the other can be innocent. On
the contrary, I will tell you foirly, in my view
of the subject, the present is the worst of the
two.
It is now proper that I should tell yon, that
the same course of defence which has, been
pursued to-day, was followed in the case I
nave just been speaking of. In Palmer's case
it was said — ana we were told to-day that it
would be proved — ^that language similar to
that used in this publication had been em-'
ployed in petitions to the House of Commons,
without censure or animadversion ; that lan-
guage not less strong was employed by Mr;
Pitt, and l^ the duke of Richmond, and
various other statesmen; and the inference
which was drawn in the year 1793, and which,
I presume, will be drawn to-day, is, that it
was legal for Mr. Palmer in his case, and for
the prisoners in theirs, to employ the language
which those statesmen have made use of. But
my learned friend (Mr. Clerk), who was also
of counsel in the case of Psdmer/was told
then, and I beg leave to repeat it to you now,
that the ouestion before the jury and the court
was not how often the crime of sedition had
been committed, or how often it had been
committed with impunity : il was not whether
petitions containing seditious matter had been
presented to parliament, without the authors
being punished : it was not whether parlia-
ment had allowed seditious words to be used
in its own presence without animadversion.;
and, last of all, the question was not whether
the law officers of tlie Crown had allowed
their duties to sleep, and passed over sedition
witjiiout bringing prosecutions : but the ques-
tion simply was then, as it is now, whether
the crime attributed to the prisoners at the bar
amounted in law to sedition, and whether, if
it did, they were guilty of having committed
it. If it were proved, that five thousand
petitions containing language eoually strong
as that found in this publication, had been re-
ceived by parliament, or that the House of
Commons nad permitted language ten times
stronger to be used in their own presence,
that can never establish that the prisoners have
not been guilty of the crime of sedition charged
in thb indictment. The House of Commons
Tl]
S7 GfiORGB III.
Trial ofAiuandtr M'LmrM
C79
has no power df making or declaring law, or
of legalizing that which is oontrary to law. It
is but one branch of the legislature, and if it
permits language to be used reflecting on it-
self, on the Crown, or or the House of Lords,
which erery lawyer out of it holds to be sedi-
tious, which courts of law have found to be
seditious, that is no reason why the same lan-
guage, when employed out of doors with a
view to corrupt me minds of the king's aob-
j'ects, and to excite disaffection and commo-
tion, shaU not be repressed with the punish-
ment of sedition.
In the course of the statement with which
it has been my duty to trouble you, and which
I have put into as plain language as T could
employ, I had occasion to mention that in all
^ases of sedition the state of the times when
the act complained of has been committed is
to be maturely viewed and considered; that
what ma^r be innocently done at one period
may be highly criminal at another ; and that :
under one state of the country, language may '
be used, or a ^crriting published, with impunity, '
which, under another, would render the author
amenable to the arm of the law. Keeping this
in your minds, it is, I apprehend, impossible
for you to forget the period when the speech
in question was made, and the libel before you ;
was published. It has been proved, and I j
freely admit, that at the time when all this took '
place the' distresses of the country were not
only great, but that the misery of the lower
classes of the people had reached to an extent
seldom experienced in these realms. Those '
calamities, overwhelming as they were of them- \
selves, were, however, aggravated by this, that |
at the period in question they were converted,
^ all of you must recollect, into an engine for
jexciting discontent throughout the great body '
of the manufacturing population, who had then i
been thrown altogether out of employment. |
ITie most unprec^ented exertions were then '
cmplojred, by the circulation of inflammatory
and seditious tracts, to excite the minds of the
people against the settled order of things in the
country, wWle, with a malignity before utterly
unknown amoiig us, and having a precedent
only in the means that were employed for pre-
paring the people of France tor the direfol
event of the Revohition, a simultaneous ac-
tivity ivas employed in the dissemination of
immonfl, irrehinoitf and indecent works, to
subvert the religious principles and habits of
the people. No doubt public conventions, as
in 1793, were not held, because all things
which had then attracted the eyes of the police
and the administrators of the laws, and were
repressed by the Judgments of this court, were
carefully avoided. But a system no less dan-
gerous had then been adopted hi their stead.
That system was, to keep the whole population
of the country in a state of ferment, by con-
voking meeting after meeting in the different
manufacturing and populous districts, under
the pretence of petitioning parliament against
abnses. At thesa nreetingv, by the use of in*
flamm'atory language of oae 4escifpfioa or
another, the minds of the labouring dasses had
got into a state so unsettled, as to have become
prepared for violence of any kind, to which*
their leaders mi^t direct them. In some
quarters the e(re<Hs of thil system had become
iM. less tremendotts than those of its prede-
cessor in 1793. In others, its eoasequetieea
were even worse. We know the effects in
Glasgow. You have lately beard the fruta of
it in Manchester.
This situation of public aAnrs, which ia
matter of noj^riety, must entei- deeply iofto
your consideration in weighings the views and
intentions of the prisoners in committing those
acts which I have charged against them aa in-;
ferring the crime of sedition. But, indeed, of
the malignity of their intentions I think you
can have no doubt. It is impossible for 'm«y or
for you, to look into the minds of men, and to
discover what is die purpose at the bottom of
their hearu. . Tliat can only be galfaeied frosa
their actions. Now, if you consider the time
and the situation of the country when this
speech was delivered, and this pamphlet waa
published ; and if you weigh the terms of tint
speech, and the various passages of that work,
the whole of which will be before yon, wb4
which I trust you wiU seriously consider, it
seems to me impossible that you should hesitate
in forming a decided and clear opinion that
the purpose of the prisoners was to render the
people disaffected to the government, and to
excite them to acts of commotion and rebellion.
If such is your opinion, it is your duty to ftnd
the prisoners guilty. ,
No doubt they have been represented aa
persons of good character. Be it so. Witii
their character in general I have nothing todo^
and leave them every advantage they may have
upon this bmnch of the evidence. To myself
it appears, that what has been provfed of their
diaracters, however good in other respects, ia
against them in this case. In that point of
view^ I should state the evidence respecting
their characters to you, w;ere I to dwell upon
it,which, however, I shall reftain from doing.
Indeed I shall notice it no further, dian merely
to mention, as matter of curiosity, that evidence
of the same sort was brought forward and in*
sisted upon in the trials of 1 794 and 1794. In
fact, the defence in the present case seems
modelled upon those cases of a similar descrip-
tion that have gone before it, and will^ I trust,
meet with the same fate.
Having thus detained you at so great length,
I shall leave the case to you, perfectly satisned
with having done my duty in bringing it before
you. It appeared to me, after a full consid^
ration, to oe a case which could not be passed
over, as it was necessary to ptit Kmtts to the
circulation of the dangerous and sedttious pub-
lications diisseminating at present in every
quarter of the country. It is for you tK> say
upon the evidence, wnether my opinion has
been correct or not. I 'am satisned myself
fhMX my opinion is right, and that A« expies*
Jg\ Mi lUmmu HtM/W Btdkm. A. Du 1S17. [74
MOOS chMge^ ig Hit indicUaept wn seftlkwi ; bo Wntlon to eioite thsm lo NdiUoiiom-
«iid I hare had to-day tbe Mtufection to bear betlion, to any specMs ef viMance, or to asy
dMrt the court thtaks 90 likewise. You will unlawful act. They bad i»et with the fair and
mtterwaids learn their loidahifn' opinion opon legvU pnrpoae of petitiooiAg tho different
die endence, as you hare now heard mine, branehes of the legieiatttre for reKef min^t the
That I hare diooght H my dnty to fpre you grieranees of which they complained ; and in
plainly and witbont ramish. Bat clear though ! speaking of those grieranceSy the panel did
1 he on the whole case, I shall be satisfied with nothing more than assist in the prerloos de»
whatever rerdict yon may give, and I can hare liberations necessary to ascertain the riewe
no doubc the eonntry will be 90 likewise.
Mr. Clerk. — Gentlemen of the jnry, in the
kmg «nd able argument which yon have just
feea.Td, the lotd advocate has attempted to con*
Tinoe yoa that both of the prisoners at the bar
and wishes of the people assembled, as to the
natare of the applications that ongbt to be
made. This defimce, so important for the
panely was opened at the beginmng of the trial ;
tmt so far from attempting to refoteity the
lord advocate did not, in the course of bis vety
bave been guilty of the cnmes laid to their { long argument, so much as aHude to it : and
dMTge. I attend yon for one of them only, | yon wiU see that the indictment, unfairly sop*
Mr. If ^Laren^ and shall leaive the defence of
the other, Mr. Bain), to bis own connsd, Mr.
JeiVey, who is able to do the most ample justice
to Me client.
Mr. McLaren is aeeused of having made a
•editioQS harangue to thf people assembled at
« numerous meeting held in a field near Kil-
tnamod^ and of having afterwards caused his
•peedk to be printed, along with other speeches
«f a like tendency, as a pamphlet, which was
sold and distributed in that neighbourhood.
That Mr. McLaren was present, and spoke a
lew sentences a^ the public meeting already
nentipBed, is certainlv true; but I hope to
satisfy you, that considering Uie occasion and
.meumsunces under which it was delivered,
tihe speech (if speech it might be called) con*
tahied nothing seditious or otherwise criminiU.
As to the pubKcatbn of the pamphlet, Mr.
M'Laren had no concern with it, and knows
nothioff of it. There is no evidence that he
sosistcd in the printing or publication even of
that speedi whidi is said to have been spoken
%y himself; and certainly there is do pretence
Sot saying that he took a concern in the pub-
lication, nle, or distribution of the pamphlet.
X hope, theiefbre, that I may disencumber my-
self of this branch of the accusation, as not af-
/ectiog Mr. McLaren at allj and leave it, in so
fer as it may be thought to aff^t the other
panel, to the consideration of Mr. Jefi^y, who
win address you for him.
As to the criminality of the speech at the
public meeting, moch eloquence nas been em-
ployed, and some points, both in £ict and in
law, have been stmined to the utmost against
the panel, in declamatory comments on the
wickedness of hissupposed intention to blow up
the flames of sedition In die multitude, as well as
OB the supposed illegal and dangerous tendency
of his words, as being utteriv subversive of the
Bnrish constitution and of all good goveri^
meat Bat in making these violent and un-
charitable strictures, it wis forgotten that a
publii; meeting having been called for lawful
purposes, tiie occasion rendered it necessary
mt the oanel (who had been appointed to
open the business) should make some remariis
on the subject of public grievances. This is
Ins dcKxics* In addfcssisg the people, ha hod
pressing the object and purposes of the lawml
meeting at which the panel made his speech^
represents it, as well as the other speechet
there made, as seditious and inflammatory
bamngaes, uttered without the pretence of asy
fair or legal purpose. These cireumstances
are not a little eitraordinarr, if the publis
prosecutor rsally bad hopes of being soccessfU
m his charee. With such hopes he should
have argued the case as it stands upon the
evidence : he should have attempted to answer
the defence on the fact, or on the law, or ob
both ; whereas, by taking no notice of a ds>
fence tmquestionably relevant, he either held
it to be unanswerable, or intended to rely upe*
a doctrine (which can never be admitted, and
which, indeed, the lord advocate hisuelf did
not directly maintain), that occasion and cir*
cumstances can make no difl'erenoe as to the
criminality of words — ^thal the same words
must, if they are seditious on any ocoasioB,
be seditious on all occasions, without the Uaal
regard to the purpose or intent of the speaker.
But against such an absurdity it is UBBeecssaxy
to reason. Every one must allow that the
same words may be highly criminal, or alto-
S ether innocent, nay, absolutely rtqaired by
uty, according to the difierent situations is
which they may be uttered ; and on this ground
I maintain, that even if the words of the panel
could not have been spoken without criminaUty
in other situations, they were justifiable as
they were spoken to men assembled in delibo-
ration about lawfbl and dutifbl petitioBs, rs^
ptesenting their grievances or complaints to
the different branches of the legislature-. Nor
does it appear of any hnpoitanoe that Warm or
intemperate expressions, not sufikieotly re-
spectful to their superiors, oocasiooall^ fell, in
the course of their deUberatioBs, fVom people
in the lowest mnks of Hfe, unable to express
themselves with that decency which is required
fh>m men In higher sftoatioos, if it be certain,
which it is, that they looked foiward to no
other result from their meeting, than the exe^.
cise of their unquestionable right to petitioB,
Suietlv and peaceably, without disorder or
tstuibaace.
The Tight of pelkloaiag has brionged to the
subjects of tins eouBtry, and svBo to lihe
741
£7 GEORGE IIL
Trial qfJUtmdgrM'lMm
[70-
BMBftesi of the peopie» from ancient times*
Since the Revohition it has never been questi-
oned; and immediaiely before that glorious
event, it was attacked onlj to enable a tyian-
Bioal government to subvert the public liberty.
But the attack was repelled even in the worst
of times ; and the first act of die government
of King William and Queen Mary was to
confirm the right of petitioning, as a frand^ise
•f which the people could not be deprived.
It has ever amce been considered as a right
unalterably fixed by the fundamental laws of
the state ; and, accordingly, though the ezer^
mse of it is suj^sed to be sometimes unplea-
sant to the government, yet no administration,
and neither House of Parliament, has hitherto
thought proper even to disoourage the people
in the exercise of their right of petitioning.
How many hundreds, or rather thousands, of
Eetitioos have been presented to the difierent
ranches of the legislature within these few
years, representing as grievances thinn which
are not admowled^red to be such 1 and yet the
petitions, as commg from the people in the
exercise of their right, have been graciously
received by tliose to whom they were address-
ed. And so important is the right of petition*
lAg, that every other right in the people has
bc^« supposed to depend upon it, inasmuch
as the people, if deprived of that right, would
be in oanger of losing the protection necess^
to defend them in their other rights.
It is obvious that a fair communication from
the people of their grievances and discontents
to the legislature, which has the power, and
whose duty it is to protect them, cannot be
•edition, if they have a right to make such
communication. If the people should petition
parliament without hanng the right by law
to do so, these petitions might be, and in
almost every case would be seditious and
dangerous, in raising or increasing discontents
and disturbances ; because every complaint of
a public grievance has a tendency to create a
public discontent, and this is illegal and se-
ditious in every case where the law does not
allow it. For the same reason, any violent
complaint of public grievances may be sediti-
ous or illegal, where it is not addressed to
persons having legal authority to take it into
consideration and give relief. But it would
be a solecism to say, that a petition to the
King or to either House of Parliament, stating
grievances, and praying for redress is sediti-
ous, because, 1st, it is allowed by law ; 2dly,
the persons addressed have an authority to
take the complaint into consideration and give
relief. Petitioning is indeed considered as a
means of removing discontents and preventing
disturbances, not as a means of raising them ;
and this may be true it some cases, though it
is not always so, and we have frequently seen
a forment of discontent much increased by
numerous meetings^ of the people, called for
the purpose of petitioning. But stil) the legal
'right of petitioniog is unquestionable ; and it
Aust be: supposed that this right, though it
cannot be used without expressing discontent,
and thereby communicatiag it among the peo*.
pie, and possibly raising it, where it had pre-
viously no existence, may be legally (and
without any crime, or the fear of criminal pro-
secutions) used in every case whatever, even
though the use of it should in some respects
have a bad tendency; the utility, and even ne»
cassity of presenting the right, counterbalanc-
ing the mischieCi which may be occasioned by
the seditious or discontented spirit which may
he raised by it.
But it must be plain, that if the people have
a right to state the grievances in petitions for
redress of grievances to the different branches
of the legislature, it follows as a necessary
consequence that they have a right to state
these grievances in the plainest language, and
even in what is commonly considered to be
strong or coarse language in the description
of public abuses, if they do not in their peti«
tions violate that respect that is due to the
legislature : under that restriction, tb^y may
assert in their petitions that there are the
grossest abuses, even in the legislature itself.
And you need not be told, that even petitions
of that kind are occasionally sent from all
quarters of the country, when discontents pre-
vail among the people. A stranger to the
peculiarities of the British Government might
think it odd that petitions of this class, con-
taining inferences of a nature apparently so
irreverent, not only indicating an extreme
degree of discontent in the petitioners, but
directly tending to raise and aisseminate the
same kind of discontent through the whole of
the kingdom, should be tolerated, especially
where it is plainly the opinion, not only of the
different branches of the legislature^ but ato
the opinion of the more sensible part of the
community, that the petitions are very ill-
founded in their representations of grievances,
and demand, by way of redress, new public
measures or arrangements, which would not
only be useless, but dangerous and even cala-
mitous. Such considerations, however, have
no influence, or very little inflnence, in the
question, whether the people have the right to
present their petitions, and whether, when
offered, the petitions ought to be received.
On the contrary, it has long been held by the
legislature, that, as the people have the right
to petition for redress of grievances, so they
have the right to state what they consider to
be their grievances, whether they are really
frievances that ought to be redrnsed or not.
he general rule is, that however unreasonable,
or unfit to be granted the prayers of the peo-
ple in their petitions may be* it is not unfit to
receive the petitions, and the people have a
right to present, them, a right that .is unalie-
nable.
But further, if the right of petitioning be-
longs to the people, they must of necessity
have the right of deliberation upon the subject
of their petitions, to consult with each other
at public meetings,, to be advised by thoae
n^
and Thomat Bmrijvr SediUon.
A. D. 1817.
C78
vho are able to advise (hem, or tMnk them^
seWes able, upon the various points which may
ooeor in considering what are grievances, and
what are not ; and if there are grievances^ what
are tiie remedite that ought to be proposed or
prayed for in their petitions. With regard to
the important claims which may be made in
petitions to the legislature^ every man neces-
sarily must have a right to meet with his
fellows, either in small or in great numbers,
and to discuss the matter with them* One
man may think that annual parliaments ^re
necessary ; another tlmt they would be hurt^
ful or impracticable. On this trial, it is not
necessary for us to consider whether annual
pdliaments and universal sufitage are good or
CMid ; and, on this occasion, I have nothing to
do with these questions. But I say that it is
not unlawful to petition for either. And ^
neraOy, whatever the grievance, or fancied
grievance is, it may lawmlly be the subject of
a petition to the l^slature ; and for the same
leaaon it mav lawfully be the subject of deli-
beration and discussion, even in public meet-
ings held for the purpose of petitioning.
You vriU observe, that there can be no limits
to this right of petitioning, and previously de-
liberating; for when itislimitea the right is
gone. Tbe right is to present unreasonable
as well as reasonable petitions. Or if un-
reasonable petitioningwere unlawful, the leeis-
latnre alone is the judge of what is reasonsmle
or unreasonable in ^titions. If the right of
petitioning could be restrained by the courts
of law, there would be an end of the right of
petitioning,— a fundamental law of this mo-
naichy, — a law, the palladium of our other
rights.
On iht occasion of which we have heard so
nndi, when the people in and about Kilmar-
nock met to consider whether they should send
addresses to the legislature on the subject of
their grievances, various speeches were made,
and we are told by the prosecutor, that these
speeches, and in particular the speech of
M^Lareo, were seattious. In regara to the
<|Destioii, whether or not his speech was sedi-
tMNiSy he pleads that the right 6f petitioning
necessarily implies the right of previous dis-
cDssion. If this be true, apply it to the' case
before yon. At such a meeting a speech may
possibly be seditious, where it appears either
that the meetine was called, not for its pro-
fessed object of petitioning Parliament, but
merely to aflbrd opportunities to make sediti-
w» speechea; — or that though- the meeting
\ttmafidt assembled for petitioning, the speech
went beyond its proper bounds, and was se-
ditious in statements not justified by the oc-
canoo. As to the first ofthese cases, there is
not even a pretence for denying that the meet-
ing in qaestion was 6011a fidt called for the
purpose of framing petitions to Parliament.
1 refer to all the evidence which von have
beard. It was a meeting collected for that
purpose, and for no other, nor was any further
purpose ia view.
The alignment of the public proseeotor, said
the evidence adduced, will apply only to the
second case supposed, that the speakers at a
meeting hona Jidt assembled for petitioning,
had gone beyond their bounds, and deviated
into sedition. But has this been made out
against Mr. McLaren ? His short speech, though
coarse, was suitable to the occasion, as an ex«
hortation to petitioning, and nothing else.
We were told, indeed, that this case is simi*
lar to that of Fvshe Palmer, who many year*
ago, was tried for sedition, foond guilty, and
sentenced to transportation. But ihiM la a ,
total mistake. The case before yon is Tery
different from that of Fyahe PbIomt, and from
all the other cases which have hitherto been
tried before the Court of Justidary. It has
been reserved -for the present Lord Advocate
to bring jsuch a case as the present to trial, in
which, if the verdict find the panels guilty of
sedition, the right of petitioning, hitherto un-
challenged, seems to be attacked almost ia di-
rect terms. The case of Fyshe Palmer was
that of a seditious libel, an inflammatory
hand-bill, containing seditious language, with-
out any proposal to petition Parliament. We
were told that this case of Fyshe Palmer
was defended on the same grounds that were
stated in defence at the 'beginning of this trial ;
yet the lord advocate declined to meet thai
defence particularly, and bear it down by the
triumphant authority of Palmer's case There
was no resemblance between that case and
the present. Fyshe Palmer recommended an
appeal, on the subject of grievances, not to the
legislature, but to a mob, the scum of the earth
in the neighbourhood of Dundee,-— to the so*
verign authority of the multitude. The de-
fence in that case was disregarded, — ^but what
was it ? It was said, that in this free govern-
ment it is necessary that the press should be
free. It was said that the people must have
freedom to attack public men, and must be en-
titled to publish, not treason, not sedition, in
a palpable form, but their thoughts in a free
and independent manner. It was added, that
Mr. Fyshe Palmer was. not very sound in his
mind. These were Uie defences for hia.
You wiU perhaps be surprised when I tell yooi
that m^ Lord Abercromby, who tried the case,
held, m bis speech to the Jury, that if a peti-
tion to Parliament had been in view, the libei
of which Fyshe Palmer was found guil^ would
not have been of so aggravated a desoriptloD,
— ^would perhaps not have beeu considmd a
libel ataA* '<Mudi (be reinaiked) has been
said of the purity of the intentions of the so-
ciety ; it is said they had nothing in view bat
moaerate .reform. But, Gentlemen, you .will
consider how (ar that is consistent, either vritii
the tenor of the address itself, or widi what is
sworn to by Mealmakeri who drew the first
draught of it, and who swears expressly, that
at that time he had no second petition in
his contemplation' and that what was after-
wards to DC done would have depended
upon eircumstanees. I much fear that here
57 6£0BGB HI.
791
)feftl»iker » (iriliiig tfat tnAp aad tWt if
Ibegr had not been altettded to^ the conduct
of Ihis lociety would not kave proved so pure
«• their iateotiotis ai« said to iMtre been ," * In
tbat C«i6t fott will obsfenwy that a seditkNis li-
bel wit diapeised over the couDtir without
aiijt GOnsequeoce betnf cdBteMplated bat that
of inAanuDg the ninds of the multitude. On
the other MtoAf we bave been at paiu to shew,
that the panels in tfaia ease were quiet oiderly
persenty net eoacemed witb any seditioue ao-
oieties; not connected with any political parttet,
only feelkg distress thinking they had grier*
anees to eemplain of^ and that tbrf could bet^
tsr tbefar ftituaitions by petitioning parliament.
Xbef met together in the moet orderly man-
neiv-^dellbemted as it is usual to do in public
meetings^ — ^prepared resolnftionSy-^prepared a
petitioa,— and atgned ity-^and that ^tition,
Ibougb couched in strong tenna, was presented
In the Houses of Pariiament, considered^ re*
eeivedy and laid on their tables. Is the right
tf petitiening^tben, to be interrupted in this
entraordina rymanner, by bringing the peti-
tioners into tbe Conrt of Justiciary 9
RecoUet that this was a meeting for consider-
ing tbe propriety of petitioning £e legislature^
and that the meeting would have been allOM
gather nugatory unless the persons tbeu met
bad been allowed to state thmr opinions to one
another. Ih the first pi^ of this indictsMnt,
dm panel is chdoged with baring wickedlv and
leWniously delivered ^< a speech coutaining a
number of sedttiens and inflamoiatory remarks
and assertions^ eakulated to degrade and bring
iota coatdmpt the Oovemment and legislature^
and to witham^ therefrom the confidence and
aibctiotts of the people, and to fiU tbe realm
witb trouble and disseiitien.'' Gentiomen»
vheiever the people are exposed ts grievanees
U»ey aeeewariJy must, when tbey meet to con-
sider the means of redrem, exprem their sense
of these grietances ; and I ask whether H be
possible 10 state public grievsinces, especiaUy
grievanees arising from sndk^ a souroe as over*
lantion^ iritboiit in soose w^ or other reflect*
ing on the Government* In the exercise of
our right of petilioning a^sinst grievances^
these grievances must be fAentionod( and U
isisspomiUe to B^ntisn them^ or even to
allude to thein, without briuging tks Govet»«
SmM into discredit. For exam^ let a peti*
lion be ptesented against ovcr*taxati#n» What^
ever were the causes of the evil^*-wars just
«ran)us^ — unavoidable misfortunes^ or mis-
•onduetin public afiaits^^^ is lawful to state
the grievnnce. But can it be steted withont
aiElcliBto mure or less^ of attempting to ^iffest
Ae public opinion su tathe mentsor demerits
«f adminietintieQ? Every piAHe stateiaeni
mspeeting pufalie afidis has that tendency.
Bat are the people to be interrupted on soeh
r lands, in tbe execcise of their just rights .
ii of the essence of their right to cooBfiain
Trial ^Alixanier McLaren
[S0
* Fysbe Palmer's oase % How.
*■ 371.
Mod. St
of grievgnces, and therefore I approAkend yo«
must disregard entirely those general expres-
sions in the iodlctment, charging McLaren's
speech as tending to bring the Government
into contempt. Tbe petitionea felt griev->
ances ; — tbey prepared petitions, and it is im-
possible to state a puohc grievance without
throwing blame upon the Government. I do
not mean to examine the question, whether
there really was any blame attachable to
Government ; for it is the same thing in thin
case whether the petitioners were right or wrong
in their statement. My defence is, that the/
were in the fair prosecution of legal views.
Suppose no words to have been uttered but
what would, in other circumstances, have beeis
considered seditions, their baring had a righC
object in view is a good de£mce. But every
sort of obloquy has been thrown on the petiti->
onersy without any notice of the lawful object
tbey bad in riew, as if tlieir object were to be
kdd entirely out of consideration.
The legality of the object, and the situariom
in which tbe speeches were uttered, ate tbe
most important eircumstances of the case.
Every thiing else is of a trivial and subordinate
nature. But let us see what tbe panel is
alleged te have sai4* No positive evidence
has been adduced te prove any part of hie
speech, except a few words at the end of the
passage quoted in the indictment, and, so for
as I bave observed, you have only the uneer*
tain evidence of one person to these words*
I shall remark upon the words in the indiel«
ment.
'* That our sufoings are insupDorte.blc^ ie
demonstrated to the world.'' I ao not amy
whether Uieir sufferings were insupportable or
not ; but tbey appear to have been sevcfre^ and
tbe pec|)le were met for the purpose of cob*
sidering them, and to join in petitioning fmg
relief. Here I presume is no sedition.
" And that they are neither temporary, aer
occasibned by transition from war to peace, in
palpable to all, though all have not the courage
to avow it.'' I do not say that proposition in
palpable to eveiy body. Some are daspeeei
to tnink that the calamity has been occasioned
in consequence of the sudden transition fmna
war to peace, and some dispute that propo*
sition. Some are of opinion, that if we bad
continued tbe war, at an expense of a hundred
millioos a year, we should have infolUbly se*
cured the national prosperity and greatneas*
I shall not attempt to settle these points, not
is that neeessaiy to the present argument^ and
t beg leaive to protest against the idea that I
give any opinion upon them at all. Peibnpt
Mr. McLaren may include me in his censure
for my went of courage in not avowing m^
opinion.
** Tbe fact is ire are ruled by men only s<h
licitous for tbeir own aggrandisement; and
they care no further for the great body of the
people,, tban they are subservient to their ovns
accursed purposes. If you are convinced of
this, my countrymen^ I would therefore pu)
81]
and
Bairdjbr SedUion.
A. D. 1817.
[83
Ike i^itetUoQ, we jcn degeeerate enough to
bear it ? Shall we, whose forefathers set limits
to the all graspisf power of Rome ; shall we,
whose forefatheiVf at the never-to-be-forgptten
field of fiaanockbuniy told the rotghty Edward,
at the bead of the most mighty army ever trod
•D Brilaio s soil, ^ Hitherto shalt thou come,
eod no farther ^ shaH we, I say, whose fore>
fatheis defied the efforts of foreign tyranny to
enslare our beloved country, meanly permit, in
our day, without a murmur, a base Oligarchy
to feed th^r filthy Termin on our vitals, and
rule us as th^y will ? No, my countrymen/'
A commentary was made on this passage
though it is not proved that the panel ever
spoke it. The prosecutor takes it for granted,
without evidence, that the words were spoken.
I am, therefore, not under the necessity of de-
fending these words. But are they in reality
so culpable ? Are they seditious ? They are
mere words of course, in expressing those pub-
lic < grieTances to which they refer. Every
child knows that they are the common and
hackneyed terms used by petitioners for public
reform, and (excepting one or two allusions* in
whidi there is evidently no sedition), if they
are not tame and feeble, they are at least neither
seditious nor inflammatory. Every word ap-
plies to the professed object of the meeting m
petitioning, and to no other object. The pro-
secutor applies some of the words to the king,
but this is a misconstruction quite unworthy of
my lord advocate. Ministers, and the pos-
sessors of borough interest* are the vile Oli-
garchy, who are said to feed their filthy vermin
OQ our vitals, and rule us as they will, and tliis
attack was justifiable in the way it was made.
What would avail the right of petitioning, if
there was no right to petition against his majesty's
ministers and their partisans ? Ministers may
be impeadted in parliament for their public con-
duct, and they may be complainea of by the
people in their petitions. Are petitions to par-
liaiDent against ministers to be punished ^a
sedition ? What hare we here ? The opinion
of the panel that the ministers have not acted
in an honest way, or as ministers ought to do.
The opinion is expressed a little strongly, but
it does not go beyond legal bounds. The pe-
tition was uterwards laid before parliament,
and was received with respect. Now the ques-
tion before yon is not, whether the ministers
are culpable or not — not whether lord Castle-
reagh or Mr. Vansittart might bring an action
fcr a libel or defamation— but whether there is
any sedition in this speech. I ask you,
whether there is any sedition in complaining
of these ministen ? Sedition is an attack on
the sovereign of the state— an attack on the
government, not on the ministers of the go-
▼emment. Yon may attack the latter in any
way> without being guilty of sedition.
Kit luther, as to the passage about the
Oligarchy. It is generally understood that a
few penons, not exceeding 300, are possessed
of an influence in the House of Commons that
a very pernicious to the state. Thia is the
VOL XXXUL I
Oligarchy, the government of a ihw by uneoiH
stitutional influence, alluded to in the paner^
speech. Is it sedition to take notice,, even by '
allusion, of such a public grievance? ]^ this
sedition? Against whom is it sedipon?
against d^ Kingl against the Lords? against
the Commons ? against any branch of the legis-
lature, or against the legislature taken as a
whole? it is sedition against no person or
legal authority whatever. It is, indeed,
directed against the Oligarchy itself, which,
in the opinion of the petitioners, is the
worst «nemy of the King, Lords and
Commons. The King, Lords and Commops
ought to be independent ; and, if an uncon-
stitutional influenoe rules over them, is it se-
dition to oomplain of that influence ? Every
friend to the constitution will complain of it,
if he supposes it to exist. I apprehend there
is nothing in this part of the charge ; and while
M'Laren denies having used these expressions
about our rulers, I say there is no sedition in
them, i would say so, even if the words had
been used where no petition to the legislature
was in contemplation. But, considering that
the meeting was called for that purpose, *
nothing can be more unquestionable thaa that
such langpuage was not seditious.
I come now to the last of the words quoted
in the indictment, and I hope to satisfy you
that there is nothing seditious to be found in
them. Allow aoe here to remind you of
McLaren's situation when he made (his speech.
It has been proved that the task of opening the
meeting was imposed on him, contrary to his
inclination, and came upon him rather unex-
pected ly . It was indeed proposed to him eight
days before the meeting, but he was unwilling
to undertake it, and immediately before the
meeting he pressed Mr. Samson to take the
business off his hands. An hour before the
meeting Mr. M'Laren was again urged to open
the business; and being in soma measure
compelled to it, he retired for a very short time,
and made some notes of his short address to
the meeting. You will see in the whole pro-
ceeding t^e most evident marks of haste. It
is not proved that the last sentence was written
in his notes. On the contrary, it was not
written. Ue was placed on what is called the
hustings, and delivered his speech during a
storm of wind, rain and hail ; from the noise
of which, and particularly from the rattling of
the hail on umorellas, it was almost impossible
to hear what he said. Besides the words con-
tained in his notes, part of which he spoke, and
part of which he omitted, he spoke other words
which. were not in his notes. What these
words were is uocertain,«as they could not be
perfectly heard. A single witness told you be
heard and recollected them, though he could
not recollect any other words of the panel's
speech. There is no great reason to rely
on the recollection of the witness, though
there is much reason to presume that the
words had not the meaning given to them
by the publie prosecutor. The words in
G
837
57 GBOROE til.
mat i^AbamUfiKr M*lMtK
fM
the indictment tre, ^ thoald be be to infatuated
as to turn a deaf ear to their just petition^ he
has forfeited their allegiance. Yes, ny feUow-
townsfnen, in such a case, to heU with our
allegiance." But the passage is in different
words according to the etidenee oJT Mr. Finnic,
whose recollection of words, deliyered in the
midst of hail and wind, and the noise of um-
brellas, while nobody else could hear what
McLaren was saying, is the only evidence for
the prosecutor of me sedition. Aaother wit-
ness saijd there was something in the speech
about hell and allegiance, but he could gi?e no
intelligible account of the passage.
Now, is it probable that the panel should
have so expressed hfmself, or is it proTed that
he used the words imputed to him ? You see
the rest of the speech does not appear in the
same mutilated form with the pas«^ given by
Mr. Finnic. There is reason to bebeve, there-
fore, that the passage so mutilated is not the
passage deliyered bv McLaren. And jret ^ou
are called upon tpt rely imnlicitly upon Finme, a
single witness, to the woras of a speech, though
there was such a noise when it was detiver^
that persons near the orator could not hear him :
And this part of McLaren's speech is said to
have been seditious. Gentlemen^ you must
always bear in mind the occasion. No otiter
passage of the speech was seditious. McLaren
was recommending a petition to the Prince
BegenL He was speaking of his royal high*
ness in the most respectful way^ and in a warm
strain of ]<mlty. '^ Let us lay our petitions at
the foot of the throne, where sits our august
prince, whose gracious nature If ill incline his
ear to listen to the cries of his people." Here
is the fondest expectation of being listened to.
But it is natural to mingle, with the kindest
and most dutiful sentiments, the severity of
doctrine and reasoning^ and, on this occasion,
it is possible that the rigour of our constitu-
tional law for extreme cases may have sud-
denly occurred to the mind of the panel. We
all know that our constitutional rignts and du-
ties go hand in hand. This has been stated in
everr possible form in which a proposition of
the kind can be staled. At the Revolution,
the Ixnds and Commons held James to have
abdicated the throne, merely because he left
ib« country^ and the illusthous house of
Hanover wsi at last established, because James
ha^tailed in the duties he owed to his subjects.
Again, in Scotland, it was not held that J ames
had abdicated^ but that he had /MrfeiteJ the
throne in eonsequence of his proceedings.
Speculations on the iuliject. indeed, aredeticate,
and ought not to be mudi indulged in. But
what was more natural than for M'Laren to
urge the propriety of petitioning, by stating
thatithe petition would of course be received,
and that if the regent did not regard the cries
of all liis people, he would forfeit their alle-
giance ? M'Diren did not say it was the duty
of the Prince Regent to listen, right or wrong,
to the petition then proposed. In thi» way the
whole passage is not so unreasonable; and
where there is anuoeertainCy what. the vuif
words weN| the moat &v6uiuble interpretatte»
must be given to them.
But, in the worst view of the words, they im-
port merely that in an extreme case, whick
could not happen, allepp ance vfonid not be due,,
and such an alternative does not import ie*^
dition. If the words were imprudent, diey
were not seditious. They might indeed hav€:
been without a vindioation,^ if they haid' becnr
used at a public meeting where no such woid»
were warranted bv the occasion, and where thA-
me^nig was not mr the purpose' of petitioniBg'
paritament. But consiaer the time when the
vrords were used. The recommendation of
ray lord advocate to this effect was cratir
correct, and I desire you to keep in mind tbaft
Uiere was a petition at the time under consider
ration, and that expressions might then be-
more allowable than at another time. The^
sacred right of petitioning is the bulwark of the
right of free discussion. Discussion may be
idlowed preparatory to a petition, that would
npt be endured at any other time. Discussion
ia necessary on aU such occasions^ Free words-
may on tb^e occasions be used when speaking
of ministers, and generaHy of public men, af
well as of public measures. Are not these
propositions self-evident? Supposing it were
asked, whether any of you have a right to write
a letter to a correspondent, and send it by the-
post. The answer would be, you have a risbt
to do so ; there is no law against it But what
if you have no right to use pen^ ink, and paper ;
no right to lift the pen, to put it in the mk*
holder, or apply it to the paper f These acts
have the same relation to writing a letter, thaft
the right of canvas8in|^ what are ffrievmicea has
to the right of petitioning, x ou hkve the
right of petitioning, which includes the right
of meeting and canvassing the subject of your
petition. Thus the right of discussion is pre-
supposed in the right of petition.
- As to the lan^age that is legal and warrant-
able in petitioning and previously discussing
the mode of petition, it is well known that
parliament may be approached with language
as strong as any part of this pamphlet, and cep-
tainly stronger than any part of the speech oT
the panel. As evidence of this, take tM votes
of uie House of Commons, and yow wilt
iind more violent and bitter expressions of
grievances, than any in this publication. I
may read one or two of thes^ petitions, which
have been appointed by die House to lie en
the table, and which the House would not
have thoi^t itself bound to receive, if they
had considered Uie language as improper in a
petition to pariiament* I hope Mr* Orent will
be allowed to read them for me.
Mr. Gnm/. — This is an extract of a petition
from Bristol, presented to the House of Com-
mons on the 29th January U317 [JSeoii from
the Vote$1. ^ That no man of sincerity will
affect to believe that such a squandering of the
resources of the country for such purposes, and
tMiBf It piM«d in th« negative.** And an*
other from the inhabitants of Delph was pre*
sented ; [fvedi] " And a motion oein^ made,
and the question being pnt, that the said peti«
tion do lie «poa the taUe, it passed in the
negatiTe.*^
On the 8l8t Januaiy, a petition from the
town of Usliiaz was presented and read, sett-
ing forth, [reocb] ** It is now notorious that
the people of tnis kingdom do experience
flagrant wrongs and neat misfortunes^ be-
cause their birthnofat of making their own laws
has, through the decaY of ancient boroughs, at
well as through fraud and usurpation, been
taken from them ; for it is ttniversallY known
that the^ nation are not represented in the
House ; in this complication of decay, injustice,
and wrong, in this rain of the constitution,
wheieby &e people have been defrauded of
the seif-preserring power of making, through
real cepresentatiTes, their own laws, the
House must see the causes of which all the
present calamities of our country are the ef-
fects : here, and here only, the cause of war,
here the cause of public debt, here the cause
of an intolerable taxation. — The law, through
ih^ r^tless power of those who have usurped
the seats in the House, assumes a severity re-
volting to humanity, and is carried into exe-
cution by the bayonet; wherefore the peti-
tioners feel it to be their duty to protest against
that corrupt and factious ustirpat^on of seats in
the House, by which all fr^eaom is destroyed^
and our unimppy country is threatened with
convulsion, slavery, or subjugation ; for in a
usurpation which inflicts on the whole com-
munity taxation without representation! nought
but despotism can be discovered.''
" A petition of the there-undersigned inha-
bitants of the town and neighbourhood of
Halifox, in Yotkriiire, was also presented and
read; containing the same allegations and
praver as the last preceding petition. — And the
said petitions were orderea to lie upon the
table?*
There are many other petitions which I may
read couched in equally strong language.
•ft]
llMJt wtA n deatlveiifepowcr in the managers
«f paper money, wonhi ever have existed, if
.^e members of the Hoose of Commons had
-becD the real repiesentatives of the people,
instead of beings as they notoriously are, the
jnete coob of an ever-grasping and tyrannical
Ollgaidiyof boconghmongers ; that it is in
'vain to hc^ for any veal remedy, for anjr solid
and sabstuitial relief except throngh the means
•of such a reform in the Commons or people's
House of Pariiament as shall ensure to the
people Um speaking iof their will throng the
-menna of representatives, annoaUychosen by
all men who have attained the age of twenty-
one years, seeing that all men pay taaae, and
dmi aU men have fives and liberties to pro-
eecti Ordeted<hat<he said petition do Ue <on
ihetaUe."
Ob the fame day, a petition from the iewn-
ehip of Qoik:k was presented and read, but it
appears to have ■contained expiessions which
were deemed otfensivje, for [reaA from the
yaia'] ** a motion being made, and the ques-
tion being put, that the said petition do lie
vpOB the table, it passed in the negative.**
On the same dav, the address and petition
4if the townof (Xdham was presented and read,
in vrinch are the foUo wing expressions: Ffeodiij
'^ In the midst of all these calamities, toe lofr-
uisteiB, m coinunction with an unconstitntional
and corrupt House of Commons, have pro-
geeded to vote away a great part of the puoUc
■MNiey to superfluous and unnecessary pur-
(poses, die whole of which evils die petitioners
ascribe to the want of a real, unbiassed, i^,
lawfril, and annual election of the members of
die Commcms Hotise of Pariiament^ instead
4if vrfakfa, the petitioners see, in that House,
Speets and other boioughmongers, hundreds
Its seats usurped ; that numbm more of
thoee sealSy through the gross venality of mo-
AOpoliang eerporators, are notoriously bought
and sold, and a laige portion of the members
of that House, who ought only to sit there as
repfeeenlatives of die people, are, nevertheless,
piaoemen and pensioners cC the «rown, and
veeeivc^ insrianesand emoluments, upwards
of t0O,000l. a^yearout of the taxes; where-
fore the petitioners feel it to be thdr duty to
proceat sigainst diat corrupt and factious usurp-
jrtioit of seat* in that House, by which freedom
fiid our once happy countnr
Lh slavery, starvation, codvuW
and luia; for, in an usurpation which
iaidiets on the whole coBsmunity taxation witb-
ooft repKsentation, nouaht but despotism can
he discovnrad, nought but rain can proceed.
Jkad the said peddo9ft were orderea to lie
wpOB the fable.*^
Immediately after ^diich, it appears that
£rcedi] '^ A petition from Ashton-under-Iine
was presentea and read, containing the same
sJlegations and prayer as the petition of the
inhaliitaafs of the township or Quick, which
was fbts di^ presented to tne House. And a
motion being made, and the question being
XfBtLp thm the laid petition do lie upon. die
Mr. CMb.— I think enough has been read,
and we need not latignethe Court and the
jury,
Mr. Gr«n^«-Particula»ly on die 12th of
March I see there are several petitions received
in the same terms with the petition from
Halifax.
Mr. Clerk, — This is but a specimen of the
petitions which have been sent to, and received
oy parliament. 'Such axe not, indeed, petitions
whidi the House of Commons is disposed to
grant. But the privilege to think and talk on
diese matters, to take advice about them, to
hold meetings about them, and to make them
the subjects of speeches, resolutions, and pe-
titions, unquestionably belongs to the people
of tfair country. The right ofpetxtioning is so
sacred, that Uie most overbearing and arbi-
871 57 GEORGE Hh
rr»a
traiy administrations hava never proposed to
restrict it altogether. You will pause, then,
before jou prooooooe a verdict, which, as the
public prosecutor demands it» wottkl» in terms
almost direct, be a verdict against the right of
petitioning: for the same argument that has
been urged against the panel would apply
against speeches relative to petitions* conj^
plaining of any other public abuses, if the
distresses of the people should be never so
great — abuses against which ne i^nnedy conld
be looked for but by petitioning the legislature,
and stating the grievances in the language of
to>utfa. Were such a pestilence i0 be intro-
duced in ^is part of the island, as prosecu-
tions to subvert the right of petitioning, the
consequences would indeed be calamitous.
The right of petitioning, so tenaciously held
by our ancestors, may l^ still more necessary
to our posterity. The present case ought not
to have been prosecuted, even if the words
had been more inflammatory than they are.
It has no resemblance to a case of sedition.
In the case of Muir,* and a variety of .others,
in which men were tried and punisHed for
sedition, a wicked purpose was always clearly
established, and the accused had no pretence
for saying that they looked toward the legis-
lature for the accomplishment of their objects.
The ipoment that such a bona fik purpose is
in view, the eubject has a right to express his
opinion, and he cannot be subjected to punish-
ment for it. If he could be punished, the
right of petition would be at an end.
Gentlemen, the panel is a person of irre-
proachable character, and his former history,
and in particular the loyalty and public spirit
of his conduct on all occasions, leave no room
for any presumption that he would be inclined
to seditious practices.
£Mr. Clerk then read the following jcertir
ficates :]
Kilmarnock, 2nd April, 1S17,
This is to certify, that Alexander
McLaren has resided in my house as a
lodger for the space of seven years against
May next, behaving himself soberly and
honestly, free from wrangling or quarrel-
ling, and as a loyal subject, speaking
respectfully of government, and all other
rulers in their different stations, so far a^
is known to me.
John Stratrern, wright.
EHmamock, 2nd AprU^ 1817.
.This is to certify, that Mr. Alexander
McLaren has resided in Kilmarnock for
upwards of eiffht ^ears, and has been se-
, veral years in habits of intimacy with the
undersigners ; and during that time, to
the utmost of our knowledge, has behaved
in a sober and peaceable manner ; at all
tiroes has been a loyal subject, a finp
2 How. Mod. St. Tr. ^17.
fneod of order, and a habitiAl respecter
of authority.
JoBH Stratheiih, wiight.
James Al£xa3«j)Er, 9tn, weaver.
John Buntin, weaver.
Wm. Howie, builder.
Geo. Smith, grocer.
John Paxton, brewer.
James Craig, weaver.
James Buntin, shoemaker.
Mr. Jeffre^j^^YovL are aware, gentlemen,
that it is now my duty to address you on the
part of the other panel ; and, after what yoit
nave already heard, and Ihe ample opportunity
you have had to consider the whole of the evi*
dence during the trial, I flatter myself I shall
be able to discharge this duty without en*
croaching much longer on your time. I wish,
first, to address a word or two to you on the
facts of the case, and to lay before you, in
a detached form, those that relate to this
panel, Thomas Baird— >after which I must
trouble you with a few words on what I ood-
ceive to be their reasonable and legal import.
It is one comfort in this case, surrounded as
it is with discomforts and anxieties, that with
regard to the facts, there can be no reasonable
doubt in your minds ; nor am I aware, indeed,
that upon this part of the subject there is any
great contradiction between the opposite sides
of the bar. And, therefore, I shall give but a
slight abridgement of the facts, separating
those which apply to this individual, tJie truth
and import ot which I do not conceive liable
to any question.
You will remember, it has been put in evi-
dence before you, that he is a man in a good
condition in life, which is denoteitl, indeed, by
his appearance. He is in reality a most re-
spectable person, who had long resided in the
town, among whose citizens he had taken an
active part on this occasion ; and, even in the
judgment of those who differed from him in
opinion on political subjects, and who, from
their official situation, had the power and the
duty to prevent him from committing any
wrong, he was universally esteemed incapable
of harbouring evil intentions against the con-
stitution. He was entrusted with military and
civil offices, which are only committed to
known and tried hands. He is past the early
period of youth, when great imprudence may
take^ptace, notwithstanding pnncinles gene-
rally correct. He has a young ramily de-
pendent on him for their subsistence; and
earns his livelihood by a trade which depends
for its success on his good character and
conduct. It has been proved that his general
conduct is not only correct but exemplary, and
that he has been in the habit of communicating
and discussing his opinions on politics with a
variety of persons who did not concur in thjose
opinions ; and therefore, while the other panel,
from being less known in the town, could not
have his character so generally* spoken to, we
wbo have been entniued with the defence of
amtilthamai
hr SetBtmn.
Buid, and >Ih> betAg 1«m dreamscrib^d in
^is rasped, eoold affrad toiMke a Mlection
ioi oar witees9^ have prnpoaely abstained
from taking ibe eridence of these who con*
.ciured ih his poMtical sentiments, or bringing
one Teformer to testify in larour of another,
and have tboaght it better to take the evidence
of those only who were naturally influenced
hy opposite motives and principles.
You heard from them that mis person has
always been remarkable for the frankness with
wfaidb he ddivered his opinions; and that,
even when expressing them with the beat and
exaggeration inseparable from such discussions
among parties who do not agree, they always
appeared to them perfectly innocent and fair.
wowne, Wyllie, and Miller, from profession
and sitoadon the roost figuring men in the
town, and the most notoriously adverse to any-
change in 4he established order of things, aU
say he «miformly maintained such language as
impressed their minds with a conviction Uiat
he was strongly and decidedly attached to the
constitntion of this empire, though he wished
for a reform in the Commons House of Pariia-
aent : that he was a mild person, aud of a
cbancter incapable of exciting, in any way,
any degree of disorder or discontent against
government.
f am aware, that a good moral character is
not in general an answer to a charge of crime,
if there is distinct proof of its having been
committed on any particular occasion ; and
that an allegation by the prosecutor of a wrong
committed by a person whose moral character
previously stood untainted, will, if supported
Dy positive evidence, lead to the punishment
of tnal person, notwithstanding such previous
good character. But I submit to ^oa, that in
a trial Uke this, depending mainly on thie
question, whether the panel harboured a
mdced, ielonious, and seditious purpose, —
or, if he did not harbour such purpose in its
obvious aod naked form, whether he was
chargeable with that disregard of the safety of
his neighbour, or thalt recklessness as to con-
sequences, which, in the eye of law, is const*
dered a moral wrong, and punished as wicked
and felonious : — ^I say, in a case in which every
thing depends on this ; where the matter is in*
tfinsically of a doubtful nature ; where it is a
qoesticm whether a person has gone beyond a
IMidooaUe vivacity of discussion, and ven-
tuied to use language which the law holdsto
be demonstrative evidence of Improper pur-
.pose — if, in these drcmnstances, you. find a
standing iq Snch a situation as the panel
teaiftMr«ttii*ea]^0»;himself to public
gifted -with powe^of eloquence-
no way accoslomed or inditted to try his
tsieals in that way — carrying on a thriving
trade, which he has no disposition to leave —
and standing comparatively uniojured, while
etbers around him were on the verge of ruin
—<>f peaceable habits^— of moderate'pohtical ^
pfinciples — under such citcamstances, I say,
foa are booad to pr^fmne for his iimoceDce;
A. D. 1817*
ro6
unless eitmiAat intention be dfariy and un*
answerably established against him. The legal
presumption of innocence,* in such a ease,
amounts almost to a moral certainty.
In this situation, Mr. Bahrd, placed as he
was hi the heart of a manuihcturing district,
could not hA to be a spectator of rery general*
and very deplorable misery. A shuer in it he
must also have been in some degree, as all
persons must be who* are connected with the
sale of commodities from which purchasers are
gradually withdrawing. Although the causes
of the general distress did nQ>t so immediately
or directly affect him, yet he heard and wit*
nessed those clamours and complaints, which-
certainly, in this part of the island, have not
hitherto broken out into those rather compas-
sionable than criminal excesses, to which- the
infirmity of human nature, rather than the ma-
lignity of individuals, or of any class of the
people, mav be hurried in seasons of such un*
precedented calamity. He could not help
hearing those complaints, and listening to the
remedies which were proposed for those evils ;
and it appears, that he concurred in the opi-
nion which some persons have held ^ and he
confessed it to all with whom he had occasion
to converse-*- that a great part of the evils arose
from a defect in one of the great bodies of the
legislature — from want of due communion of
sentiment between the bod^ of the people, and
those whose fonction it is to express theilr
sentiments, and watch over their interests.
That he entertained such an opiniou, there is
no doubt. Not going so iar, perhaps, as think*
ing that a ueform in the representation of the
people would remove the evils then existing,
ne, in common with many persons, was of
opinion, that it mivht tend at least to prevent
their recurrence. He certainly did favour the
professed object of the meetinfr, and in this,
if his guilt began, it also ended. He undis-
guisedly gave his countenance to a general
meeting for petitioning the thr^e branches of
the legislature, for redress of grievances, and
reform of the Commons House of Parliament.
His conduct in this particular was worthy of
the sincerity with which it was dictated* As-
sociated with some' others whom you have
seen, they agreed as to the propriety or ex*
pediency of encouraging this method of pro-
ceeding; and at the same time, they .deter-
mined not to take this step of calling a meeting
for petitioning the legislature, if it was op*
posed, or likeV to produce any opposition, m
an official form, on the part of the local ma^
gistrates. Accordingly mt, Baird, as one of
Uie most respectable of the committee (all of
whom seem to have been cool persons enough
when the heat of the action was over, and the
field deserted), waited on the provost; and
the provost told you, that though be disap-
proved of the meeting, he did not think ne
nad power to prevent it, • He seems . actually
to have gone out.of town when it- took place :
so far 'was he' from* thinking thefe ^was any
daDger to be appfthndad : and he wu '
ni
iff QfiOROB. III.
JVM ^Aktmder tttatfrn
CM
ied in bit opfailoD from tht mall— <lifft wm |
no tendency tx> tumult or disonler. |
At that meetiogi Mr. Bmidy no doubt^ «t-
ilended. He wu ttiere wid heard the apexes
ihat Jirere delivered ; some of wbidi, ondoabt-
edlj, ^icontain Tery indecorous and improper
'Cqpfettibns — expressions which it may have
been prepoetctous to utter at a meeting con-
vened for lawfol and oonstitutional purposes.
But if persons go to such a meeting at al^ they
may expect that prepoelerous expressions will
1)0 used, on both sides, peibafMy of the qnes-
tion. But is a man to ne punikied for sedi-
tion, if he accidentally hear seditious laoguage
mnt^oyed by aoodier person? Not on^ wet
the measure of ealliog a meeting for petitioning
perfectW lawful in itself, but &e bamnour of
those who attended seems to haTO been ordeily,
decent and exemplary* I do not know whether
Tonr views concur with those of Mr. Baird,
but thinking as he did on the subject, he acted
properly. It is to be taken for granted,
that Ae petitioners were sincere in their opi*
■km, and that in taking those measures, tney
thought thev would be of great eflRsct in pro*
ducing good*
At that meeting, then, Mr. Baird did not
epeak. He heard the speeches in question^ —
Mt as that could not, or course, taint him with
guilt, I am sure you will go along wiUi me in
thinking, that up to this point there was im-
thing culpable in his conduct; and therefore
the veiy beginning and ending of the crimi-
nality imputed to him consists in his having
nllefwaids (I cannot say, concurred, but) sub-
mitted to a resolution forced on.himbythe
m^rity of those persons, with whom he was
associated, in an application to parlmment, for
having these orations printed, in a foil, true
and particulat acoaunt of the whole proceed-
ings. This we stated in the outset ; and it
hat been proved, without contradiction, by
the testimony of a variety of witnesses. In
the examination of the several witnesses, no
indtcation ever appeared,-«no hint, even in
the moat distant manner, ever presented it-'
fel(— 4hat the publication of the speeches was
made inith a view that seditious doctrines
dmnld be piopatated, or that the contents of
the work should be studied by persons at a
distance. Hie puUication is dearly proved
not to have had any such ambitious object;
but to have been made in the humble view of
lecaiing a little paltry gain,— to defray tim
expense of nailing up a fow boards for the ao-
coasmodation 6f the oraton, and providing a
ftw sheets of gilt paper for thsee or four peti-
tions to be tnnsmitled to the Prince Regent
mid the Houses of Pariiameat.
It occurred to the petitioners, that the only
means for defraying mis heavy expense was to
print an aooonnt of their piocoedings^— that
anums tiieir neighbours, whether those who
agreed mth them» or weto opposed to them
in iwlitkal oninions, tbcy might sell as many
eopies as te^ht raisie the sum which
is not the leeit veetige of aoydmbn m havn
the woik read or admired, either for mischief
or glory; The only object was to get a small
number sold; and aeoordrngly diey seem all
to have been sold — without so mndi as a
single copy having been given awuv. Mr.
Baird, into whose hands, as on^
mittee of the petitioners^ a number of the
copies were impressed, got rid of them, it is
true, vqth more fodlity than another man who
was examined to-day did of Jiis copies. But
this was merely becnnse he keeps a weU-fro-
quented shop, not because he was in any way
aealoos for their circulation. The natum of
Mr. Baird's trust and management in the
burfnem were proved to vou by his own shop-
man, and his own dedamtion; and it has
been proved, that if he got rid of every oim
copy he vras possessed of, shopmanlike 1m
exacted his groat for every one ot them urhidt
he sold. Tbe printer said that about 400
copies were printed. Some remained in the
haiids of members of the committee who did
not get them sold. They were not sold te
booksdlen ; becanse the petitionen could not
eflbrd to pay booksdlcrs' commission: thev
were sdd for a paiticnlar purpose, which £
have specified, and were soul in the cheapest
way. Some of them were sold in a grocer's
sh<^ where they mixht be ofuse to wrap up
goods that were purmsed; other members of
me committee, however, could not sell their
eopies, because they could not, perhaps, be of
sudi immediate use to the purchasers.
You see the nature of this transaction, then^
and you must now be aware that it is con-
formable U> the statement which was given of
it at the beginning. Mr. Baird took no step
disconformable to his general dmracter of n
quiet, modest, honest, wel)-disposed, good
man ; he made no speedies, but disapproved
of various speeches and passages in speedma
(which foot has been folly made out), as hamh
and offensive; and these are considerations
which certainly are of importance in determtn*
ing whether he n guilty or not of sedition, an
diarged against htm in this indictment.
These are the whole of the foctsof this case ;
and you will be pleased to add to these focta
what is proved to you by the evidence, and
which the dates and the documents themselves
instruct, vix. Uiatall this took place publidy.
It was known to his majestv's advocate, and
all the lieges, that this was done so long beck
as December 1816; and yon have seen that
400 eopies of the publication were all that
wevepnnted. I do not think yon will imagint
it is very Ifkdy the anthon and printem es»
peeled a gtfeat sale. None of the authom were
mndi known inthe literaiy woiid, and none of
them, I think, profossed themeelves to be
poUttdans. The object was to sell copies to
the eniiotts cdnntiy gendemen and the goasipa
m the neighbourhood. It was reasonable to
think, too^ that some peofite mig^ have tlua
eariQSity» who were prevented by the weather
frMB gm^^mtt it, bTtttmidiag at thn meeting ;
09l mwf THaiiifi fiwrrfjTir VMmw
far ywfi i*i> KwMMt, thai iIm ipeedm i*tM
A. D. 1817.
IM
•pocMi IB dtfiafioe of tiM angxy biwtf of
iMTODy — ifi tiM nidtt of hafl, mow, and wind^
•ad potwitiwtaiiding tho coporitioa of the
•lomeBlt. PodtwDS ia oenumiiity with tbese
gpoechOT <pero cngi owod ; tad it it nol demod,
iior can there be wf doebt of the feet, thai
liwjr were oieaentedp and tliat thej were re-
ceived Willi the oaoal cinlities with which
pewons in thoee hig^ qmirleia are woat'to
leeetve aoch coimmmifeatioM,
All thie was dene montht ago, and ^ a time
when DO atarm aboot seditioa obtained here
or in aaiy oUier quarter of the kingdom; and
Mr. Beird was-attowed lo idl his commodity
el pamphletay and to convene with his neiph-
boiua aboQt them^ without an j bod^ hmting
Ihathewaiin any danger, not fitom'Whathe
was doiaff, bat from wluift he had done weeks
before. Bot, after that, some odiootf proceed-
ings took place in another quarter of the
ishiad. Certain mobs had eicited consider-
aMe alarm in the mind of the Lq^islatiire, and
of the inhabitants of the metropolis^ where a
larn asMmbkq^e of people is easily convened)
and distnrbance easily excited. They did
comnit some little ontrage, and occasioned
aome fear for the peace of the dty,* This
Hear was propasated to the extremities of the
empirey'-4nd then the Ttgilance of the Pnblic
Fh»ecntor in tlds country goes back to a for-
BKT meeting, in a remote quarter, which had
not been attended with any tumult, and had
not been followed up wifh any the slightest
criminal consequences. A book, consisting
of foolish, ridicnkras specimens of rustic ora*
torr is on this occasion brought forward,-—
and this quiet, esteemed and trust-worthy
man is brought to your bar, and arraigned for
having wittedly and fdonioosly circulated
We come now to consider what is the in^
port of the foets in this case, and what is the
▼erdict you ought this night to pronounce on
the peison, wImso character through life, and
whose conduct upon one occasion, have been
detailed to yon in evidence to-day: The
ouestion is^ Whether the eridence to which I
have referred is such as to compel you, con-
trary to that general presnmption of innocence
ifl^di law establishes for every aoeosed per-
aoB,*-coatnry to that special presumption of
Jljnnrnncfl wluch the wbole tenor of the de-
llmdaBt's lifo and Aoaduet morallT esUblishes
in his favoor,— wheihvr that evidenee, I say,
be each as to constrain yon to pronounce theft
kis eaadact upon this occafion originated in
amligaaal aad diabolical parposes^-— purposes,
foom the snoosis of vrido he had Orety thing
to lose and nothing to gain, but was to be
ttorsly an inglorioos stirrer up of sedition in
the fim instance, and a victim to its guilt and
iosaaify in the second. — ^The question I say is.
Whether the evidence goes to shew that such
Is Ihe chaiacter of his. o£fence,— that such foUy
"vw-
flee James WatsonVCeM, VoL xzxii.p. 1«
oMst be imputed to a men of sense and
racter, and that vou cannot help- saying, on
your oaths, that ne disregardea all conse-
quences to others, to his country, and to him-
self and was detehnined to stir up seditioa
and distaibance.
The essence of this, and of all other Cffimee,
consists in the moral defect by which they are
engendered; and therefore it is, that eveiy
criminal indictmeot necessarily charges, that
the offence for which it threatens the iccosed
person with punishment was committed wtclh
acnd/emioiii/j^ ; and I believe almost every
ctment for crimes of this description con-
tains in more express words than occur here,
an allegation that the acts set foitii and de-
scribed were done wdA en mlotfioa to excite
sedition and disturbance. It is the intention,,
in short, in which the crime legally and
morally consists. I do not find foult with the
omission of that in the indictment. I rely oi»
the candour, propriety, and vrisdom of the
Bendi, to give you the requisite information
on the subject : and I am sure yo^ wiU be told
that the words indispensably inserted ^in tliia
indictment are in their own statement equiva-
lent to a direct allegation of intention in the
commission of the crime charged; aad that a
more particulsr charge of intention oould nol
have served any purpose.
When I sav this is a necessary piH of this^
and of all other charges of sedition, yon win
ffive me so much ciedit as to suppoee that I
do not mean to assert that the Fuolic Prose-
cutor is bound to bring direct and positive
proof of a criminal intention having bee»
actually expressed, or that it is not compe^
tent for him to aigne that the nature of the-
acts themselves, — the circumstances in whick
thqr were committed, — the situation of the-
party, — ^the temptations to which he was ex-
posed,^-ids whole conduct before and after tibe-
time he con^mitted the acts, — the general and
well-known complexion of the times when the*
acts were done, are to be taken into consider*
ation, in forming a judgment as to the inten*
tion with which the acts were performed.-— ^
Sttdi considerations csnnotbntarord evidence
of the purpose and intention \ and in ^ues*
tions with regard to almost dl other onmes^
^is inference is generally so plain and neces*-
sarjr M to make the task of the Jury compa*
rativdy easy. If a man aim a blow at another;
and knock out his brains, — if a person break
in at night and rob a house, or if he for^e a
bill, and draw money for it from a bank, it is
vain ta say there is a necessity to bring evi*
dence beyond the feet itself, to prove a malign
nant purpose in the one case, or a purpose of
fraud in the other. But observe me charao*
ter of sedition as defined, or attempted to be
defined, by my learned iiiend, and, indeed, bv
all the lawyers. I am not finding fault with
my Lord Advocate for not properiy defining
sedition, because it is one of uie disadvimtag^
attending such a case, that a suificient ana
satisfactoiy definition is not to be easily found)
751
S7 GEORGB IIL
Trial ^Mtumbr M*lMm
tTtt-
meattest of the peoples ^mn aooient times.
Since the Revohitioa it has oever beeo qaesti-
oned; and immedialely before that glorious
event, it was attacked only to enable a tyran-
uoal gOTenunent to sabvert the public liberty.
But t£e attack was repelled even in the worst
of times ; and the first act of die go?emment
of King William and Queen Mary was to
eonfirm the right of petitioning, as a franduse
of which the people could not be deprived.
It has ever ^mce been considered as a right
unalterably fixed by the fundamental laws of
the state ; and^ accordingly, though the exer-
cise of it is suf^sed to be sometimes unplear
aaat to the government, yet no administration,
and neither House of Parliament, has hitherto
thought proper even to disoourage the people
in the exercise of their right of petitioning.
How many hundreds, or rather thousands, of
petitions have been presented to the different
branches of the kgislatnie within these few
years, representing as grievances thinn which
are not acknowled^ to be such 1 and yet ihe
petitions, as coming from the people in the
exercise of their right, have been graciously
received by tliose to whom they were address-
ed. And so important is the right of petition-
ing, that every other right in the people has
been« supposed to depend upon it, inasmuch
as the people, if deprived of that right, would
be in aanger of losing the protecticm necessary
to defend them in their other rights.
It is obvious that a fair communication from
the people of their grievances and discontents
to the legislature, which has the power, and
whose duty it is to protect them, cannot be
•edition, if they have a right to make such
communication . If the people should petition
parliament without hanng the riffht oy law
to do so^ these petitions might be, and in
almost every case would be seditious and
dangerous, in raising or increasing discontents
and disturbances ; because every complaint of
a public grievance has a tendency to create a
public discontent, and this is illegal and se-
ditious in every case where the law does not
allow it. For the same reason, any violent
complaint of public grievances may be sediti-
ous or illegal, where it is not addressed to
persons having legal authority to take it into
consideration and give relief. But it would
be a solecism to say, that a petition to the
King or to either House of Parliament, stating
grievances, and praying for redress is sediti-
ous, because, Ist, it is allowed by law ; 2dly,
the persons addressed have an authority to
lake the complaint into consideration and give
•relief. Petitioning is indeed considered as a
means of removing discontents and preventing
disturbances, not as a means of raising them ;
and this may be true i^ some cases, though it
is not always so, and we have frequently seen
a forment of discontent much increased by
numerous meetings of the people, called for
the purpose of petitioning. But stiU the legal
'right of petitioniog is unauestionable ; and it
must be. supposed that this right, though it
cannot be used without expressing discontent,
and thereby communicating it among the peo».
pie, and possibly raising it, where it had pre-
viously no existence, may be legally (and
without any crime, or the fear of criminal pro-
secutions^ used in every case whatever, evea
though tne use of it diould in some respects
have a bad tendency ; the utility, and even n^
cessity of presentins the right, counterbalance
ing the nuschiefr which may be occasioned by
the seditious or discontented spirit which may
he raised by it.
But it must be plain, that if the people have
a right to state the grievances in petitions Cor
redress of grievances to the different branches
of the legislature, it follows as a necessary
consequence that they have a right to state
these ^evances in the plainest language, and
even m what is commonly considered to be
strong or coarse language in the descriptioa
of public abuses, if they do not in their peti-
tions violate that respect that is due to the
legislature: under that restriction, they may
assert in their petitions that there are the
grossest abuses, even in the legislature itself.
And you need not be told, that even petitions
of that kind are occasionally sent from all
quarters of the country, when discontents pre->
vail among the people. A stranger to the
peculiarities of tne British Government might
think it odd that petitions of this class, con-
taining inferences of a nature apparently so
irreverent, not only indicating an extreme
degree of discontent in the petitioners, but ■
directly tending to raise and aisseminate the
same kind of discontent through the whole of
the kingdom, should be tolerated, especially
where it b plainly the opinion, not only of the
different branches of the legislature, but also
the opinion of the more sensible part of the
community, that the petitions are very ill-
founded in their representations of grieyances,
and demand, by way of redress, new public
measures or arrangements, which would not
only be useless, but dangerous and even cala-
mitous. Such considerations, however, have
no influence, or very little influenoe, in the
question, whether the people have the right to
present their petitions, and whether, when
offered, the petitions ought to be received.
On the contrary, it has long been held by the
legislature, that, as the people have the right
to petition for redress of grievances, so they
have the right to state what they consider to
be their grievances, whether they are really
ffrievances that ought to be redressed or not.
The general rule is, that however unreasonable,
or unfit to be granted the prayers of the peo-
ple in their petitions may be, it is not unfit to
receive the petitions, and the people have a
right to present them, a right that is unalie-
nable.
But fiirther, if the right of petitioning be-
longs to the people, the^ must of necessity
have the right of deliberatioa upon the subject
of their petitions, to consult with each other
at public meetings,, to be adjrised by thofe
m
and Tkonuu Bairdjor BedUion,
A. D. 1817.
C78
who are able to advise them, or think them-
sehres able, upon the Tarious points which may
occur in coosuleiing what are griemncef , and
what are doc ; end if there are grieyances^ what
are the remedi^ that oaght to be proposed or
prayed for in their petitions. With regard to
the important claims which may be made in
petitions to the legislatnret. every man neces-
sarily most have a right to meet with his
/eiiows, either in small or in great numbers,
and to discuss the matter with them. One
man may think that annual parliaments lare
Aeccssaiy ; another that they would be hurt-
fbi or impracticable. On this trial, it is not
necessary for us to consider whe^er annual
psoiisuttents and universal suffirage are eood or
CMkd ; and, on this occasion, I have nothing to
do with these questions. But I say that it is
DOt nnlafrful to petition for either. And ge*
neraOy, vHiatever the grievance, or fancied
grievance is, it may lawfully be the subject of
a petition to the legislature ; and for tlue same
-season it may lawfully be the subject of deli-
becalioB and discussion, even in public meet-
ings held for the purpose of petitioning.
You will observe, that there can be no limits
to this right of petitioning, and previously de-
bbeniting; lor when it is limited the right is
gone. The right is to present unreasonable
as well as reasonable petitions. Or if un-
resoonable petitioningwere unlawful, the legis-
lature alone is the judge of what is reasoniu>le
or unreasonable in ^titions. If the right of
petitioning could be restrained by the courts
of law, there would be an end of the right of
petitioning, — a fundamental law of tliis mo-
■aicfay, — a law, the palladium of our other
On lihe occasion of which we have heard so .
Bwdi, when the people in and about Kilmar-
nock met to consider whether thev should send
addresses to the legislature on the subject of
their grievances, various speeches were made,
and we are told by the prosecutor, that these
speeches, and in particular the speech of
Mliereo, were seditious. In reganl to the
^piestion, whether or not his speech was sedi-
tMNM, he pleads that the right 6i petitioning
neeeasarily implies the right of previous dis-
cswsion. If this be true, apply it to the* case
before you. At such a meeting a speech may
possibly be seditious, where it appears either
that the meetins was called, not for its pro-
fessed object of petitioning Parliament, but
nerely to afford opportunities to make sediti-
ons speeches; — or that thoug^- the meeting
hm^fidt assembled for petitioning, the speech
went beyond its proper bounds, and was se-
ditious in statements not justified by the oc-
casion. As to the first of these cases, there is
not even a pretence for denying that the meet-
ing in qoestion was hcrna fiie called for the
rirpose of framing petitions to Parliament,
refer to all the evidence which vou have
heard. It was a meeting collected for that
purpose, and for no other, nor was any further
purpose in view.
The argmnent of the public prosecutor, aoid
the evidence adduced, will apply only to the
second case supposed, that the speakers at a
meeting hcma jidt assembled for petitioning,
had gone beyond their bounds, and deviated
into sedition. But has this been made out
against Mr. McLaren T His short speech, though
coarse, was suitable to the occasion, as an ex-
hortation to petitioning, and nothing else.
We were told, indeed, diat this case is simi-
lar to that of Pyshe Palmer, who many years
ago, was tried ror sedition, found guilty, and
sentenced to transportation. But Ihis is a
total mistake. The case before you is very
different from that of F^sbe Palmer, and firom
all the other cases which have hitherto been
tried before the Court of Justiciary. It has
been reserved 4br the present Lord Advocate
to bring 3uch a case as the present to trial, in
which, if the verdict find the panels guilty of
sedition, the right of petitioning, hitherto un-
challenged, seems to be attacked almost in di-
rect terms. The case of Fyshe Palmer was
that of a seditious libel, an inflammatory
hand-bill, containing seditious language, witb->
out any proposal to petition Parliament. We
were told that this case of Fyshe Palmer
was defended on the same grounds that were
stated in defence at the beginning of this trial ;
yet the lord advocate declined to meet that
defence particularly, and bear it down ^ the
triumphant authority of Palmer's case There
was no resemblance between that case and
the present. Fyshe Palmer recommended an
appeal, on the subject of grievances, not to the
legislature, but to a mob, the scum of the earth
in the neighbourhood of Dundee,-— to the so*
verign authority of the multitude. -The de»
fence in that case was disregarded, — ^but what
was it ? It was said, that in this free govern-
ment it is necessary that the press should be
free. It was said that the people must hate
freedom to attack public men, and must be en-
titled to publish, not treason, not sedition, in
a palpable form, but their thoughts in a free
and independent manner. It was added, thai
Mr. Fyshe Palmer was. not very sound in his
mind. These were the defences for him.
You wiUperhaps be surprised when I tell you,
that mv Lord Abercromby, who tried the case,
held, in his speech to the Jury, that if a peti-
tion to Parliament had been in view, the libel
of which Fyshe Palmer was found guil^ would
not have been of so aggravated a description,
—would jaerhaps not have been considered a
libel atalL ^flluch flie remarked) has been
said of the purity of tne i
intentions of the
cietv ; it is 'said they had nothing in view but
moderate reform, fiut, Gentlemen, you .will
consider how far that is consistent, either witii
the tenor of the address itself, or with what is
sworn to by Mealmaker, who drew the first
draught of it, and who swears exprsssl^^y that
at that time he had no second petition in
his contemplation'' and that what was after-
wards to be done would have depended
upon drcumstanees. I much fear that here
791
57 GEOaCB HI.
Tritd qfAkfonier M'Laim
[se
HCMliMker it kO&ug tht fanitliy aad tktt if
tb^ bad not been attended to» tbe conduct
of thit societjr wonld not bnve proved so pure
ai their iatentioDs are said to Ikare been/' * lo
l^t caiey xou will otenwy that a seditioiis li-
bel wna diaperfeed over Uie coontrr witbout
aAjt consequence being cOnteaiplafted bnt that
of inflamMig the nindt of die Multitude. On
the other hand, we have been at pains to shew,
that the pa«e]a in this eaae were quiet oiderly
peraoofy not eoncemed with any aeditioua so^
gieliea ; not connected with any poUttcal parties^
only fading dlstresi^ thinking they had gfier*
aaces to ooaaplain of, aad that they conra betp
ter their sitnations by petitioning parliament.
The^ BMt together in the aMat ovdnrly man-
neiv-^delibemted as it is naual to do in public
taaetings^—prepared rasokidoniiy— 'prepared a
petition,— 4M signed it, — aad that ^tition,
llongh condied in strong tecmsy was presented
to the Honaes of Patiianient, oonsideredy re*
eeivedy and laid on their tables. Is the right
^petitieniagythen, to be interrupted in thta
eatraordina mnanner^ by bringing the pet»*
tinners into the Conrt of Justiciary^
RecoUet that this was a neeting ibr consideiw
ing the propriety of petitioning the legislatare^
and that the aMeting wonM have been aHo^*
gather nugateiy unleas the persons then met
had been allowed to state their opiaions t« one
another In the first page of this indictaMnt,
the panel is ohttigad with hairing wickedly and
letooionsly delivered '< a speech eootaimog a
number of seditiens and inflanmatory remarks
WHi assertions^ eaknlated to degrade and bring
im» Goatanpt the Oovemment and legislatnre^
and to withdrew therefrom die oonlklence and
aihctiotts of the people, and to fiU the raidm
wilh treuble and diesesitien." Gentleaaen,
wherever (he peopk are exposed to griavanees
they necessarily must, when they meet to eeik-
aider the means of redrem, espiem their sense
of these grietances ; and I ask wliether it be
possible to stato pnUic grievances, especieUy
grievances arising from sndk a sonroe as over*
taxation^ without in soaae way or other reflect-
ing on the Government. In the esereise of
onr right of petilioning against grievances^
these grievances mnst be aikentioned ( and k
isiBH>omihie to mention tfaem^ or even to
allude to them, witbont briaginff the Ooven^
SMUt into discredit. For ttamirte, let a peti^
lien he presented against ovcr«taiatien» irhafe-
ever were the causes of the evtt^-^^wan jnst
ern^jusV— voavoidafale miefortonea^ or mis-
eanduetin pnMic afiairs^-^ is hiwinl to stato
the grievwiee. Bnt can it be elated withont
afffdiag more or leas, or attempting to afleet
An pnMtc opinaen as ta the merits or demerits
«f adminiBtmlseii? Eveiy pnbKe statement
respetling puUie eAus has that tendency.
Bat are the people to be intemptod en sneh
r rends, in the ezedtcise of their just rights.
i:* of the essence of their ri^t to complain
^^■^ • ■ ' ■ I I I I II —
* Fyshn Pahner'8 case % How. Mod. St«
Tr. 371.
of grievgncas, and therefore I apprehend yon
must disregard entirely those general expres-
sions in the indiclmentt charging M'Laren'a
speech as tending to bring the Government
into contempt. The petitioners felt griev-
ances ; — tbey prepared petitions, and it is im-
possible to state a public grievance without
throwing blame upon the Government. I do
not mean to examine the question, whether
there really was any blame attachable ta
Government ; for it is the same thing in thin
case whetherthe petitioners were right or wrong
in their statement. My defence is, that they
were in the fair prosecution of legal view8«
Suppose no words to have been uttered bnl
what would, in other circumstances, have beesi
considered seditious, their having had a right
object in view is a good defence. But ^^^
sort of obloquy has been thrown on the petiti^
oners, without any notice of the lawful object
thev bad in view, as if their oliject were to bw
laia entirely out of consideration.
The legality of the object, and the sitnatioia
in which the speeches were uttered, are the
most important eireumstances of the case.
Every thuig else is of a trivial and snbordinatn
nature. But let us see what the panel is
alleged to have sai4« No positive evidenon
has been adduced to prove any part of bin
speech, eacept a few words at the end of tbe
passage quoted in the indictment, and, so fiir
as I have observed, you have only the unoer*
tain evidence of one person to there worda«
I shidl remark upon the words in the indict*
ment.
" That our sufferings are insupDorteble, in
demonstreted to the world." I ao not sajr
whether their sufferings were insupportable or
not ; but they appear to have been sevefre^ and
the people were met ibr the purpose of con*
sidering them, and to join in petitioning fiat
relief. Here I presume is no sedition.
'* And that they are neither temporary, wsr
eccasihned by transition ftom war to peace, ia
palpable to all, though all have not the courage
to avow it." I do not say that preposition in
palnable to every body. Some are dispeeed
to toiidi that the calamity has been occasioned
in eonseqnence of the sudden transition fiwan
war to peace, and some dispute that propo*
sition. Some are of opinion, that if we had
continued the war, at an expense of a hundred
miliions a year, we should have inlalUbly se*
cured the national prosperity and greatnesa*
I shall not attempt to settle these points, nor
is that neeemary to die present aignment, and
I beg lea^Fe to protest against the idea that 1
S've any opinion ufM>n them at all. Perimpe
[r. M'Lnren may include me in his oenstue
iir my wnnt of coorege in not avowing m$
opinion.
^ The fact is we are ruled by men only ee*
lioitotts for their own aggrandisement; and
they care no further for the great body of the
people,, than they are subservient to their own
accursed purposes. If you are convinced of
this, my countrymen, I would therefore puf
SI]
and Thomas Bairdjbr Sediiian.
A. D. 1817.
[83
tile qifestioiiy «re joii degeaerate eaoogh to
bear it ? Shall vfe, whose forefathers set limits
to the all grasping power of Rome ; shall we^
whose fbre&lliiers, at the neTer-to-be-forgotten
field of Bavnockbiun, told the mighty EdWard,
at the bead of the most mighty anny ever trod
eo Britain's soiU '' Hitherto shalt thou come»
and Qo further f ahaH we, I say, whose fore-
lathers defied the efforts of foreign tyranny to
enslare our beloved country, meaiiiy permit, in
our day, without a murmur, a base Oligarchy
to feed their filthy vermin on our vitals^ and
rale as as tli^y will? No, my countrymen/'
A commentary was made on this passage
though it is not proved that the panel ever
spoke it. The prosecutor takes it for granted,
without evidence, that the words were spoken.
I am, therefore, not under the necessity of de-
fending these words. But are they in reality
so culpable ? Are they seditious ? They are
mere words of course, in expressing those pub-
lic grievances to which they refer. Every
^ild knows that they are the common and
hackneyed terms used by petitioners for public
reform^ and ^excepting one or two allusions^ in
which there is evidently no sedition)^ if they
are not tame and feeble, they are at least neither
seditious nor in6ammalory. Every word ap-
plies to the professed object of the meeting in
petitioning, and to no other object. The pro-
secutor applies some of the words to the king,
hut this is a misconstruction quite unworthy of
my lord advocate. Ministers, and the pos-
sessors of borough interest, are the vile Oli-
garchy, who are said to feed their filthy vermin
on our vitals, and rule us as they will, and this
attack was iustifiable in the way it was made.
What would avail the right of petitioning, if
there vras no right to petition against his majesty's
ministers and their partisans ? Ministers may
be impeached in parliament for their public con-
doct, and they may be complained of by the
people in their petitions. Are petitions to par-
lament against ministers to be punisbea ^
sedition ? What have we here ? The opinion
of the panel that the ministers have not acted
in an honest way, or aa ministers ought to do.
The opinion b expressed a little strongly, but
it does not go beyond legal bounds. The pe-
tition was afterwards laid before parliament,
aad was received with respect. Now the ques-
tion before you is not, whether the ministers
are culpable or not — ^not whether lord Castle-
leagh or Mr. Vansittart might bring an actioo
for a libel or defamation— but whether there is
any sedition in this speech. I ask you,
whiether there is any sedition is complaining
of these ministers? Sedition is an attack on
the sovereign of the state— an attack on the
government^ not on the ministers of the go-
▼amnent. You may attack the latter in any
w^^ withont bang guilty of sedition.
fiat farther, as to thjB passage about the
OCgatdiy. It is generally understood that a
few persons, ootexoeeding 300, are possessed
of an influence in the House of Commons that
is very pernicious U> the state. Thia is the
VOL. XXXUL
Oligarchy, the government of a few by nneon-
stitutional influence, alluded to in the panel'^
against tlfteKingl against the Lords ? against
the Commons ? agaiast any branch of the legis-
laturcr or against the legislature taken as a
whole? Jt is sedition against no person or
legal authority whatever. It is, indeed,
directed against the Oligarchy itself, which,
in the opinion of the petitioners, is the
worst enemy of the King, Lords and
Commons. The King, Lords and Commops
ought to be independent ; and, if an uncon-
stitutional influenoe rules over them. Is it se-
dition to complain of that influence ? Every
friend to the constitution will complain of it,
if he supposes it to exist. I apprehend there
is nothing in this part pf the charge ; and while
M'Laren denies having used these expressions
about our rulers, I say there is no sedition in
them. I would say so, even if the words had
been used where no petition to the legislature
was in contemplation^ But, coiasideripg that
the meeting was called for that purpose,
nothing can be more unquestionable thaa that
such language was not seditious.
I come now to the last of the words quoted
in the indictment, and I hope to satisfy you
that there is nothing seditious to be found in
them. Allow me here to remind you of
McLaren's situation when he made (his speech.
It has been proved that the task of opening the
meeting was imposed on him, contrary to his
inclination, and came upon him rather unex-
pectedly. It was indeeo proposed to him eight
days before Uie meeting, but he was unwilling
to undertake it, and immediately before the
meeting be pressed Mr. Samson to take the
business off his hands. An hour before the
meeting Mr. McLaren was again urged to open
the business; and being in soma measure
compelled to it, he retired for a very short time,
and made some notes of his short address to
the meeting. You will see in the whole pro-
ceeding \hfi most evident marks of haste. It
is not proved that the last sentence was written
in his notes. On the contrary, it was not
written. He was placed on what is called the
hustings, and delivered his speech during a
storm of Mrind, rain and hail $ from the noise
of which, and particularly from the rattling of
the hail on umorellas, it was almost impossible
to hear what he said. Besides the words con*
taioed in his notes, part of which he spoke, and
part of which he omitted, he spoke other words
which. were not in his notes. What these
words were is uncertain,«as they could not be
perfectly heard. A single witness told you he
heard and recollected them, though he could
not recollect any other words of the paners
speech. There is no great reasoa to rely
on the recollection of tiae witness, though
there is much reason to presume that the
words had not the meaning given to them
by the public prosecutor. The words in
G
791
57 G£OaGB HI.
Trial qfAkfonier M'Laim
{S0
]|C««liMker it tilling tht Irath, aad thtt if
Ui«gr had not been attended to» the conduct
of Ihit societjr wotdd not hvr^ proved so pure
•s their uileatioiis are stid to iJAre been/' * lo
tlMut etMy y^ will obs^nwy that a seditioiis li-
bel wna diipeised over Uie countrr without
tn^ consequence being cOntmplalea but that
of inflaming the ninds of the multitude. On
the other handy we have been it pains to shew,
that the panela in thii eaae were quiet eiderly
pereonfi not concerned with any scditiouB so^
gielies; not conneeted with any political parties,
only feeling distresi^ thinking they bad grier*
aaces to complain of, aad that tbi^ coukf betp
tsr their sitnatiotis by petitioning parlianient.
The^ met together in the moot orderly man«
neiv-rdelibemted as it is usual to do in public
mneUngs^ — prepared resolutions,"* prepared a
petitioB,-<--«nd signed it, — and that ^tition,
though couched in strong tecmsy was presented
to the Houses of Paiiianient, considered, re*
eeived, and laid on their Ubies. Is the right
^petitioning, then, to be interrupted in this
eatraordina rvmanner, by bringing the pet»*
tinners into the Court of Justiciary I
RecoUet that this was a meeting ibr consider*
iag the propiiety of petitioning the legislature^
and that the aMeting would have been alto«
gtther nugatoiy unlees the persons then met
bad been allowed to state their opiaions t^ one
anotheiw In the first page of this indictment,
the panel is charged with baTihg wickedljr aad
leiooiously delivered '< a speech eootaimng a
number of seditious and inflammatory remarlm
WHi assertions^ eakulated to degrade and bring
iiilo contempt the Government and legislature,
and to withdraw thetelrom die oonfidence and
aibctioas of the people, andiofiU the raidm
witb trouble and diasention.^' Gentlemen,
wherever tbe peopk are ezpoeed to i^evaneos
they necewsrUy moat, when they meet to eoik-
sider the aieans of redrem, ezprem their sense
of theae giietances ; and I ask whether it be
possible to stato pubiie grievances, especieliy
grievances arising from sudk a source as over*
taxation^ without in soase way or other reflect-
ing on the Government. In the exercise of
our right of petilionilig agsinst grievancto^
these grievances must l^ atentioned ; and it
isimpomibie to mention thei% nr even to
allude to them, wilbout briuginff the Govern*
iMtit into discredit. For ttaaaiMe, let a peti«
tion be presented against over*taiatien> iHmfe-
ever were the causes of the evtt,^warB just
erai[^ustr-ttDa.veidafale miefortooeo» or mis-
•anduetin public afiair^-^ is lawful to stato
the grietunee. But can it be atated without
affKtingnwireorleM, or atannpting to aflect
tbe puUic opinion as ta the ments or demerits
«f adminiBtmtaeo? Every pubiie statemeni
aaspeeiina pubiie aAira has that tendency.
Bat are the people to be interrupted en siMh
rmnds, in the eieicise of their just rights .
is of the esence of their right to cooapiain
* Fysba Pahner'a case % How. Mod. St«
Tr, 371.
of grievgucas, and therefore I appr«^nd yo«
must disregard entirely those general expre**
sions in the indictment, charging McLaren's
speech as tending to bring the Government
into contempt. The petitioners felt griev*'
ances ; — they prepared petitions, and it is im-
possible to state a puolic grievance without
throwing blame upon the Government. I do
not mean to examine the question, whether
there really was any blame attachable to
Government ; for it is the same thing in Ihia
case whetherthe petitioners were right or wrong
in their statement. My defence is, that they
were in the fair prosecution of legal views*
Suppose no words to have been uttered but
what would, in other circumstances, have bean
considered seditioust their having had a right
object in view is a good defence. But every
sort of obloquy has been thrown on the petiti-
oners, without any notice of the lawful object
they had in view, as if their oliject were to bn
laid entirely out of consideration.
The legality of the object, and the situatiott
in which the speeches were uttered, are die
most important eireumstances of the case.
Every thang else is of a trivial and subordinate
nature. But let us see what the panel ia
alleged to have sai4. No positive evidenee
has been adduced to prove any part of bia
speech, eacept a few words at the end of tlier
passage quoted in the indictment, and, so for
as I have observed, you have onlv the uncer*
tain evidence of one person to tnese words#
I shidl remark upon the words in the indiel«
ment.
" That our sufferings are insnpDortp.ble» ie
demonstrated to the world.** I ao not any
whether their sufferings were insupportable or
not ; but th^ appear to have been severe, and
the people were met for the purpose of com*
ridering them, and to join in petitioning for
relief. Here I presume is no sedition.
'* And that they are neither te&^Mrary, nor
oecasibned by transition fix>m war to peace, ia
palpable to all| though all have not the coumga
to avow it.'' I dd iK>t say that proposition ia
palnable to every body. Some are dispeeed
to uiidL that the cahunity has been occasioned
in eonsecpMnce of the sudden transition flnoaa
war to peace, and some dispute that propo*
sition. Some are of opinion, that if we had
continued the wgr, at an expense of a hundred
millions a year, we should have infollibly so*
cured the national prosperity and greatnem*.
I shall not attempt to settle these points, nor
is that neeaaiafy to the present argument^ and
I beg leMFC to protest against the idea Aat 1
give any opinion ufM>n them at all. Periwpo
Mr. McLaren tnay include me in his oensnrti
for my wnnt of courage in not avowing mijp
opinion.
'' The fSaet is we are ruled by men only a<>*
lioitous for their own aggrandisement; and
they care no further for the great body of the
people, than they are subservient to their ow«
accursed purposes. If you are convinced of
this, my countrymen, I would therefore pu)
«Il
and Thomas Bairdjbr SedUion.
A, D. 1817.
[83
Ike qifestioii, «re jmi degeaerato enough to
bear it ? Shall W€^ whose forefathers aet limits
to the all grasping power of Rome ; shall we^
iFiiyMe fore&lheiaj at the never-to-be-forgotten
field of fiaaiKwkhurD^ told the mtghty EdWard,
at the bead of the most mighty army ever trod
•n Britain's soil, '* Hitherto shalt thou come»
and no further f shaU we, I say, whose fore-
^thtis defied the efforts of foreign tyranny to
eoslave our beloved country, meanly permit, in
CHir day* without a murmur, a base Oligarchy
to feed their filthy Termin on our vitals^ and
rale as as tliby will ? No, my countrymen."
A oommentary was made on this passage
though it is not proved that the panel ever
spoke it. The prosecutor takes it for granted,
without evidence, that the words were spoken.
I am, therefore, not under the necessity of de*
fending these words. But are they in reality
so culpable ? Axe they seditious ? They are
mere words of course, in expressing those pub-
lic • grievances to which they refer. Every
child knows that they are the common and
hackneyed terms used by petitioners for public
reform^ and (excepting one or two allusions^ in
which there is evidently no sedition), if they
are. not tame and feeble, they are at least neither
seditious nor inflammatory. Every word ap-
plies to the professed object of the meeting in
petitioning, and to no other object. The pro-
secutor applies some of the words to the kmg,
but this is a misconstruction quite unworthy of
my lord advocate. Ministers, and the pos-
sessors of borough interest, are the vile Oli-
garchy, who are said to feed their filthy vermin
OQ our vitals, and rule us as they will, and this
attack was justifiable in the way it was made.
What would avail the right of petitioning, if
there was no right to petition against his majesty's
ministers and their partisans ? Ministers may
be impeached in parliament for their public con^
duct, and they may be complainea of by the
people in their petitions. Are petitions to par-
mment against ministers to be punished ^
sedition ? What have we here ? The opinion
of the panel Chat the jninisters have not acted
in an honest way, or as ministers ought to do.
The opinion is expressed a little strongly, but
it does not go beyond legal bounds. The pe-
tition was afterwards laid before parliament,
and was received with respect. Now the ques-
tion before yon is not, whether the ministers
are culpable or not — not whether lord Castle-
xeagh or Mr. Vansittart might bring an actioo
lor a libel or defamation— >but whether there is
any sedition - in this speech. I ask you,
imtber there is any sedition ip complaining
of these ministers? Sedition is an attack on
the sovereign of the state— an attack on the
government, not on the ministers of the go-
▼emment. You may attack the latter in any
way, without being guilty of sedition.
jBot frrther, as to the passage about the
Ofigaichy. It is generally understood that a
lew penonsy not .exceeding 300, are possessed
of an influence in the House of Commons that
It very pernicious to the state. This is the
voL xxxni.
Oligarchy, the government of a fhw by uneon-
stitutional Influence, alluded to in the paner^
speech. Is it sedition to take notice,, even by '
allusion, of such a public grievance ? Is this
sedition? Against whom is it sedipon?
against tlfte King? against the Lords? against
the Commons ? agaiast any branch of the legist
latore, or against the legislature taken as a
whole? Jt is sedition against no person or
legal authority whatever. It is, indeed,
directed against the Oligarchy itself, which,
in the opinion of the petitioners, is the
worst enemy of the King, Lords and
Commons. The King, Lords and Commops
ought to be independent ; and, if an uncon-
stitutional infloenoe rules over them, is it se-
dition to complain of that influence P Every
friend to the constitution will complain of it,
if he supposes it to exist. I apprehend there
is nothing in this part of the charge; and while
M'Laren denies having used these expressions
about our rulers, I say there is no sedition in
them. I would say so, even if the words had
been used where no petition to the legislature
was in contemplation* But, considering that
^e meeting was called for that purpose, *
nothing can be more unquestionable thaa that
such language was not seditious.
I come now to the last of the words quoted
in the indictment, and I hope to satisfy you
that there is nothing seditious to be found in
them. Allow me here to remind you of
McLaren's situation when he made (his speech.
It has been proved that the task of opening the
meeting was imposed on him, contrary to his
inclination, and came upon him rather unex-
pectedly. It was indeeo proposed to him eight
days before the meeting, but he was unwilling
to undertidce it, and immediately before the
meeting be pressed Mr. Samson to take the
business off hb hands. An hour before the
meeting Mr. McLaren was again urged to open
the business; and being in some measure
compelled to it, he retired for a very short time,
and made some notes of his short address to
the meeting. You will see in tho whole pro-
ceeding tlve most evident marks of haste. It
is not proved that the last sentence was written
in his notes. On the contrary, it was not
written. He was placed on what is called the
hustings, and delivered his speech during a
storm of wind, rain and hail ; from the noise
of which, and particularly from the rattling of
the hail on umbrellas, it was almost impossible
to hear what he said. Besides the words con*
taioed in his notes, part of which he spoke, and
part of which he omitted, he spoke other words
which. were not in his notes.. What these
words were is uncertaiD,«as they could not be
perfectly heard. A single witness told you be
heaid and recollected them, though he could
not reoollect any other words of the paners
speech. There is no great reason to rely
on the recollection of tiae witness, though
there is much reason to presume that the
words had not the meaning given to them
by the public prosecutor. The words in
G
1071
«7 GGOltGfi til.
Trial^Attmmdtr M'Lartn
(10*
•rdkr !• point out from reotat «nd domMit
aotboiity> how tlearly tbo doctrine of renstance
it tecogntsed among all who hai*e ttndied our
oonttttution, and h^w boldly it is held foithy
Ofan 4>y the official adviMvs of the crown, at
th^i ultimate resource which the eonslittttion
allbfdt when an extrema case shell aivive.
flow, no nror^ extreme oase can be soppooed^
than that of the prince setting himself m op-
yiosition to the voice of bis whole people, and
lifaat is the onl^ sense which cen be put on tiie
fMSsage here in craestion. Resistance is a la-
mentable and a dreadful remedy ; but h may
lie a- necessary one : and though we ought to
tsdce it for granted that the necessity will never
decur, we cannot allow its existence or its
#ficaey to be qaestioned. ]t is a tnie, bat
awful maxim, and not fit to be canvassed irre-
▼erendy in conversation, publie speeches, or
|pcA>Keations. But in d«0enoe of my client, I
ai^ that it is a tree maxim, ' and that there is
oeitber treason nor sedition in stating it, as is
dome in this pamphlet.
I shall notfifttigue you by going over all the
jfmssages whit^are cited in the indictment,1)«(t
BhaH only trouble yon with one or two, in order
to settle die sense and constraiftioo, and do-
e^rmine what was truly and really the scope
of the whole discussion on this occasion. You
were told that the qoestion lies here (and I
agree that it does), Whedier, upon the whole,
under ai pretense of petitioning, it appears
ther^ was a purpose ui die minds of these
«eople not to obtain redrem, but to excite se-
dition, tumult and confusion from one end of
tfhe kingdom to the other. That is the ques-
tsob truly and -substantially; and yuu are not
V> dwelt on detadied passages, without tahsng
tnto view idl others -of a hem ambijguotts de^-
•eriptiott : — ^you are to judge ofthetmportof the
whole.
' One of the dtations- in the Indictment is,
*That the House of Commons b not really
what it is called ; H is not a House of Com-
mons. At present we have no rspresentatives*"
Now this seems to me just such a way of stating
the thing, as when a person nys, This is no
bouse — this is no dinner — ^this is no speech,
meaning it is not what it ought to be. The
mode of expressing the opinion is^somewhat
strong, but mat is its roeanrag. It is said in
the pamphlet, ^And*a House of Commons,
but the latter is corrupted ; it is decayed and
worn out ; it b not really vrhat it is called ;
it is not a' House of Commons." It is then
explained, '^ The House of Commons in its
original composition consisted only of Com-
mons chosen annually by the universal enffrage
of die people.** Ihete is the difference be-
tween what it is and what*theperson speaking
conceives It ought to ,be. when we wish to
say a thing is not what it ought to be, are
sometimes express our meaning by saying it
!s not at all ; and when a person means' td say
that the representation or the people is not
what it ought to be, he may naturally enough
express bis meaning by saying that (her£ is no
representation at 'all. Ihe statement of 4his
veiy opinion has ofien been given in this way,
and has never been challenged. But it is not
on my authority that I mi& you to take thia
explanation^ It Is given in express tanss'ife
the subsequent parts of die very speech froea
urhieh the expression is quoted. — ^The orator^
after some ferther disseitatiun, goea on to sty,
''Will any man, then, possessed of commun
sense, say that this is a House of Gommoaa
agreeabie to mtr CemtUuHony or that it is a FAfft
representation of the peopled AH this, vo«
will observe, is in the same speech, and it
must, by every rule of construbtioo, be taken
along with what went before to explain and
modify those more general expressions.— f^iWl
same explanation occurs in fife other passages
of the pamphlet^-and leave no room wbatevev
to doubt, that what the omton meant 'wmi
merely that the Hoase of Commm» was B«t
what they wanted, and was not ajakr md e^nal
representation of the people^ Is it sedition to
say so ! I for tme 'think ^e present lepwscai"
ation a very benefieial one; uid though It
might be made more agreeable to theory,!
should not expect great benefit from someeC
the change* which have been proposed. Btft
caA -it be cidled a &ir and equal repicsentatioti
of the people in any sense of the word?
There is nardly any person in Kilmarnock who
possesses a vote. — 1 do not say -there iaany
disadvantage attending the prmnt represent-
.ation, but other persons may thiidc difterentlr;
and sure I am tnere are plausible grouaids for
any one sayingp, he womd like to see the ffs*
presentation reduced- nearer to the theory of
the Constitution. Upon sjrstem and prrndpla
the representation ought to be altered in somo
parttcidars, though, upon tike whole, I do vec
expect the mtgbty erocts from any aiteiutioii
which some people do. The passage In que»->
don is a short, raetorical> pithy, foreiMu way
of expressing the speaker^s opinions ^t ha
obviously meahs- t&t the representation is
unequid, that it is not sufSeient, mid not
agreeable to the theory of 410* Constitution
That a man should be prosecuted -for eedition
for appealing upon such a point to the nutlNH
rrty or Parliament was never heard of before.
But it has been the ftte ^ the panels to be
accused of arraigaing the Conrtitotion, wtrile
contending, as they thought, for its restoration
to ptirity and vigour.
I now turn to flie definition of sedition in
onr laH^ books. To commit sedition, you
must, in direct tetms, or by unequivocal insfn^
nations, excite discontent and disturt^anoe
against the present state ahd cofnstiCuted atf^
thorities of the country. Mr. Hume, «4io ia
not supposed to have looked upon aedition
with* any extraordinaTy lenity, expresses him-
self thus: ^It reaches all dmse practices-,
whedier by deed, word, or writings or of
whiitsoever kind, which are Suited and im
tended to disturb tbe .tninguillity of th^
State;— for diapiirpose-bf pfodttcing piA>l§e
tioi^le or commotion^ and moving fait M n«
100]
ami Ikomi Sairdjbr S^dUion*
A. D. 1817.
1110
j«iy!ft iolfeoU to ifaft'diiiti** mHteac^ or
rabveni«i of tW«taliisht4 Oofenmeiii and
lanriy or iettled 6mh and order df duiigt/'
Ben MB^ bj iriMft.iiialiMoeB and cpumofdes
lio iBaMntrs «Dd caplaiot km defimlion.-*In
evoij oe% yott 'will olntrva^ W Jdikcs.it an
indispenttoie qoalifiaition that there thoidd
be "aaMe dlracr exhertatinB^to the people to
if f«. Hum. ie leAed tmoa as a great advo*
te the: cAwxi in 'hi* obeervatiOBa mi
Thu tiMB ut wUdi he vrole bii
mi thadavoft thiaiohgeet aie tiip^ieeed'
to taie.girea a btaa- 1» hii .'opinBnMv of .whiaii
he ftraa piehably iwiaieihie. There iaa pra*
g epiaioB at 4etea' to ihis effect, in the
.OM of -thb ■daad'eepaeiaHgry-^aQBfQBiidcd
io all paebeUilj^'tet cMnnly veey geocndfy'
(' Utty^ it, % ceaneoQ oaiaiea
faia-irealiee; aad oetlahd^r hia ar*<
laeanied aeluraeH
go; ' turn heok waa pufaliihed -leoeaaly
ei theieoantiy^ie^
*" r£»r 2SS:;
impul 'hia/opiBie»oD'theaohjec>j
Yei^ alriflifar 'ind. wgeroaely- aa* it iaa« he
thrtigii he ^edowp th> iawr^ it wiii he^eedt
ha gmipiqg!:aBd[i compKheaMve
doea-.net iaehide the..Ga« oCbthe
pMi%» bet. tint eeefT'-ooe efhia
otMbe.peefde^iectite tor lh«Bieelreieoaie< pert
of thet pearee liUeb beloegs to^ other ihanda.
Bet ia -the* pteaeat cae^ thaie are -oe waade
'idee, te here bcea aeteftaiaed
iM^aotteef the
jopen aa oedinatiny
pnrpeae. There are 'word%indned^
leeuediet the' idea^sf ae^
ilncthe.jpeachoofi Ma. JMid«
^jsaaeiew $»dgfimf kkead9%
mMMhon Mtfaflnae.verfti/tdrf^
IfamthJeipieniiieytathepett ^Jthanffioiaat
djnetnaiaphutriat ee.'aaa<hear ^ ii bcmMa:
Ibeoietor aeswen hiinaelfiths%(¥ItgiMrca
c ngAii Al %. aoB^Uiti ^fm^ t*e Mkig end
Mk JbaBBi ajT PMioeraT/iei^ h riffbt to be^
bend^eed febaned ^■tarwe^ieier. ' Let oe
thi»;dey "tabiMe the pririlegeidf oelr f^
rioasCooetitvtion^ i^ vt- kiy mtr peiiiium te>
.^reAe^atod aeeeit oii^ figbteat Men^end aa
firitoos;** If tera aflQr thing eqemleat' ia
aeditioB here.
I sight^pat the atafter abo to die test eC
wbet the pmionaM: did» Did thej oroaoise
eay sodhtwa te.eomepoed iirth? : Didahcv
afflitte thinlie»tadi thei Ufaited IhshiHBP
^h PhUfaai^deeiaie their ^^e^nirittaes pam
aieeet^.er jpmHde^iap ee^ waj^fbetbeirfetuw
ptnefts^ingBh-.tlB'-ahertP arfaet did 'tfief do^r
ThejKdidK: jest ullat. they ytofterad teido(,«**
thi]r pet^oDedPashaneet, and. having sent off
liouw quietly- to tlnn
Mo mrelBig.- hap ever
at RilAamedi sieoe the eTeeiiation waa nade
in Dean-Fbrh; aad if that ia the way in which
the people are to attaviala their diatresses, it ia
at least aa inaeeeet aameniag npacoiaa ai the
gin-shop. Bot we most go berk to our eeatar*
Ue prooteda» '* let oe^ tl^etelbraf (aseerery-eonp
stiiMtional aseans toi reeeaor oer ieat tightly
rights which oer ancestors ci^oyed aad eacr^
cised; let na.bt finsi asMi neaMmons iaifrnr
resolres, that we mU not hcdsMived of oer
pHvifegea any leeger, that we eiaiai. theei aa
oar bvtfarighty and hyowr qmUmid .ectttftHm
tkmol esedM^ shew oair enemies Umi we iUtt
ommckjf^ r^fffimmn, mid eiarpstiee^.and thai we
want nothing bet what is lor the gsneral good
of the ceeatfy/' Bet tbescv it baa bean se^
are pteteeces»' pot on to disguise the real
^okedness of their designs. 1 tbink yoe eae
iw.ne dengar. Gentlemen^ of belieriag thnh.
'Whaterer feutts these pdeple may have oooi»
tniHed^ 1 em eeeddent yon wiU not find them
gmkyefhypeorisy. My own oaeviefion is^
that they have apdcen nu>ra rselentlir than they
intended ; but I am- sure yen wtU give tha*
credit et least -for all the moderation they pro^
fees.
Thcie is a great deal more to be said on the
other parts of this pebhcation. Mr. Cmig
makes aa do^ucat oarengoe; There is a
great- deal of poetry in his steech. ** Being
then, my bretmreny impelled by B«tessity» let
us eppraach, displaying reesoa and resolutaeaa
like -men who know tWir duty tiul their ob^
Ject. Yea, witb these- and similar princinlea
ma^ we- nndauntedly ge forward^ and Hk*
tegitimala aens-come to-te years of mejority^
let as in the nacM of law end justice demand
the inestimehle end dearly pnrohased beqeeat
of our woithy progenitors^ "that we may enjoy
it oiMBeleps^ and transoHt- it te a landing poa^
terity^ And 30 aol, Aweiting the fiat of hiak
who»»agmdicd> hot the pcmona of asee» bvt
htmndnili^fte the cries of th4:pecr, and ^ndeth
the caniaef-4ba distiiesaad^ nlwaTa^mtingior
oor toeonmgemena Me $imem"0f Ms mpirtm
ee<» HtJdsiereeasded for our instmetienyWdelKir
ket ineuMt dtmmA pteteikd with the uiiust
judge, that althongh, witiieut any regard to hie
high obligations^ yet wae not totally destitnte
of that piftnciple which aDakea ell bttnan kind
qnake, when reminded of- neglected duty.
Mny we be actuated by the same oonrage te
eo aad do likewise." Here^ again^ tou see
how diatinody their iriews were limited to the
peeodhl iteratten of petitions.
The purpose of the Aesolutions, too, haa
been cntirmy misnndMetood. In the Mh it.ia
saidt ^ That the dibt; now amewiting Co nearly
l'jCNK>>milliDna^.ba*bedn^con(racted1mthe pro»>
seeetiod-of -onqust and-nnneceaaiky watVy^by h
odmspt admihistMieai^ enifeMUr ''supported
bymrlioeae .of ComaMdS) v4eah conjidt be
said$ < with' enyt^jnsiaeef) ft) tee './fair' eetf apni
ft^rCMntalismiof' ttte^icenhtifyt buV.irbiidi 4&t
themmet part' is' cdmpeted'of'^nHir pet In by
a berough fetatiuny who hihr^ruanrped'tbevights
of the ^ple^^endwho bymaiae
Ill] £7G£0R6&III.
Trial ofAlmmier M*tAr«n
inn
«otttrited to retttrn a majority of niemben of
that House/' Th^ fiicts here stated are trite
and stale, but the passage is worth noting, as
aUbrding, atfd that in the most anthoritative
and ofi/v deliberate part of the pnblicatton, the
most dear and complete eridence of what
Ibey meant when they used ezpresfions Titu-
perative of the present House ot Commons.
llie 9th Resolution is, ^ Being, therefore,
impr^sed with the tiwth of these Resolutions,
tiie meeting lesoHre to present petitions to his
Royal Highness the Ftince Regent, and to
botn Houses of Parliament, requesting his
Royal Highness in particnlar, to attemble Por-
luuneiU without delay; to call upon it imme-
diately to adopt such measures as may tend to
restore to the people their undoubted right in
the representation,— to order, in the name of
the people, an immediate reduction of the
taxes* ai\d the standing army, the abolition of
all unmerited pensions, sinecures, grants, and
other emoluments, as the surest way of esta-
blishing on a firm and lasting basis the rights
of the crown, and the privileges of the peo-
ple ; and that in all time coming, no person
who has an office, or place of pront unaer the
King, or reoeiines a pension from the Crown,
shall be capable or serving as a member of
the House of Commons. 12. Wm. III. c. 2."
It is quite plain from the context, that it is
ike whole Parliamenif and not the Prince, that
is called upon to order an immediate reduction
of the taxes, the standing army, and so forth ;
—so that the eloquent exposition of the lord
advocate upon this passage was founded upon
a manifest misconception of its meaning.
I have only to cidl your attention to the next
resolution, which clearly shows the scope and
extent of their views and threatenings, ^ And
the meeting hereby resolve to make known to
his Royal Highness the Prince Regent, and to
both Houses of Parliament, that thegf wiU not
ctate tending t^i <me fetOion efUr another ^ ami
ming every conttitutiomd meagare insured to
them by the laws of the country till they obtain
the restoration of their rights auul privileges as
men and as citizens of the stale." This is the
only practical resolution they came to ; and
even this was not acted upon, for it appears
that no other meetings have been, held, or pe-
titions transmitted fVom that time to this. In
the same way ' the meaning of the words,
** Shall we bear this,'' or similar terms, is,
throughout explained in the dearsst and most
precise way to lie, Shall we bear our sufferings
without complaint, vrithout munnuring, with-
out stating our g^evances by application to
the proper quarter? ** So far Irom ceasing to
complain,'' they say ** the damour of our cries
for ledms shall ne#er cease to ring in their
•ars^ till the abhorrent temple of oonruptiOB be
annihilated, and the banners of freedom vrave
from the heights of Dover to the mountains of
the Vorth." That is a lofty passage, and foil
of eloquence certainly. But in every one of
the speeches, in whidi it is anxiously stated,
not only that there are grievaaoes, but griev-
ances which could not be bonie, ^rhat do they
propose to do ? Do they propose to attadc
the throne? No; they merely say. We sdaU
apply, like the importttnate widow, and
reiterate our clamour till we waary you, or by
the force of our reasoning, prevail over ytmr
prdndices.
There was one part of my leanied friend ther
lord advocate's speech, of vrhich I am really-
unvrilUng to ssy exactly what I think, or ex-
press the feelings it excited. I mean the pas^^
sage regarding the army, .vrhen he spoke as if
there had be«i a disposition entertained by
some of those at the meeting to induce thr
army to rebel against the government. The
only libel I have heard to-day is the sup-
posing, for a moment, that such ah intention
could be entertained, and vrith any the
slightest hope of siibceBs. 7[he policy of keep-
ing up a standing army was long the subject
of discussion in parliament, and the dahger of
it to the constitution was much insisted on,
while, latteriy, such a danger has been lean
apprc4iended, and the great eonsideration m
questions regarding the army has been the ex-
pense which it necessarily imposes on the
country. But whatever opinion may be en*
tertained on this subject, there was no die-
ciission at this meeting on the expedioicy of
a standing army; and Sie passage in questtoa
is most manifestly intended merdy to meet
this common and almost obsolete Whig topicy
and to show that it was not from that quarter
that danger was to be apprehended. I say-
that this was obviously its meaning, if indeed
it is not rsither to be regarded as a piece of
mere dedamation upon a very popular and in-*
viting theme. Nobody at present thinks iU of
the army: on the contrary, it' is scarcely
possible to speak on any public subject, vritfch-
out taking an opportunity of saving something'
in the praiw ot the army; and .to endeavour
at a piece of eloquence in its favour ie tlie
ordinary style of writers of all descriptions.
The hope of seducing it from its duty and
allegiance, if it were not too wicked, is mr too-
absurd to be entertained even by the moat
desperate conspirators.
In another speech it is said, " It is higb
time, when they have robbed us of our money,,
deprived us of our friends, violated our rights^
and abused our privileges," — it is high time
for what ? to take up arms and overthrow the
government P no such matter— only ^ To db-
numd redreu far such treatment,*' The orator
then goes on, " But, methinks I h^ar theaa
say, we are determined to give no redress, we
have huddled ourselves intoplaces> pensione
and sinecures, and we are determined to hold
them. This I think is thdr language." Wdl,
wdl, what then? In ihis desperate case,
proceeds thia seditious orator, ^ We must seek
redress from another quarter ; we wmtt petiOom
hiirdyaihighnett the Prinu Rtjgent to remove
our grievances ! to give us a psriiament of our
annual choosing, yUndk will represent us tn a
form agreeable to our vrisbes^ and i^ceahlft
1191
(Uid Thomas Bairdjbr Sedition.
A. D. 1817.
[114
to the constitiitioo." Is it said that this is
hardly a coTer for professed rebellion? In
answer, here is another passage, ^* The unani-
mity of our sentiments and exertions^ agrtedbU
io tke constUtUion, will once more dispel the
dood which eclipses the resplendent and
animating rays of liberty, and will again make
her shine forth in this once happy country
with unimpeded effulgence.^ The last speech
ia the pamphlet ends thus : *' Permit me now
to conclude in the inimitable language of our
celebrated bard, and friend of liberty, Robert
Boms — May tyranny in the ruler, and licenti"
manea m the people, find in each of us here an
ioexorable foe.-'
There is another passage where allnsion is
made to re?erend hirelings, upon which the
lord advocate bestowed his eloquence as need-
lessly, and, I am sure, with as little effect as
on the passage about the army. In that quarter
of the country, a tendency to fanaticism
rather than to irreligion might be expected ;
as it was there that presbyterianism first struck
root : and in this very pamphlet you will find
passages similar to those employed by the
CoYenanters in the Tales of my Landlord.
"^ It is there you will see bow Egypt flourished
under the wise administration of Joseph;—
and what the heard-hearted and inquisitorial
Pbamioh did for the. sons of the Nile ; — it is
there you will see what Solomon did for
Israel ; — ^with what Jeroboam, Nebat's wicked
son, and odiers, brought upon the (now)
wandering sons of Jacob. It is there you will
see what Nebuchadnezzar, £vil-Merodach,
and fielshazzar, did for the now extinct Baby-
lonians ; — ^how Persia rose under Cyrus, and
sunk under the bloody Cambyses," &c. &c. I
am confident, indeed, that you cannot look
into any part of the publication, without
seeing great reverence for scripture/— « calm,
temperate reliance on the assistance of Provi-
dence in all good acts, — ^a reliance to be
founded on good moral conduct and prayer.
The term, ^ reverend hirelings," employed by
tliese rude orators, might be considered per-
haps as not undeserved by certain clergymen
who leave their proper duty for making pro-
selytes in politics ; and persons who do not
agree with them might say,- with any purpose
but an intention to bring discredit on religion,
that they had been hirelings • in certain parts
of their conduct. Nothing is more innocent.
The attack might perhaps have been made in
a more decorous manner, but surely there is
no pretence for saying here, that there is any
design to excite a spirit of irreligion.
I have now gone through the publication ;
and I leave it to you to determine on its na-
ture,--only reminding you that it is a funda-
inental rule of law, that a seditious intention
19 necessary to constitute sedition. You will
therefore consider, whether the object of these
people was merely to petition parliatnent, or
whether, under the false and assumed pre text
^ petitioning, their object was to excite sedi-
<MB aiBong the peonter*aBd to spread misohief
VOL. XXXlfl,
and disturbance ip the country* In judging of
this you will remember wliat you heard in
evidence as to Mr. Baird, of whom you werjg
told that he would be the last man to join ia
any treasonable or seditious enterprises, and
that he was accustomed at all times to check
the folly and infatuation of his neighbours.
I have already detained you, I am afraid,
unreasonably long, but I cannot leave the sub-
ject without taking some notice of the prece- ,
dents respecting trials and convictions for se-
dition which have taken place in this Court .
They are all of very recent date, having oc-
curred within the memory of most of us ; I
believe there was no trial for sedition earlier
than the year 1792. There are, indeed, some
ancient cases thinly scattered in the records of
the Court, but in all these the crime was ac-
companied with other offences, by which the
sedition was aggravated. There is no case of
mere sedition, earlier than the date I have
mentioned. That date must strike you at
once as affecting the character of all those pre-
cedents. For it is never to be forgotten, that .
they, one and all, took place at a time, when
the minds of Juries, and of Courts, and indeed
of all persons in the country, were in a state of
unprecedented alarm for the safety of the con-
stitution ; at a time when acts and expressions,
which undoubtedly would not have been taken
cognizance of, in happier and more serene
seasons, were considered as of the most danger-
ous tendency ;--at a time when this country
had recently engaged in an alarming war with
a powerful enemy, — a war, not arising from
disputes about territory or points of national
honour, but which, proceeding from enthu-
siasm and madness on the one hand, and un-
defined fear and resentment on the other,
arrayed every individual in both countries in
personal hostility against every other:—- a war,
indeed, proclaimed against all established go-
vernments, by a coyntry whose whole interior
exhibited a phasis of confusion and crime, and
breathed forth a pestilential air, which threaten-
ed to spread the contamination through all
the neignbouring regions. We fought not, as
in former wars, with men formidable only by
their numbers, their skill, or their courage, but
with men whom we imasined to be armed
with a deadly poison, and zealous to spread
contagion wherever they went. In tliese
times, not only was there a raging war with
that natjon, which was loudly threatening an
invasion of our. shores, — but it is impossible
to deny that there was an established centre
of rebellion at home, looking up to France as
the great redresser of wrongs, asking its assisV
ance to rear up every where, the cottage on
the ruins of the palace, and to carry into exe-
cution the most visionary and absurd plans
for the regeneration of society. Coidmunic»-
tions of a most dangerous nature were pasi^ing
between the two countries, and the crisis
seemed as imminent as any the world cve^r
saw. Such was the distressing condition of
this eountty^ tl|at it was impofsible to remit
m
rr53
57GEdRGBMlL
Ttiftl of Alexander M^Lnttn
CIM
for'an instant, tlie mo^t Watcbftil police over
the bonduct of the disaffected. And what was
kctually their cdndaqt in tJbat season of general
alarm P Why, they were found in innumerable
multitudes holding 'meetings thronghout the
whole land, — not going out one da^ under a
feelhsg of distress to petition the legisUture, —
but forming themselves into permanent dnd
affiliated societies, corresponding with one
another throughout the whole kingdom, and
Ivith societies abroad, and smitten to such &
degree with an ambition to imitate every thing
in France, as to adopt French names and ibrms
in their associations. In short, an organised
system of disaffection was formed^ calculated
to strengthen the hands of the enemy, and to
unite all the domestic desperadoes that could
Be mustered against our own established govern-
ment. Such wajs the condition of the country
wben the trials for sedition were first brought
on. In' the course of ten months, societies
had been established, not only in every con^
siderable town ip Great Britain, but in every
Kttle village, which, as branches of the ffenersu
society, appointed delegates to it. I tnink I
km not exaggerating the condition of the
oountry at that time, with a view to suggest,
nor do I give this as an apology for some of
the proceedings which then took place ; but I
state it as it really was, that you may know
the true character of those proceedings.
The first trial was that of Mr. Muir.^ It is
with pain I recollect that case. With all due
respect to the Court and the jury that tried it,
]E cannot think it a precedent to be commended.
1 cinnot but consider it as an occurrence to
be lamented — since unfortunately it cannot be
Ibrgotten. Tet, in that case there were many
circumstances of aggravation, of which there
is DO shadow to be found here. Mr. Mnit
was a member of the society of the Fiiends
of the People in Kirkintilloch and in Glas-
gow. He had gone to France, where he
Tematned till aft.er the war was declared, fie
came back to Ireland, and assisted at several
Wetings of the United Irishmen, and then
return^ to this country, when he was arrested
and brought to trial.^ Ilie charges against him
were relevant. He was accused of having
excited the jpeople <o disaffection to the king
and the established goTemment t he was ac-
cused of having industrioiuly circulated the
work entitled the Rights of Man, and other
publications of a pernicious and seditious de-
'tcriptioD. I am old enough to have attended
Ibe trial f I was not then at the bar, but I per-
fectly remember the leading features of the
case. I think the evidence was scanty ; but
still the charge was relevant ; and if the proof
bad been satisfactory he was guilty of sedition,
and therefore liable to punishment. At that
tim^ there was a combination which seemed
pregnant with danger to all existing establish-
ments,— a combination formed by societies all
over the country, who appointed deputies to a
• •.41ldw.MtHi.St.Tt, tiT.
gen'etttl meeting. The ciitmlattoii i>r ioM
works as Paine's Rights of Man Was at that
period likely to produce mncH evil. I believe,
however, that feelings Of compassidn 'for Mr.
Mnir were general. I hope they are perfect^
consistent with ntter detestation of sedhion:
I "believie isentiments of regret fdr the neCes^ty
which led to his .prosecution and conviction
were universal; and I say, Vrift all due snb^
mission to the law and the verdict of the Jnrv^
that very many loyal subjects thought there
was loom for a verdict of acquittal^— that the
bulk of the nation regarded the sentence as ikB^
ilecessarily severe.
The next case was that o? Fyshr Plilhier?*
Re was also connected with the Friends of
Freedom, and had circulated a political haaft^
bill in Dundee and in Edlnburgn add^ssed h>
jthe Idwest people. Hundreds and hnndred^
of 'these, addressed to all and sundry,^had beeti
by him committed to the winds of heilven ; and
surely to sow such doctrines broadcast in ^\$>
reckless way, without pretence of anv'speciiil
end, was criminal and punishable. 'Ine hdtid^
bill contained much inflammatory niatfer,'atiil
was proved to have been circulated by him.
ft was addressed' to alt and sundry, and at m
time when the minds of the people were ia' 1
dangerous state of irritation. No direct Te^
medy was proposed for any of the evils com-
plained of, ana the only obj6ctinvieW seemed
to be a dangerous usurpation of j^o^er. I"S^
there was real sedition in that c^e;^d thkt
it had no resemblance to the present, 'whiffy
there Was merely one meeting, and one set of
speeches, for the special Object of 'pl^&pafing {^
petition to parliament-^wiUi the {Trepanttion
of which the-whole business actually cidSed.
The next and the onlv other cases WcyeihttsD^
of the members of the British Coki^n^6o*^.
Skirying,t MargaTot,J Gerrald,§ and othet^^
and certainly the existence of that tfttradidi--
nary association gave a peculiar character ^to
the whole of these cases. That foi'midalAe
body, you may remember, was composed of %
set of persons acting as delegates from the re^
motest parte of Great Britain, and who hadFM
lawful cusiness in this place, -and no dtB^
visible purpose (han to excite disaMe^doii^^
who haa no such thing in view as petitionitijg
the legislature^ but who wished to organise a.
power independent of it, unknown *to 3ie con-
stitution, and incompatible with the existence
of its great institutions. They bad priv)Eite
meetings, and committees of emergehcy, isotoe
of which were only to act in the event bf a&
invasion by a hostile force. £ven taking th6
statement which . was made b^ those pe)rspns
in their 6wu defence, and looking to tiie'si&ai>
'tion of the times abivad ahd at home,* it i»
impossible to doubt that it was ne<^esstir^ to
put down the Convention, and to inflict ^ '
: \ f f
• 2 How. Mod. St.Tr. 237.
+ 2 How. Mod, St, Tr. 391.
t 2 How. Mod. St. Tr. 603.
\ 2 How* Mod. St. Tr. 8d3.
nn
and Tk9m<u Baird/or SedUUn.
A. D. 1S17.
jwhmQnt on SQch as Skirripe. I need |o no ;
mithier kd^Q 4«taib, bu( shaU loerelj mention
that tbeie ipia real, actual^ and palpable seji-
tipu u^ that case. Mj burpos^ ln,^lluding ^9
them, is to cbntnat them with the pr,esent
m^; ^ e^ in thosija tiiq^y and under all
j^^ deplppiblf ^itciunstajices ^liichl haye
ni^jpiKta, tkis c^fi voutd bare t>^en Tiewed
▼eiy did^i^tly fyom^ ti^e cases then tried.
The tpalof l^bert^n aqd Berry* tool^ place
jU a \^v^ tu more critjioal than th^ present.
Zlier wm tri^ for luinting and publishing a
bpok entitled Tfi6 Pojitiq^l Progress of Scpt-
Imj^, whldtif 9^X0 hurt^ tejidency, went far
l»^ond ik^ pauppblet now in question. $uc1^
fpa such t^e| were said to have been illegally
mposed, and the copstitutiop held out as ^
foere con:g)irac7 of the rich aghast tlt^e poor :
]r?t tne punisrument infllcte4 was thref mooter
ipamisoxunent to one ^f th^ip, an^ six moiitlif
to the otli^er. There lyere ^^orse cf|^es in 1793.
|n one, I pean t|i^t of Norton a^xd Anderspn,^
^t jm proved that persons who were pieinbers
at the society of tl^ Friends of the People
bad gone iRto the cs^f — insisted that several
ipf the ^oldieri should j[oin the society — and
giveuyaf a tqast, George the third ^n4 lastf
gnd aap)^a^ou to a)l crqwped heads ^ yet,
ifpan ^cl^ Verdict qfcpnyiction, nine months'
imprisonment, oi^Iy, ^aj in£icted« Twp qa^es
occi|rrie^ in 1802. In oue of them, under very
gfpss ciicumstaJDces, for the man y[as a soldier,
4i|d had said he was sorry the king was not
k|iot, and tha^ l^fi could sc^ his neart^s l>Iop4
|)fi^*^aybnet| th^ punishpient intficted was
<^ ino^t)^*s' itQpnsQppp^ot^ and banishineni
nim ^cojtUnd for two years. The fi^er ^M
^ c^ q( jpi^ J^firjey (I m sorry that should
batf^ Imn tiie naine^ who, for wishing de-
Hfractipi^ to ^ipg, que^n, and royal family,
^ffttef^ fhx^ jpontKs' imptisdQment.
' I liave gttoted these casef to show, that ^ven
il^'tifQ^ ffjien gfpa( rlgojir ^vas jfiecesaary,
fl^^f fipch wor^ than th^ present werf
^tmieptiy vieif ^ j j^^ ^ say^ considering that
we fiaod ppw iQ ▼ery difierent times, and
||ij^ ^ P^PJQ jf ^[ppainocV ha4 confessedly
no miction of holding ponventipnf composed
0f«e!e^(e^irofiiirariops quarters, or of pro-
Ip^ljpiiiig s^diiioii in apy w;^y, but were hungry
aiiimtf, Vho Qi^Iy m^t op one occasion to pe-
titioQ for something, they knew not what, which
th^ tho^pl^t ^ap)^ i^ord them relief, and
Bpver ^ar^9nred any purpose of exciti;ig or
fjmf m ^ebeUioo, but continued to prosecute
lAfsir yi^f^ by ^ onstUutioA^ pieans ; can you
itmic^^ that if the paoiie ^riot^s cases which
{'hay^ bpfD con^djeriug i]5ceived such sjigjit
m^ce, thii present case ^buld, eveji then,
iaf e been ^shongbt worthy of anv punishpaent
a 9^ pr th^ ^jiy iJ^e^^irtber shou)d p/p^ oe
j^m^ than ^^mg'.tfe ^2^^\s Ifoipe a jiftle
M«w^l?i*h^, ' 9fff Tj^'^T %^*fned,' to hp
jn<>fe cautib^ on jspy Ifilur^ occa^oin T
t ?low. ^. ^. tf, f.
L119
In urging this to you, I think I may refef
to an authority wlach cannot be either de-
spised or avoided — I mean the authority of
the wfaol/e kingdom, of the whole law, of the
whole Q^jesty and power of the king, ministers,
judges, and legislature 6(^ England— of that
country which has had the longest experience
of freedom, and has learned most thorough])^
by that happy experience now little real dange^
there is in the aisconteiits, or even the occa«
liohal violence of a free people. There, it
would appear, (hey are not so easily alarmeq
—not so easily frightened at words, or so apt
to suppose that the constitution can be brougui
into hazai'd by a fi^w intemperate expressions.
I 4^0)^^ therefore, the example of England as
it stapos at this presept moment. Will anv
one say, that what passed at Kilmarnock win
bear any comparison,' fn point of indec^iig[
and indecorum, to what is notoriously passing
in England ^very hour, and under the imme-
diate observation of the judges and of parlia^
meot. The orations of Bunt — the publication!
of pobbett and oth^s— the meetings ip Spa^
(elds and Palace-yard, are all, up to tnis
hour, unchecked and unpunished — aod are
met only by ridicule and precaution. Ip the
Eovf 1 Kxcoange, at the doors of the l>ouses 0^
{)arliament, at the gates of the psdace, pub-
ications are opeply sold — ^oot 400 copies of
dull speeches, out hundreds of thousands of
^aily and weekly effusions, containing, every
one of the(p, mutter far wors^ than what is
found in'tljis publication. I am sure no 006
can look into them, without being satisfied
that they contain strong excitements to dis-
content, and (l^at their authors are fKontioually
^f^orking upon the feelings of the country ; yef
they are still holding forUk their doc^inef
without danger of interfereirce.'
See, then, what is the course, that all the wis-
dom in council, and policy of government, i^
that land of freedom have held? What is the
course they htfve pursued with regard to thct
portion of the people with whom originated
apy disorder that exists in the country, and the
people to whom indeed the disorders are stiu
connned ? Notwithis^nding ' the situation of
England for the last six months, this is (hejir^
and the only trial which the present aisturbed
state of the countiy has produced. Really, t
should not have expected to find the first trial
in this country/ They that are whole need not
a physician, 'fhere has been breaking of frames
in many counties in England for eighteeti
months ; and y^t his majesty's governmisnt have
a merciful reluctance, and ^re slow to call the
people to account even for those great excess^
while there is any reason to t^ink that they
tave been' pix)duced chiefly by tpeir misery.
^p^ If ith regard tp fiip pplijtical commotions ip
th,9 j(netrop6li^, they kno^ that a check to ihe
'jpint of freedom oughj' pof lo be giv^p
wit^<?yl ;ie;ces^ityiTr-jtTift the presp^ tuipults
tavp jyqt fgrj^^j^'qpjijnucli from wickedpess <Jf
^eart, a^ frpjp the 'p^essuVe of ipise,ry ;— an4
j^itj^ > ga^xpal ijolic^tuge, t^ey J^opjt watchftilly
ii9l
57 GEORGE III.
■'Trial ofAUxander McLaren
C120
and corapassionalely upon tlie people as if they ; gemm of their countrymen is so apt to hurry
.■were in the delirium of a fever ; — and they spare
them as deluded and mistaken only for a season.
That is the tone and temper in which the equal
justice of England is dealt, and sure I am it is
admirable, when compared with that which
would lay every newspaper open to prosecution^
and stifle the voice of freedom. Nothing but
extreme necessity and immediate danger can
justify the rearing up state prosecutions.. Ac-
cording to the example of England, we should
be slow to punish the people. In England,
much more has taken place to justify prosecu-
tions than has yet occurred in Scotland. Looking
at home where no riots, and no rebellion exist,
andwhere a great mass of misery has been more
quietly^and more soberly borne than in the sis-
terkingdom, ^e should not be rash or hasty to
stretch out the hand of vengeance against those
^ whose case calls rather for compassion than pu-
nishment. Believe roe, gentlemen, it will be
no honour, and no glory to us, to set the exam-
ple of severity on such an occasion ; nor will
It redound in any way to the credit of our law
or our juries,'that we were more sharp-sighted
and jealous than our neighbours in weighing
ihe rash words of our fellow citizens, at a time
when they were suffering the extremity of dis-
tress.' At such a season, expressions t&i// be
.used which it is impossible to justify; and
offences will be' committed, which will again
disappear in seasons of prosperity. A vigilant
police, in such a case, is all that is wanted.
Absurd and impr6per expressions at meetings
for petitioning parliament hardly deserve no-
tice ; and a facility of obtaining convictions for
government on trials for such offences is uni-
rersally recognised as a mark of public servi-
lity and degradation. It is always most easy
for the worst governments to obtain such con-
victions,— and from the basest people. Affec-
tion to the constitution is planted substantially
in the hearts of the subjects of Great Britain ;
and it is only those governments which are
doubtiiil of their own popularity, that are given
to torture and catch at words, and to aggravate
slips of temper or of tongues into the crimes of
sedition and treason. If, on account of some
rash or careless expression at public meetings,
people are to be punished as guilty of sedition,
there is an end to all freedom in examining the
measures of government. The public expecta-
tion is alive to the result of tne first of these
trials; and I say it will be no honour, and no
glory to you, in such a case, to set the first ex-
'umple of finding a verdict which would subject
ihem,— especially when they find that far worse
excesses are pardoned in England to the phleg-
matic English, — in whom they have far less a-
pology. * '
I have exhausted you and myelf, — but I have
one word more to say. This is a case above
all other cases fit for the decision of a jury,
— a case in which you can expect but little as-
sistance from the Court, and in which, I will
venture to say, you ought to receive no iroprea*
sionfrom that quarter, but judge and determine
for yourselves. The great use of a jury is, not
to determine questions of evidence, and to
weigh opposite probabilities in a complicated
proof. Its high and its main use is, to enter
into the feelings of the party accused, and
instead of entertaining the stern notions of
fixed and inflexible duty which must adhere to
the minds of judges who administer inflexible
law, to be moved by the particular circumstances
of every particular case — to be touched with
a nearer sense of human infirmities, and to
temper and soften the law itself in its applica-
tion to individuals. It is on this account alone,
I believe, tliat in foreign lands the privilege
of jury-trial as existing in this country is regar-
ded as so valuable. And certainly its vuue
has always been held chiefly apparent in trials
for alleged political offences, — with regard to
which it is the presumption of the law itself^
that judges might be apt to identify themselves
with the crown, as they belong to the aristocra-
tical part of society, and to those great establish-
ments which appear to be peculiarly threatened
when sedition and public disturbance are ex-
cited. Whether there is any reason for this
distrust is not now the question; and in this
Court I am perfectly assured that we have no
reason whatever, to doubt the impartiality of
the Bench. But it is not to them that the coun-
try looks, — that all Britons, and all Foreigners
look, in questions with the crown, when as head
of the state, it demands punishment on any of
its subjects for allecced want of obedience. — In
all such cases, the friends of liberty and justice
look with pride and with confidence to the
right that a man has to be tried by hjs peers.
If this question, then, is left to you, and to
you only, I am sure you will not easily take it
for granted that the panels at the bar were
actuated by seditious motives; You will judge^
whether in the publication of this fooli^, in-
temperate and absurd book, there was an
intention to excite disorder and commotion in
the country, and that in this conduct my client
people to punishment in the circumstances of \ was blind to his own interest, and to the evil
these panels. Even if you think that the crime
is doubtful, I trust you will not be disposed
' lo lend yourselves to the over-zeal of his ma-
iesty's professional advisei*s in this part of the
kingdom. I say, I trustyou will not shew a
' disposition to follow, where the keen and jea-
lous eyes of persons in authority may spy out
matters of offence'; and that Scotsmen will not
be forward to construe into guilt those excesses
of speech into which they know that the/emif
consequences to his country. The essence of
the crime, I can never too often repeat, con-
sists in the intention; and in judging of this
you will take all the cii^umstances and eM the
acts of the parties into your view. In a sea-
son of great distress, one single meeting was
held for petitioning the Legislature, — a pur-
pose which redeems every thing that might
nave been amiss in their proceedings. No-
thing but a petition to Pariiament was, in fact.
121J
Stid fkomat Bairdfor Sedition.
A.D. mi.
tids
the result of the meetingj-^anil 400 copies
t>aly of these foolish speeches vere printed.
No steps were taken to promote disorder, but
the most entire tranquillity then and after-
'wards prevailed.
When I think of these things, I can have
BO doubt at all of the issue of this trial. Yon
cannot but perceive that the panels have not
been proved guilty of sedition ; for they have
oot been proved to have said or done any thing
wrickedly and felotuousfy, or for the purpote of
exciting tumult and disorder in the country.
Their general conduct and character render
such an imputation in the highest degree im«
-probable; and the particular facts Which have
been proved are so far from supporting it,
that, when taken all together, they are obviously
inconsistent with its truth.
SUVMING-UP.
Lord Justice C2erft.~Gentlemen of the Jury;
Although you have heard from the learned
Omnselwho has just now addressed you,
. with infinite ability, on the part of one of the
panels, that this is a case more fitted for the
-particular consideration and final decision of
a Jury than of the Court, and that here the
-Court has less concern, and less to do, than in
any other species of trial ; I am, much afraid
-that, in the view which I entertain of the duty
incumbent on me on this occasion, I shall be
under the indispensable necessity of still de-
-taining you for some portion of time, notwith-
standing the fatiguing duty you have had to
' perform.
In consequencerof the alteration of the' law
' relative to proceedings in this Court, it is no
longer neeessary to take down the evidence in
* writing,* but it is still the duly of the pre-
siding' Judge to sum up that evidence to the
Jury who are to decide upon it; and notwith-
' standing what the learned gentleman said,
'(and' I 'am not disposed to find fault with his
remark), I shall state for your consideration,
the nature of the charge and the evidence ex-
hibited against the prisoners at the bar. But
even if I were not enjoined by the pbsitivc
authority of statute to do so, I should not
* have hesitated, in such a case as the present,
to state to you my view of the evidence and
of 'the law applicable to it. It is your pro-
vincej, indeed, to judge of the whole of the
case; but sitting here as a guardian of the
rights and privileges of the people, and bound
as I am to administer the law according to
the best of my judgment, I have to state to
you, clearly and distinctly, my view of the.
law of this case, and then to leave it to you to
do your duty, as I shall now endeavour to do
nrae.
The Indictment exhibited against the pri-
soners at' the bar, contains in the major pro-
position, a general chairge of sedition, and in
the minor you have the narrative of the fietcty
• Vide Stat. 23 Geo. III. c. 45, made per-
petual by Stat. 27 Geo. III. c. 18.
I in reference to whic% the public prosecutor
subsumes, that they are both, or one or other
of them, guilty of the crime of seditidn, actors
or actor, or art and part.
You will have observed, that the evidence
which has been laid before you is of a
different nature as it affects the different
prisoners. One of them is charged with
having delivered, at a meeting held in the
neighbourhood of the town of Kilmamock«
a speech, which the public prosecutor states to
have been of a seditious nature, containing
a number of inflammatory remarks and asseiv-
tions, calculated to degrade and bring into
contempt the Government and Legislature,
and to withdraw therefrom the confidence and
affections of the people, and fill the realm
with trouble and dissention; the manuscript
of which speech he is charged with having
afterwards delivered to a printer, for the pur-
pose of its being printed. And with regard
to the other prisoner, it is stated, that he pre-
pared for the press an account of the proceed*
mgs at the meeting, which account containt
the speech above referred to, and others also
alleged to be of a seditious and inflammatory
nature, and that he assisted afterwards in its
circulation, by exposing and actually selling it
in his own shop.
It will be necessary for you first to consider
what is the evidence of the facts as it applies
to both and each of these prisoners. After*
calling your attention to the facts, I shall make
some observations on the law of the case;
and I shall then desire vou, upob these facts
and that law, to consider whether there is
ground for the conclusion of the public pro-
secutor.
It ma^ save you trouble, to state to you at
the beginning the definition of the crime of
sedition, as given to us by an authority, which
is one of the most respectable with regard to
the law, 'that can exist in any country what*
ever. I do not know that there is any founda-
tion, in point of fact, for the supposition which
was mentioned, that the author I allude to
had ever been suspected of having any par-
ticular bias in giving a view of this depart-
ment of the law. I never before heard that
such a notion existed in the minds of the peo-
ple. Bnt sure 1 am, if they who read his
book look to the authorities and decisions to
whicli he refers, they will be most decidedly
of opinion, that he has expounded the law ia
the most clear, able, and satisfactory manner.
Mr. Hume, the author to whom I allude, gives
this general description of the crime of sedi-
tion*:' ** I had formerly^ in drawing the line
between sedition and leasing-making, a proper
occasion to explain the general notion of uiis
offence, and I shall not now attempt any fnr^
ther to describe it (being of so various and
comprehensive a nature), than by saying that
it reaches all those practices, whether by deed,
word, or writing, or of whatsoever kind, which
•9^
• Vol. ii. p. 484.
193] ^ GiORQE HI.
TrSfitqf4hevi4er M'^tarm
ClH
ve suited vdA ioteo^eA: to dwtiiri) die tra^r , eottposHiaD is, ipeseralljrff that it is of an iof
•iiiltity of (h« sjtaCs, for tlie paFpo9« of pro*
jttoing: piilHie Uooble or oommotipq, aad
moTiDg his Majesty's sitbje«|0 to tfa^ 4i<liK9b
i«Mitan«Q» Of subvanioft of tibte ealabUshed
goaaniiaent and Uws^ of sattlod temo and
flfdorof tW0gi,
>^U»dot ^s deseripdoift woald fall a woilf:
^mcb a« it haft boon i^esarvod finr tba ifiicked*
nass. of tha fireseot age to produae)* whicb
finQM. teatoli tJbai all aftonaro^y and hereditary
iiiilk» or all dancal dig)ailie« and astablisl^
flMBts of r^fioB) are an abuse aad mwrp-
ationi eootrary to reason and jnstieei and
VAftt to b^ aoyloQgef saifered or contintied.
Or» tbougb ilie pieoa abouW not set out upoa
ia bfoad a principle at tbis» if it argue (ia
ttOOMMMi vilb the manv oomposilions which
baiFo lately been pressed upon the world) that
1km po^er of the king is oTeiYrown, and
tn^il^ (d miff k$$ard, to be retrenched ; or that
iba CMUIK>ns are a more nominal and pre-
landed rapresentative of the people, whose
laws are entitled to no manner of regard; or
that the whole state is MX of corruption, and
tbai the people ought to take tba office of re-
imaiaf it upon ihentselyes. All axhortations
of this l|ind, whetbar any eommotiop follow on
them or not (for if any do fpUow, then it wiU
d^and on tbedegveOf fashion, and immediate
ooeaston of that dtsoirbanca. whether it is not
treason in those who partake of it), are un-
dottbtad acts of aeditioay beiag oaloulated and
employed for iba direct purpose of loosening
$b» hold whicb thaOovemman^ has of the opi?-
siions and alfesiioaa of thfi people, and Ibua
pveparing tbam for aeto of rasistftooo or
aggression.*'
. SoTeflal of the jostaooes wbi«h ba i^vep of
Ibii «nme vvwe alraady read to you, and I
*aed not repeat tbi&m. Bat J refer to anotbar
■assage further oa, in whish tha fmthor ooi^
knH and ilkiatftiat bis opinion. ^'Tbf lai^
aon ia aU these eases is the aaiae* The oriana
#f aadiiian, tbensfore, Has ia tba stirrifig of
anob hnvoiirs mt naturally tend to ohange apd
eaasmelios in iha stale. $o pear, indaed, is
Hia alUanoe betwaan sediiioa aad treason^ that
i£f instead of sowing the seed^ of a hostile dis-
position lia the GoTemiaent, or preparing e^
materials m in tkne may kindle into a A^me,
She offender abatt seek the aame object jpaore
faBSBgdwaely, by a direct end dtifioite exb^-
atian to aha fe»ple to rise at ibat particular
jeaaoo ^asid f oniyaActvre, as ad^ant^ao^s for
^Mwogtbairiends; this measure in like ipan-
«K, aa a oaosidtafeioa to hvf war> -seems tp
liatiaitiivf kH than mo aot for ^o«ipaBsiiig M^e
4eash of tiie ktiw, beiagadofidad and laa-
MM sftep ilolvaiidM the doing of <that fvbiph
^siinotrbe id^ne witbqnt tba plai9 d^oftor of
iba Soaaaetgn'a Mie^"**
Agftta^sn ftpeabing of a dialiaotitw Vrhioh
Jhaabtvdayibatti'gfauiead.-a^botaiieaa aeiM a«ji
Mid^edi&^a;' Mr. fiama eiipiiBSMS bimself Jin
tfwsewoidsl: ^i[ idl-lhat can be «ttddf -the
♦ Vol. ii, p. 4d4. t Ibid.^p. 4W.
jSammatory kind ; such as by the principles it
inculcates, and the obloquy it throws out oa
tbe mamagepi^ pf public ^airs, ^nds t|0 thf
infusion of jealousy and discontent among tb^
inultitude; but without - prgiceedi^g to any
petrosal of a plan, or set of active^ ope^on^
as grounded upon these p^ciples, and fit 19
be follow^ in the exis^ng state of thiosa;
this may with propriety be referi;ad to too
head o( verbal sedition. It was for a co^npOr
sitioa qf this, character that Robertson and
3erry* were convicted, as has been meatione^l
and William Stewartf was outlawed upon a
charge of the like nature, on the 11th March,
1793.*' So that you see it most distinctly
Stated, tbat words, if of an inflamqiatoqr nv
ture, though not followed by active operauoo^
will amount to verbal sedition.
1^ I shall content myself with reading to yon one
other passage, without offering a word of my
own upon the subject. Thijf passage refers to
the distinction between the crime of ^editiop
and that of leasing-making, which is still recog-
nised in our law, '' Bi^t sedition is a crime of
afar wider and more various de^cripiivn, aa
wqll as of adeepercbaraoter, which may aq^a^
ly ba oommitted in relation to any of ta^ oth^
powers, orders, or parts pf the public consti-
tution of the land, or to any class or division
of the society of its inhabitants, and withooA
the use of special calumnies or slanders against
the king, or any other individual ; as by the
forming of combinations, the taking of reso-
lutions, the circulation of doctrines and opiu*
tops, or, in general, the pursuit of any coarse
qfmetffwra and^vf^ioa^ such as dirfietbr tap4*
to r^stan^e of the legis^atvira or estfiblisbafl
govemmant, or to the aew-modeUiag fif tba
st^te. without the ai|tbority of lav* |fo inaee-
tiv^, therefore, bow violent soever, og^dnal
avooaicby ipraieral,— np abuse, the n^oft oat-
rageoos, of the Bri^b oonstitution^-r-iio pr^
ceediogs, though ever w^ plainly tenoiag to
abolish tNt vanerable sy8teD^ ^d set up a
pair form of government in its room, wonld
jOftify a charge of leasingrmaking, Becsuisf i
iboi^ all iovolving the state and office 0^ tbe
]pfi% «s part of the constitution, such pr^
jai[^ are ^veiled against the yho)e svstea,
^d are pot amoved out of special groove ^
tbe pria^ upon the throne, but spring frojpa a
d^p^ ^d more roalignai?it prii^ciple, as wa}l
jss empk^ pnore direct and afore extensive
speans ihifk that of mere scolder of tbe per^o^
and condyM^t of tjve king. Thu^ ^edition if ^
prppsr orine against the atate, and balds the
^a^pj^p aftar tr^asott, to which )^ fS p^y
9Ali^, s^ ivbich it an ofWn but ]^ ji
interval, precede. The other is a persca^l
J^fe^mt ^^ 'l^bfd injury o&ned \t> *tt]ie fiing
^4 ?9rhieh ^f laff i<msi<l«» W »? W^^
IPQ^serioitts Mrtt -tMm pijber ^jiyiesof V^
riiis, partly by .xpayon ^i ^be j"*^ r^ggg^ it t^
♦^JHow,bIod.St..Tf...79^ ' *
t.?.Il9W.J«p4.fit.'Sr,?i5-
1051
and Thomat Snirifor Sedition*
A.D. 1817.
MSB
to iliB't^ifife *^ triliqwllfy of Ui9 imA of
the state, ilie nodt vti^a^atp^mm in the Imvd ;
luid perthr hy reason of the poMible evil m-
floence of sach an example on the affections
ted di^[MMitions of his sahjeets."
HRfing tbnsexplainedy frdm what I oertainfy
ttketo be nndoaMed aQthority, what oonsti-
totes sedition, I have to stete to you what is
eqaa^' dear in point of law, and what it is of
essen&l importanee you sboaUl keep hi f iew,
and upon which iMth sides of the bar aie
agieed, — that it must be held as the landa-
mental fnle of your conduct in 4eeiditt|^ this
ease, thst^by the hew of ScoUatHl your duty is
not limited to a tonsidetation of the iaots
Inefelr, but Unt it is- your protince to take
info view the naOrre ef die sj^eecbes and wn-
tittgeomplBined of, as well as the hAi of poh-
lis&^^aUd I state to you in the words used
hy*a dj!ifhi|liished Jvkdge m-a former ease of
a&ilioB, though not etfadtly parallel to the
fMesenl, that it is not only yimr right and pri-
vilege, lUit Jfour unquestionable duty, to say
^Mietfier seditioa has biete committed or not.*
Hiving paved the iray 'to ttie cottsideration -of
tile qo^s&n before us, Weare first to consider
fvhat is the evidence irhieh fte prbseontor^itt
i^aced astoM'Lartmhaviagdehvcffedmspcaah
Itetainhi^ passai^ suchas these set forth in- the
MdEtaoent. You-vrill teooHBOt^tiiatyoa had
BMBght before yeu Mr. Andftw Finnte, k
iMhiess on the part of the 'Cr##n, blit who,
In reAMncetb «e whole of the transactions
indter ^saasW^iatidn, w«as MiBBetf, ^toweeitain
exteMy a pikty concerned. He was a menp>
1»er of the coiMnittee ttiat -prepared mttjltan for
the ttiBefingy^as himself pnteent-at' the • mfsofr-
fagy-atfd was-hfterwardsfselected^ij take a« lead
in the si£boeq«eDt pMeeedings. '¥ett'«ie se
judge eflfis ^^tidenGe,*^hkh he ^Kj^pcafod lo
give hi m-fiUr, open, ted 'Mndidmanaier. I
kee no «hfll6tion to^fhe wai|;ht of his etiteMe.
Iieaays,flifttheiswot«hle to iptek diMMRitly
is tolhe^w%ole of lil^fiiveii^epeeoh, bnt 4bait
to4he litter pen of it he did pay piiaieilir
Mtea^ioii. 'lie ii«m« (balhtf 'heardhhttdiAHer
lhese-^M>iiAs: «We>WiU ftr^^'^^^'let ns lay,
eurpetici0br^lfthe1hM:^f-lh#«hrMa, who»e
«ts tfor angttsrptinee, whoM<9enetous mme
irin ifi^lhse his ear to the eriesof-Ms people,
which he-is botmd to do by the eoliftimtioflal
iiws ef Iris eountiy ; and we are thereby boofid
to give him our allegiance : but if he shoidd be
so infotdated as to torn a deaf ear to the gene-
ral cries," or," voice of his people, to hell- with
eur attef^anGe." This is the whole of the
passage as -for as the 'witness reeolleots. It
was ^ the close of" the speech these words
ivere used. He stafe^, that the'Svoids^ ** And
we aie ihenhy boond to give him-eur aMegi-
aifeee ; bat if he should beeo infos«aied'«s to
turn a'deaf ear to the geneMd eries ^' ot ^voioe
V9 h^^jMOple^'^and not '^jSiifeMeo," »being
tt|i #oitis soi«««pieDyy melted in theiidieiment.
•*HM>>*«*^i>ip>
'^ See Lord Ahetvwmby's sanmimg^p in
«he ease of Fyshe Pahie^«a^e VoU 9. p. 31^7.
preeeded these words'' to ImU «dtb mr afl^
anoe." He is positive ^and was equally so
upon hb cross oaanrination) with legasd to
what be heard McLaren say. tie states^ that
the words," to hell wadi onr allegiance^'*
struck him as strong, and that thouffh be did
ix)t take any noees of them, he consMMred tlMan
so strong that he can swear to diem. Xon
will therefore coasider as far as this witneas
'goes, whether you have not a deposition. tQ>the
very words. It vriil be for vou to jndge
"whether the exact words cbaigta-An Iheindiai-
ioaent have been proved er not, or whether, te
essential parts of the passage ham boan
proved. When a very elase affiniSy is. ■»•
sCnictedy it is for lyou la coBsiisr-whatis.eiia
foir import.
Another vritnessvras eaUedon the pact ieff
the proseeulion, iwho, tbongb he.givBs ibat an
imperfodt aecovnt of the apaech in ganaral,
does swear to what is desersiag of attanliesi.
He remembers.partof the spea^ towaads .the
end, " to hell vnth," or " for. ailegsance." .Ha
said, the words, "if lie tamed < aideaf Mr-^ia
the voice of his people,'' wwefallewiBd bylhe
«spieesions I have just cited about aUegianee,
This as the evideace. of Meina, and you mall
consider wiMther it dees not coBrobonato. Urn
special aecmint srhich lir. Fassiieigises ctf
the. speech he bemd :M<La(en delivet. tfiiet
attempt waj made io examine .f Innie as e^
the eitnatioo where he stood, at the.
or whether -^se avas any jiosse or
ef hearing.
The question ^as-to theepaeeh avtuaUljKidi^
livesad doesnot seat here,.beaaB0e -yen will
•find it was admitted by M'Laaen haBisBlf,sta
his-deahiration bsfose the sheriff, that he dsA
give in a naaaseaipt contaamnghis speaeh Jia
the .oammittee to he.pcioled, aiid.rthBi the
prmtedaeconnt^^ iaiieas>ahontwhatahejda4d»>
naaaaadmi dmtabore oneaaiia,>;e insfH wil ia
said abaitt'the middieof ihe seaaMi:wage.ns.
to ai|egianoe,:whiah the derUwn»i:thmhs;he
dadsatdehseritDithe naoadsias. smamsaJ in
ihepahiication.*' Yea have, beeidas thiai^Mtlm
aeiiwsce . of '4aihar . fwitnasses. In paslieulaK,.
temsonswean,' that the apneahms raad^oecr
in *iiM4Bett's preenoa, and that Mr« Baacd^
•the other prisoner, made an aHeraftion onit:ui
penial; Ohat he inserted words,. makingrthe
speech. oonfotronble to the piinSed aceonnt lof
it hare before- us. So that this ehroamatanee
of the MS. having been prodnced, read over
-and levised, in .the presence of these men, and
en' alteration being made by Baird, withofSfc
any objection, as Samson swears, having been
made by M'Laren,. ahews that> M'Laren ap-
-proeed.ofohe akamtk>D,«rat least 4hat he did
'ttotoppose it; andthis, withiheothetwviiam:%
rgoeswto 'Shew 'what'-was^the tmejsMiitnie .of
ithe spaeeb/deisvemdjuponrthat eeaasiqn.
You have i to cempare . the - paimad f^mpoiA
•vittth^ tbaeeei jiHSOBlsimdiaard by EinniatwUch
eameiavit of^ihffLaren'ai- month. tU jmvu thiak
it your duty ta^ake the prinied etateBMiit as
the true account of what was said," But should
1*7]
£7 GEORGE IIL
Trial <}f AletaHder M'haten,
[138
he be 80 infatuated as to turn a dekf ear to
their just petition, he has forfeited that allegi-
ance; yes, my fellow townsmen, in such a
case, to— —with • their allegiance;" you y^ill
keep in viewj that McLaren gave in the
manuscript of his speech to be printed, and
vras present when Baird inserted these words ;
and you will decide for yourselves^ whether
there -is any doubt that he permitted that,
which he took no steps to prevent. But again
if you take into view the words as given by a
-respectable witness, and confirmed, to a cer-
tain extent, by another witness, and admitted
by the prisoner himself to Mr. Johnstone, yon
will consider whether there is any rational
ground, for. doubt. as to the import of the
passage of the speech which M'l^ren delivered
■aitng beieea sufficiently established.
Next, with regard to Mr. Baird, the case is
of a different description as to the .facts, for
lie is not alleged to nave made any speech 9X
all. The charge against him is, that he . was
one of those who printed and published a
statement of those proceedings, containing not
<iBly McLaren's, speech, but those of others
^fiiich are founded on as being of a seditious
and inflammatory nature.. It does appear in
«v^deDoe that Mr. Baird was at meetings of the
eonimittee, bodi before and after the public
meeting ; and when the decision was taken as
4» printing and publishing the proceedings he
was present. It has no doubt been proved,
<Mi ills part, that he was one of those whb did
oppose in the committee the printing of the
|iatsage in McLaren's speech, but that his
olgection was overruled ; and had Mr. Baird's
case rested here, and had the public prosecu-
tor endeavoured to implicate him in the pub-
lication, by his merely being present at the
public meeting, it would have been difficult
indeed to have persuaded any jury to have
found a verdict affainst him. But his conduct
was different ; for, after his objection had
been overruled, he superintended the publi-
cation ; .and it is folly proved* that he went
twice or three times to the printingK>ffice with
Mr. Andrew, who was employed in revising
the p'roof sheets, and that, upon one , of these
occasions he suggested the correction of i a
grammatical error. This evidence will pro-
bably be sufficient to satisfy you that Mr. Baird
did take a concern in the printing and pub-
lishing of what is complained of, even after he
stated objections to one passage. His con-
duct, therefore, at tliis penod, makes. him re-
sponsible, even if the evidence . stopt there ;
Imt has it not also appeared in evidence, that
Crawford holds him responsible for the payment
of the printer's account? and were not many co-
pies of the pamphlet sold at his shop ? Mr. Finnie
swore that Mr. Baird got some copies from.him,
and expressed surprise that the witness had
not got quit of all his copies. Mr. Baird is not
a bookseller, but a grocer, and disposed of. the
copies in hiflr shop ; one of which copies, it
has bean proVed was^ thef ^ bought by Htigh
Wilson. . . -w
. Having stated to you what appears to me to
be the. result of the eYidence in these particulars
as to the* facts of delivering and publishing the
speeches complained of in> this indictmentj
there still remains a much more important
question for your decision, which it is your
entire province to decide on, but with respect
to which, it b my duty to submit a few obser-*
vations to you. You have already had an op-
portunity of hearing, that on the face of this in-
dictment, as the matters are there disclosed
•and undertaken to be proved, the court con-
sidered the charge relevant, and fit to be sub-
mitted to a jury ; and now that, the evideoca
has been led, .and we have the whole circum-
stances investigated, I have no difficulty in
stating, that notwithstanding all that I have
listened. to in the very learned, able, and in-
genious criticisms, both on M'l^ren's speech
and on the passages, of the publication which
have been rounded on, I am still of opinion
that there is matter of a seditious description.
It wouljl be. most improper, however, on my
part to. hold out to you that I think this a case
of sedition of a most atrocious or aggravated
description. That would be an erroneous im-^
pression. I have to observe, also, that I am
far from thinking it proper, in the case you are
now trying, to refer to other cases which are
notpanUlelto it in the focts. . But in reference
to the prisoners at the bar, it does appear to
me, ana to the rest of the judges, to be clear,
that there is on .the face of the speech of
McLaren, and in the different passages which
have.been referred to, as well as in the context
of the publication, matter of a seditious nature.
How far that seditious matter has existence ia
point of fact, or is affected by the circumstances
in evidence, or the remarks made on it, you,
however are to decide. In judging of this,
you are called upon to look to the intentioQ
imputed to the parties ; and I concur with the
learned gentleman in thinking, that it is the
part of the public prosecutor to establish the
criminal tendency of this alleged seditious
publication. Criminal intention, or Uiat the
facts were committed wickedly and feloniously
as charged, constitutes the very essence of the
crime. You must be satisfied, that the pro-
ceeding was not only seditious in itself, but
that there was the criminal purpose in the
speeches and publication which is charged ia
the indictment. I do apprehend, that when a
jury, is called upon to decide upon tlie import
of a speech or of a publication, ,it is their
bounden duty to put upon that speech and
publication a fair and even a mild interpre-
tation. They are not called upon to stretch
matters, or to endeavour to find out a far-
fetched meaning in words. If words are of
4m. ambiguous nature, the mildest construction
of them, is to be adopted; but, on the other
^hand, reason, requires that a sound, plain, hpr
'nest meaning be. given to language. . It Is niot
disputed by the public prosecutor (for he him-
.self, in some me^ui^ followed such a course),
that it » Qe.osQ^ary to Ipok to the^ context,^ ami
H0I
mud fhMm Bmrdjbr SMOtn^
A. a. isir.
[1S»
BolV> laitt Mtf » ieBCenoa of t spenb 4it y«b-
liealion, bvi to give fiur play to the aconsed,
bf rofimijBg to what pioccdaf and 4o wfaal
IdHois. It ii yov Inmness 4o take Ihe.docii*
aeots into jour own handsy'and looking to the
wkfi^ coDtcst to draar the eftochifion iHiether
tlpeve is aeditioa er not.
It if laMy poiwiWe al ftis late bow to go
tiiroofb every erne of Aa passages whidi are
tended oA» Mid fiu less through the wbole
nohlieation ; Wt I beg leare to say, in re-
ivence fo the speech of M'lAien, that there do
sppear to ne a asost improper atyle end tone
inte^boleof ii. He refeit to tiansacUoas
si » wmj distaol period, of whioh no sober-
SSinrded n^n ironld wish to revire or obtwde
ft^ recoUestiae, as affording any nde of eon-
duet fisr the people of this country^ in reference
|o their piesootsiiyition. From th^ beginning
^f the speechy in vpbich complaints axe made
of the oppressions under which the country iM
iabo^iingy to the conclusion, in which reference
is nade to the Pdnce B«geat, there is a ce-
mr^ style of inflammatory dedamation. Nor
was this effusion unpremeditated, for notes of
fhe speech were inepared by .him at an earlier
or later penod oewire the meeting. Without
going into particulars, Im there is a lone and
tagwsge in this speech which are strongly in*
IbMnm^tCiy, and tending to eidte in the people
disconrgtf and disaffection agiinst 4ie gwexn*
pnau md legjMatnie. tX this it is, however,
Youjr iMtovittce to judge. I have no difficulty
91 saying that liie lai^guage appears .to me not
to be of a desenption whsch can be ssfionciled
10 the single oloect of petitioning.
The passage uppa woich the most ipipoetant
oomnsents. hiore teen made is thai with regard
to tho petition to Ihe Pkince Begent, end the
Mseqjaenos of his not Ustoning.to the just pe-^
titioiBs ol the people. The passage is in these
epofde : ^Lat us lay .our petitions at the foot
of the throne* where sits oor angust prince,
jvhoio gfaoions natooe snli incline his eir to
liaten tp die cries of bis j>eople, vfiuoh he is
iMomad to .do by the laws of the oountry : But,
ebooldhe besoinfatuatedastotom a deaf ear to
fbAr just petitiqp» he has fosf^ited their alio*
^ance. Yes, «j ieUow-townsmen, in ^uch a
case, to hell wijth.oor -aUegiance." Take the
cxpnessions as given either in the pahlication,
er as in ari^eace by 4he witnesses, and say
is yonr oplnicn as fo this part of the
A great deal of most able and ingenious
criticism lias been bestowed upon this passage,
fmd mA it :the oeoastol for the panel giappied
to abettttmoat, pcsceiving at of v^al iippoitaaoe
ee4»eia*eiestofhis€li«Dt. ' He jvas bordering
«pon wmf diiieafir gronnd, indeed, in ihe de-
mice fdach hsimainlaiiied. But, after all yen
fcsraie boad^on thesnlQeot, yon eie to oonsider,
^ihethtf, nQtorithstanding she forouiable »-
marira maile in jnlssia re ito ahe Priaee Eqpsnt,
wawifk 1. adapt doapyaar in Aei^wt partjofthe
wsafa ipqneetiwi,.the langua^m the fol-
bw^Mioe instifiablai^ u Mmpfxefoaence
to the fAtitioas of dhtf people at laige, or to the
petition of these particnlar pecsoas. Tbe-term^-
jnst petition, no doubt, is employed. Baft
who M to judge of the justice ot the petition 1
It would appear from all that passed that tho
petitioners tnemselves were the judges. Whalf
was said to be the alternative u this petition*
:#as refused ?—<" To hell with aUegiance," or '
** our allegiance.^ I aak of you, as sensible and
reasoaable men, whether this language does-
liot indicate that the Speaker had tomtd a
purpose of throwing off bis allegiance, in the
event contemplated of a rejection of the per
titions in question f He was to arnur himself
against fais sovereiga, not in the ludioroiie'
manner that Mr. JdFrey suggested, but in a
venr different and much more' serious manner;
and I boldly affirm, that if a single step had
been taken, by following up the language ibim-
employed by any overt act, it would not liaife
been sedition, but plain and palpsifaie treaao&
Whether the languafps thai was here usei^
which. It has been said, only ^presses a Tesy
delicate principle in the ceostitutional law cif
this country, was calculated to excite discon^
tent, disunion, and public disturbance, is Ihe
question for jFonr deeision. You vrill judge
whether the words were uttered ; ]rou will jpva
them fair pli^ in judging of their meaainff*;
and in the interpretation df them you will senr
io the other parts of the speech. Inthatvfay,
yoa will satefy your minds as to the grouads of
the canclosion you a&ay come to, and decide se
to the intention of the speaker, and ihe import
of the passage.
Yon will judae^ else, of the meaning of the
term ** Gti^mchyf" which oocuri in the^peecb,
and in different parts of this publication : yoa
will consider' whether it alluaes to any of the
brandies of the legislature, or must be limited
to the persons forming the actual administr»*
tioo. I coincide with the opinion which was
lifted at bymybrodier on my right-hand ^
partieularly vrhea I oonsider the way and
■lanner in vfhich 4he term is explained by
another speech founded on in the mdiotmenl.
^* We have these twenty-Ave yeats been oo»-
demned to incessant and unparalleled slavery
by a usurped Oligarbhy, who pretend to be oar
guardians and repvesenutives, while, in foot,
they are nothing nut our inflesible end detei^
mined enemies.'* I think it is impossible, by
any interpretation, to suppose that this has re-
ierenee to ministen. It obviously has ^eio-
rence to the House of Commons, one of the
branches of the legislature. When they com-
platn of the oppression under which the ooaa
tiy labours, Ib^ have reference to the Com^
moas House of' Parliament. I think the same
iatespretation is applicable to M'Laren^s
apeecb. You are to consider, then, whether
the House of Commons, as now constituted, is
meant to be designated by the ^ usuiped Oli-
aardiy, who pretend to be oar guardians and
Wpiesentatiyes, while in fact, they are nothing
-5--*
• Le^aestoar«id»p. W.
ISlJ ^7 GGORGlB in.
Trial qfAi$mm(ler M^LofW
CHS
but our ioflezibte and .determined enemies^"
nlid who have these twenty-five years con-
demned the country to incessant and unpa-
ralleled slavery; and you are to determine,
whether 9 by propagating such opinions in a
speech to an assemblage of 4000 persons, and
afterwards introducing them in a pamphlet
which was sold and circulated in the country,
the paneb were not guilty of sedition. 1
tubmit to you, that if there is any meaning in
words, this was degrading the House of Com*
motts^— casting on them the imputation of
having enslaved- the country for the twenty-
five preceding years, and attributing to them
all the misery which the coufttiy is represented
as suffering.
: There is another passage in the publication
to which I think it necessary to call your at-
tention. I mean that general statement which
.'which was made as to the proceedings which
iook place in the year 1793. You wiU find the
passage in page 2, of the indictment. *' But
let lis come nearer home. Look at the year
1703, when the debt amounted to two hundred
«nd eleven ipillions, and the annual taxation
io about eighteen millions ; when liberty began
4o rear her drooping head in the country;
when associations were framed from one end
.of the kingdom to another, composed of men
eminent for their talents and virtue, to assert
ibeir rights; when a neighbouring nation had
i'ust thrown off a yoke wluch had become into-
erable,.— what did the wise rulers of this
jcountry do? Why, tiiey declared war, not
only against the French nation, but also against
«he fiiends of liberty at home." It has been
;urgued, that the term, ** wise rulers," means
the ministers for the time, and that their con-
•duct may be discussed without blame. I con-
jcnr in the observation, that there is no sedition
in the oensure of administration merely as
iservants of the crown* But the passage clearly
applies, not only to the government of the day,
Imt to the mtem of govemment,^ — to the legis-
lature'itself How can that be doubted, when
.you observe the concluding words: "Why,
4hey declared war not only against the
French nation, but also against the friends
' of liberty at home.'* Look; also, at the context.
.The clear import of it is, that when the coun-
try was in the awful situation described by the
learned counsel, the government declared war
4kgainst the liberties of the country. What
4ook place at that time is matter of notoriety.
,New measures were then necessarily resorted
.10 for the salvation of this country against the
attacks of foreign and domestic foes. King,
.Lords and Commons, united for the purpose of
'Securing the liberties of the country, and their
measures are here manifestly represented under
these words: /* They de<;^red war not only
.against the French nation, but also against the
•friends of liberty at hpme.? You will say, in
^ point of fact, whether t]^e fainistry or Ui)9. whole
legislature .were referred to in this passage, and
whether to cirealate it was not to psopagate
^ sedition tbrau^ottt the Miatiyt .
- Th0re are other passages, faflio the ooiiBtda».
tion of which I cannot now enter. I shall
just refer to one which has been commented
on at great length. The passage is, *' And a
House of Commons; but the latter is cofw
rupted ; it is decayed and worn out ; it is not
really what it is called, — ^it is not a House of
Commons," &c. It is said that there has been
language used in parliament, and passages in
petitions presented to parliament, stronger and
more offensive in their nature, than thi«
founded on by the public prosecutor ; and thai
such petitions were received and hod upon the
table of the House of Commons. Passages
were read to you to prove this. Upon Uiis
part of the subject I must observe, that what
IS, or is not, tolerated by the Houses of Par-
liament, must be foreign to our present discus-
sion. They are the best judges of what is
a violation of their privileges ; but this much i
state to you, that if seditious language be used
out of doors by persons in preparing a petition
for parliament, even if that petition should
embody the seditious words themselves, it
cannot be pleaded against a charge of sedition
that the petition has been received by parlia-
ment. We are bound to judge of the language
employed by the .test of law aiyd common
sense, and by that test to determine wbetjier
it is seditious or not. It has ' been held, again
and again, to be no justification, in a charge
of sedition, that language even of a more
seditious tendency had been used in or out of
parliament without being followed by any
punishment — ^It is stated for these paneliB, that
stronger language has been used in«. other
anarters ; but the answer is, that is nothing to
le question under consideration. If the
language here be seditious, iV is no matter
whether such abuses have been passed over on
other occasions. If such petitions as thoee
referred to had been particularly brought under
the view of the House of Commons, I shouki
think they must have been rejected; and it
would, be matter of astonishment to roe, indeed,
if petitions couched in language far short of
what is now before us were received. • But in
the multiplicity'of petitions presented to that
House, some may pass without due attention.
Perlmps very objectionable petitions do lie
there. But if the public prosecutor proves in
this Court the utterance and publicatien of
seditious language, it is of no consequence
that petition^ containing such language have
even been received unchallenged by the House
of Commons.
There is a part of the defence, however,
deserving of your serious attention. It was
abl^ argued by Mr. Clerk, that the language
which is here complained of, havipg been used
in connection with the exercise of the legal
right of petitioning the lerislature, cannot be
considered as seditious. Uod forbid that any
thing should be said by me hostile to the right
of petitioning the 'House of Commons, the
House o£ Lords,. or the' Sovereign, if the peo-
ple are ceqiectfulin their language; for to
133]
mi 1%»fhm BtMJof MMte.
A. O. 1817.
1134
lUte grier^Boes, aad apply fbr ledrtft, is the
uodoobled aad miafieiiable rigbt of the salgects
of this realm. Bat I have no difficulty in
sayniff, that i^ under the pretence of petition*
ing^, laogiiage of a seditious nature oe used,
those using or publishing it must answer fbr
the conseauences. The sacredness of the
right which is to be canied into effect, will
not sanction the use of unlawful means in the
accomplishment of it; and those who come
forwara upon such occasions must abstain
fWmi inflammatory, seditious, or treasonable
expressions. It would be a gross abuse of
tite inviolable right of petitioning, if it afforded
an opp6rtunity for every kind of language
being uttered, however improper or reprehen-
sible. Such never can be the result of what
ii due to the sacred right of petitioning; and
therefore the learned gentleman admitted that
he did not cany his argument so &r as to say,
that a petition mav sanction anv thing of an
improper nature ; but he argued, that if you
be satisfied that die object was, to petition the
legislature, you will be disposed to make due
alfowance for the language which may be used
lb caning attention to grievances. To this
extent the observation is well founded. His
good sense must have made him perceive that
both the law and constitution would sink
under any other doctrine. That is the test to
which you are to bring the matter now under
your consideration. You are to look to' the
whole fttcts and whold publication ; and you
win judge whether, when the people assembled
to prepare this petition, there was or was not
a biameable excess in the language employed
by them, and whether this was not greatly
ag|;ravated by the proceedings of the meeting
"being embodied in a publication, and circu-
lated over the country. I have no wish,
sentlemen, to press this case further tiian the
mcts appear to warrant. It is your bounden
dntr to weigh all those expressions which are
ftirly admitted to be too strong, and even
jndeeent; and it ik* jour province to say,
wiiether these expressions do amount to sedi-
tion, have a tenaency to bring into contempt
tfie government and legislature, and to stir
«p the people to disaffection and reheHion.
I (certainly do most sincerely lament that
«ar attention has been caUed to tliis case.
This is the first trial for sedition that has
occurred for a considerable length of time;
aid 1 can assure the learned ffenttemen that I
had fondly flattered myself, that even at my
rime of hfe I should not have . again had
occasion to apply my mind to the study of this
part of the law. I hoped and trusted, tiiat
after the dear exposition of the law in 1793,
1794, and 1795, in the different prosecutions
wha^ were then found necessary, sanctioned
smd approved of by the unanimous voice of
Jfae .country, I should not have been obliged
tb consider cases of this description. But
no it is, tibat although the situation of this
oonntiyis so highlT prosperous and enviable
t^ben cMiq«r«d with the rest of Euiope, it is
in Britaita in 18t7 that we live eidtod on to
consider such, cases. An allusion was made
to the state of the country at the former period,
as accounting for, and justifying the prosecu*
rions which then took place, as well as their
result. But the learned counsel was afterwards
under a necessity of alluding, also, to what has
recently happened throughout the empire at
large. * Extraordinary and strong measures
have been adopted, and the enactment of neir
laws has been rendered necessary by the state of
the times. But you are not to be affected by
such considerations, and I would not even
have alluded to them had they not been al-
luded to by the counsel. You must lay aU
considerations of this kind out of yonr view {
and, considering this indictment as brought
by his majesty's advocate in the discharge of
his duty, you are to determine on the facts^
and say whether the panels are guilty or not
of sedition.
I resret extremely, in a different point of
view, that this should be the first case brought
before this Court, and from a county with
which I am connected by so many ties. It
apoears to me that both of the prisoners
haa been men of exemplary conduct and
ffood character. According to the evidence,
Sf'Laren's private character had been veiy
respectable. Nothing but what was right had
ever been observed in his conduct. He had
never demonstrated any thing like a disposition
to tumult or disturbance, but was a volunteer,
and had served as such with reputation. The
testimony to his seneral character well de-
serves your consideration, in judging of the
criminal intentions of the parties, and deciding
whether their purposes were seditious. With
regard to Mr. Baird, again, you will concur
with me in deeply lamenting the exhibition of
this charge against him, atandiuf; as he has
done in so fair a situation in society. Many
of the witnesses, even for the crown, have
given him a high diaracter. The inhabitants
of Kilmarnock had some time ago appointed
him one of their police commissioners, thus
showing their good opinion of him. It ap-
pears, Uiat he was a man of respectable moial
character, and, in the opinion or the witnesses,
attached to the eovernment and to the con-
stitution, though he had a strong opinion of
the propriety and^necessity of a reform in pai^
liament. It has been strongly affirmed for
him, that he never had any thing further in
contemplation upon this or any other occasion.
With regard to both the prisoners, they were
not known to have been ever connected with
any other political societies.
These are points important for your con-
sideration in judging of the essential question
which you are to determine as to the guilt of
the pristaers. If, upon a careful consideratibn
of the whole facts in tlie publication, and the
evidence which has been adduced, you shall
b6 of opinion that no sedition or seditious
intention has been proved against the prisoners,
you wiU find by your verdict .that th^ are Jiot
ld<i 57 GEORGE III.
guilty of the ehmge. If, Ob die otter faindy
YOU are of opinion that these ib seditious matter
in the speech and publication, and that the
^arge or criminal intention imputed to them
in the indictment has not been done away by
the general conduct of the prisoners, you will
not, I am confident, shrink from your duty,
but will find them guilty of the crime of sedi-
jdon libelled in the indictment. And, if you
Ihink that the scales hang doubtful, and that it
U difficult to say whether the prisoners were
guilty or not, the former good character and
conduct of these men are entitled to fuTouiable
consideration. I leaye the case in your hands,
being co'Ufident that you hare paid most par-
ticulaar attention to all that has passed, and
can bare no object in tiew but to return a
eonsdentiOtts verdict. Whatever you may do,
I trust your Yerdict will be satisfactoir to your
4wn minds, and equally. so to die public.
Wrmt qfJk/Mmim M^^mm
I
J^itU 7th, 1817.
Lord Jtutice Clerk. — Gentlemen of the jury^
who is your chancellor ?
Jwy, — ^Mr. M'Kinlay.
[Mr* M'Kinlay ga?e the verdict into court.J
Lord JvUiee derft. — Alexander McLaren
and Thomas Baird, attend to the verdict of
the juiy on your case.
* At EdMurgh, the 6th of April, IBiTyeart.
The above assize ha?ing inclosed, made
choice of the said Archibald Mackinlay
to be their chancellor, and of the said
John Baxter to be their clerk ; and haring
considered the criminal Indictment, raised
at the instance of his majesty's advocate
for his majesty's interest against Alex-
, ander McLaren and Thomas Baird, panels,
the interlocutor of relevancy pronounced
thereon by the Court, the evidence ad-
duced in proof of the indictment, and the
e?idence adduced in exculpation, they,
Sa plurality of voices, find Alexander
lAren guilty of the crimes libelled in
the indictment; and Thomas Baird, ail
in one voice find him guilty of the crimes
libelled in the indictment. But, in con-
sideration of their former good character,
unanimously recommend them both to
* die clemency of the Court. In witness
whereof, their Said chancellor and clerk
have subscribed these presents, consist-
ing of this and the preceding two pages,
' in their names and by their appointment,
place and date aforesaid.
(Signed) A. Mackivlay, chancellor.
J. Baxteb, clerk.
Juitke Gfar^— OendeiAenof the jury,
you are now disdiarged from the very fiitiguing
and painful dunr irhich you have hud to per-
form ; and I feel it incuBbent'on me to state
to you, that the verdict which yon have f^
tioMd^ it^ in iu geacnd nealt, such ai I was
10 expect vcni a iuiy,oi yuUrivspcciaoBii^^
after the unwearied attention you have be*
stowed upon the whole of the trial. I am
confident that this verdict, while it is satia*
fiictory to your own minds, will be of gceai
service to vour country ; and I have only to
add, that the recommendation with which jwi
have accompanied the verdict, and whiel^
under all the circumstanoes of the case, is ao
proper, .will aieet from the X3ourt with all tha
attention it deserves.
Lord A&focate, — It jonly tooains for me how
to crave the judgment of the Courf .
Lord Jmtke Gferi:.— Have the counsel
the prisoners any thing to say on this verdict f
Mr. Jeffrey. — In stating to your lordships
in one or two wOrds^ what has occurred to us
on the verdict, I hope I am not doing more
ihan my duty. It appears to us, that though
its general meaning is impossible to be mis-
taken, there is an inaccuracy in one point,
which is worthy of consideration. Botn the
prisoners fue charged with iedUion and wUk ne
other erimef and the verdict has found them
both guihy of the erima libelled, usi^g the
plural and not the singular number. There
may be many facts charged in the minor pro*
position of the indictment, but there is only
one crime charged in the major proposition ii^
this case ; and you are aware that the verdict
is an answer to the major, and not to the
minor proposition. Logical accuracv is alwaya
requirM on these occasions, and this, there-:
fore, is not a verdict on which the Court
should proceed to inflict punishment. There
is only one crime charged in the major propo^
sition, and the minor contains different acta
libelled on in proof of the crime stated in the.
major proposition, and yet the verdict finda
the panels guilty of the crimen libelled on. I
am now arguing to a court of law, and not to
a court of equity. The verdict, in finding the
S-isoners guiltv of the crknet libelled, has found,
em guilty of something not charged against
them.
There is another circumstance which it is.
my dtttv to mention, that this verdict appearal
to be dated on Sunday. I believe this ob-
jection has occurred in other cases, but haa.
never hitherto been seriously argued.
Lord Jmtice Clerk.-^Mr. Jeflfrey is only
dotiig his duty in stating any objections that
occurred to him. But I apprehend there is
nothing in the objections which have been
ofiered. The mere slip of a letter cannot be.
considered as a substantial objection in this'
case. Uttpo crimee had been charged indie
major nropoeition, and the ve'Mict had oaW
found die prisoners euilly of die enme libelled,
it might have been difficult to say which bf the
crimes was meant. But here thcfre can be no
doubt of the meaning of the verdicL
Lord E^rmnd.^1 temefnfanr in i fHii fli
Ayr, of fNW I«\f»ri9» o* a «M^ « j(MMM
Mtl
■■rf Tl IiimW flii'iU Jill fclBTiiii
A. D. in7«
Ciat
^*^4ia*^**^'^
^tsdiei WW Toidy as bwiM moottun^ wk toaat
thtt dK jMfir mw ihooli beiitSicted. LmA
Clerk Miller adcuiited the latt^ altera
aari hnpcaed an tMttnf puaishm^nt.
A riMflarawtnaitanre oeqmeA ai acpiesticHi
Mte« the Govt of Admixalty^ abcmt a wreok
.aii tta oaast ov OiluKy.
- la Aia cave Ihe word cfiniatis ikot iiBfpit>pcif *
§Mim k the general diaraet^ of the cliche;
tat thete are two apecieB 4if tedition UboUod^
.one tiie makiaif a lywoh, aaotlMBr the ^Uiih^
jagabook.
liOfd filnaaadr— I ooBcar in Ae observetioai
^wki^ yoar toiMap addreoied to the J^. I
Ibiak this joiy dOMrvea tiie thtuks of tite
Court ; and, wku is mora, tke Aanks of Ike
ipoanCiy. I think they deseire the thanks of
anofher ciaas of men^ of whom I know little
^t hj report — of those who are coaaidering
j^ow rax they msnr go in opposition to the con-
adintlon with safety to their lives.
It was said by ooansel, that the present was
hn from bein^ an aggravated speaes of sedi^
^on. _ I like it the better for that. It is more
4gTeea!Ue to my feelin^ps — to the feelings of
every jnry, and of every iudge— to have mere
moderate crimes to try^ man to be obliged to
•jofiict transportation, or death.
' f am the more impressed with a sense of the
jnerits of this verdict, that when in ffroping
4apf way about 11 o'clock a^ night, in ue dark
•treeta of this city, and leflectmg with myself
wbat verdict I iftkonld have given, had I been
m jnrfBian in this case, sncb was die ^fklti of
a bfaoe <Mf ekMfnenee, ibat I eanaei say wlielhe#
I wooild bate said yes ortto, if I had been at
fbsft t&ne bbfiged to give iSi efpAnlOiii whethef
^er not the jpfisbn^n were gtiilt)r« Ltfee iM
j«i7 1 diooldfairfe wished to h*ve betts inolosed
§tst oonsideraiion. But, lyrrtet beMin^ It^
jtty doMbt dteafypeariBd, and I came to lh«
eipmoa, that the reletraney sC the bidi^Mient
as deaf aM the fbcfs completely pNfred.
%mff wortl--HSvef7 kttef of this indiotmetit
18 now been ftu^ proved, fftie JeYy hh^'
fiwnd It iMived, thiit afltei^ siifeal^ite of the
B^ctel with d«e iespeet'(Wli«aeir s«Holilly m
atft I do'ndi know), they |049n toeftt^ '« BM
MMbld he be so inlhtaated m to tiM a tfcMf
iiar to tfaeir j«M pedtiMu h« \M IMriMd'AMir
allegiance; yes, my fellow-countljMte^ iri
.flMlbacasey Ift As0 kptf4 oii^ ettjj^dMee.*'
It is net the lime new to iii^tolfe ki(» iM
jCfMcnee $ thou|^, wave that OMttj^feM, I
Awdd be lAcahr thit MA «#y eij^hMm U
ntoved aoafayt the pMets. AMI it hai tiM
tmfpMsi, iieoftett o^kusm^ thni Oiei 8fibii|^
#lititnuiiafceei ee*ie otftHi tte^^HMide ^IR^
JOtitOtrndtf iHtnMte. Wftkt I 'afittde io f#,
llte4epOiitiiAibf finrv^ Who tetl th«% Wis
a ¥Me fM in Ihe OMnMM wkhf ^ilHM ^
fifiMlf tte «b6^)i8Safl^ ; ttiif tome eifecM^
tofit HiirijIfAflMs ilni «ra!< tffitililer mi II
■m le »rtiiii>t iM ffti^ iMt4M m^
MrtefsboaUHilbegvbM. Istet iiatrirH^
Aence that theee were tlsB wmds atiered m the
ridi f B«t tt is nnnecessaiy to gs ihsongll
endentoi It sppeaia to me^ thnt it wai
not the ainistars or the dnr, bnt the oonMta^
tiott tet Was attacked. Bnt I «m1 not gO
buo thetb All that Remains for as is» to eon**
sider tiie amonat of the punisknent to be il»
tteted eA the prisonen.
The milder the pnnislwnent enn be made, if
it be inch ai mey deter ethers from cotnmildng
the like crimes in time ooSding^ thht is thi
pnnishnient that will aaeet ssy wish and that
of yonr lordshipi. This eate is different tosi
those tried in 1703 and 1794. I looked inte
them last night. They are ektieintlty diftrent
from the pf^ent case. Ibere the pnaishmeut
twatded trm tfansport«ion« NoHe of yo«t
lotdshipscnn hoof opinion wo oan here gn
that lengthy and> eonsideiriag Ae reooea*
teendation of the jurjr, I think w^ shall ssdistr
•at own oooseieae^ and the Jnstlte of tbe easoi
by inilitting sit months' jniprisonriient o* iM
paAelft. At the same tm^ tiiey sheuM b6
obliged to ted secarity to ke«p ^e peaoO fo#
the period of tlnree yeais^ Mr. Bsird, n^
appears to be k man of opulence^ under thd
penalty of tO(R., and the other nnder that Of
401^^ wMcih I Aink is not vAieasiiinaMe.
lord 6dlMs.^^fiothof the apfortanatejnanels
at the bar stand accused of sedition. Of that
crime, after a long trial, conducted with inft<
nite ability on bou sides, the unhappy persona
hav6 been found guilty by a jurjr. Under
tibese circumstances, nothina remains for us
but to give effect to the verdict by indicting
sooh punishment as it appeaii to us thek cam
deserves. Taking atl the circumstances into
consideration, aiM among otheft the reoom^
mendation of the jury, t concur in opinion aa
to the punishment which has been proposed-^
that thoF should be impritoned lior six monthsg^
and find secntity lor good behaviour^
lord JHM(ja^.^In^onsideiingthejad^:aieii«
Whi«h &x6M vb pMaMmcOd on this occa^on^
we iMiitnrally look to ihe judgmeM which h«^
be<^ pronOttfteed in shnilar tMepi ahd peM^
didarly to fhose wbhft have beeti referred ttf
by lord dermand. For, in every br^cb or
judicial ptoeedtfre^ aiiil in nolhin^ fnorO than'
m pronouncing judgment op a verdict infetiteg*'
aai arbitraty pnnithxnelltft, it is desinble to be
gnfided m ptecedents. If this ease bad i^
iftmbled &e cas« of I^sbe Palnker,* to viAiicIt
it has been assimilated by counsel, I thonld
hayetH^it asniy orphiion that thepuniHh*^
lai^t itionid be the state fts in thitt casO. And
if, utiliippil)r ib^ this €«>ntttty, Mch eates of
mi ttid agisted tedition fHaB oome before
tm CtthM^'-'Htei^ Utfle to be distittgnlsftedl
ft^lh U^etMi-*^ wfll be my tq^inion, sM* *
ilifl tiolieid«Hct)6n Of Ifte biw, kdd Of the WMlW
d^m fttttej^Hyoi, thuttransp^hrttic^ ii^fie
pftyMr'ptiuilnttfeitf; Bttt X^kgree w tiMroplnoa
• S How. Mod;tk. IV. Mn
1991
57 6E0R0EUIL
THAtfAUs^Mer »Uhb
[1«0
which hat beeh 'eipMsMd^ tbitthSt Uaouit
very different from the others alladed to, end
that it has a nearer resemblanoe to that of Ro-
bertson and Berry,* than to any others whidi
ocenrred at that time ^ and I therefore thio|L
that iaporiaonment is the appropriate popish*
meat- in. this case, and that wludi is pointed
out by precedent. As to the duration of the
confinement, I am always averse to long im-
prisonment'; and considering the recommend-
ation of the jury, I concur in the limited time
proposed in this case.
Having said thus much, I must express my
hopes, that this verdict will put down the
crime of sedition at the present juncture in
this countiy. It was urged in defence of the
prisoners, that the. culpable expressions were
employed when the per^ns were met, in a
season of distress, to petition the Kins and
both Houses of Parliament. But surely the
right of petitioning may be exercised without
making the speeches and resolutions, at such
meetings^ vehicles for sedition and treason.
What was said in a former case as to the
liberty of the press and of speech, may be
applied to the right' of petitioning. As every
nan may print or may speak what he pleases,
so mi^ he use what language he thinks fit in
his petition, or in the speeches and resolutions
accompanying the petition: But under this
condition, that if in his petition, or in the
speeches and resolutions accompanying it, he
is guilty of treason, sedition or scandal, he
must be answerable for th^ consequences, just
as he would be^ai&s^erabl^ for those crimes if
committed by him in eiercising the liber^ of
the press, or the liberty of speech. Why
should it be otherwise P I cannot believe that
this necessary restraint on the right of peti«
tioning will be any obstruction' to the right
itself. If the real object of the petition be to
6btain its prt^er, why should it be couched in
offensive termd ? Is that the way to attain its
object? It is the very reverse. It is the way
to get it refused. * Such a course can be fol-
lowed only for the purpose of getting a refusal,
and at the same time spreading alarm through
the country* To checx such conduct, as the
verdict of tlie jury tends to do, instead of
iniuring the right of petitioning, is the method
of securing it, and rendering it truly valuable
to the oountnr.
I have read the whole of the pamphlet from
which extracts are made in tne indictment,
and I am sorry to sa^ I have formed a much
worse opinion of the intentions of all the par-
ties than I had by readipg the indictment, or
by any thing that passed Qn the trial. It may
iMve done little injury, fox the range of its
circulation was limited ; but let any intelligent
man consider what would have been the con-
sequences, if t^is pamphlet had passed un-
noticed, and if similar publications had been
circulated in every village and populous town
in the country. No man who reads this pam-
* 3 How. Mod. St Tr. 79.
phlet dm hesitate to say, thal'hi'tiidl a case
the country would have been filled vrith the
most combustible materials, and that a slight
spaik would have lighted up rebellion from
one end of the inland to the other.
I shall only add, that if the prisoners and
their associates will not learn wisdom from tiie
verdict, and the opinion of the Court, I trust
thejr vrill learn it from what was uttered by
their own counsel, with a force of eloquence
which, I trust, has made a lasting impressiokl
on them. Mr. Jeffrey told them that they
were treading on deUcate ground, that the
expressions they used were roost, improper,
inaecorous, and absurd, and that what they
said only l^trayed an ignotantse of the bubject
on whidi they spoke. I. trust they will re-
member this lesson, and that all others will
learn to profit by their exajnple.
JiOrd Beiton. — I am of the same opinioii
with the judges who have spoken regarding
this verdict, and I particularly agree with the
words which' have fallen fifom the last judce
who delivered his sentiments. I shall -only
fnrth^ observe, that while I concur most cor-
dially as to the punishment proposed to be
avrarded in this case, I have no doubt either
of the right or the duty of the Court to inflict
a higher punishment when required; and es-
pecially to award the punishment of trans-
pprtation in a case of aggravated sedition;
In the present case, the short period of im-
prisonment which has been suggested, is, I
think, sufficient, all circumstances being coi^
sidered.
Lord Jtatke Clerk. — I am extremely hapmr,
that, under the whole circumstances, of tnu
case, and particularly the recommendation
whidi has been given to your lordships by the
veiy respectable jury who had to try it, I am
eiud>led, in the discharge of my duty, to oon*>
cnr in the proposition now made as to the
punishment which ^should follow upon this
verdict. For I have, upon the most mature
reflection, and the most deliberate, consider-
ation I have been able to bestow upon the law
of the case, formed a clear and unalterable'
opinion, thiU, for cases of aggravated sedition,
such as those which have been aUoded to by
some of your lordships, the proper, the legi*
timate, the necessary punishment for this
Court to award, is, the highest short of a
capital one.
I take this opportunity, however, of stating
as I before did to the jury, that, notwithstand-
ing, the particular circumstances and aspects
of this case, it does not appear to be one of
that highly affgravated class. But I should be
guilty of a dereliction of my duty if I did
not take this opportunity of distinctly stating,,
that, though not one in the highest class of
sedition, the ofi)snce of which these prisoners-
have been convicted, upon evidence, dear,
satisfactory, and convincing, is a spledes of
sedition attended with drcumstances of oon-
8idend>le aggravation. . IallQde|injparticnlari>
1411
bnd t%omai Bnrd/or IMiikm.
A. D. 1617.
cua
to tlM» cMe of the fntener, Tfaoims Boirdi
For, though I did not think it neceAary or
proper in me to dwell on that circomstance in
niy obsenrations to the jury when I summed
up t6e evidence to them, I do now think it
mj duty to slate/ that the Situation in which
that gentleman stood, — ^tbe rank of life in
which he formerly moved, — the character he
poaiessed, — the influence he had, — and, above
ally the commission which he had lately held
aa an officer, do^ in relation to this offence,
and to the circumstances in which it was com-
mitted, render his case of greater aggravation
than that of the other prisoner.
* This gentleman, although moving in an
elevated sphere in the town of Kilmarnock,
and seleeted by its inhabitants to be a com-
missioner of p<riice, is proved, by incootro-
▼ertibie evidence, to have associated for days
witlrpetsons, some of them of the very lowest
laak (for McLaren is only an operative wea-
ver), temuBg a deliberate plan for the meeting
wlikh has bioaghtp him into his nnfortuaato
■itnatioo. I shmild have conceived Mr. Baird
waifid have much better dischifr^ his dotr
to his country, — would have shown a nracn
better attention to the general distress,
0br which I greattv fiBel,'biit trust it is now
ttt a. way to be alleviated), had he confined
liis exotions to contributing, acoording to his
means, for the mitigation of that distress,
instead of taking those active measures which
it is proved he did take, in preparing the
business, — ^in meetings, — ^in concocting the
measures of the day,— and, above' all, in
actually putting in the mouth of the automaton
who api)eared in that box, a speech, which,
when It is examined, will be found to contain
the most scandalous and seditious matter*
For the contents of that speech^ whether Burt
was the real or pretended author of it, Mr.
Baird rendered himself responsible. . I must
therefore say, that, considering Mr. Baird had
filled the honourable situation of Captain in a
volunteer corps, he had altogether forgotten
his duty in ever lending himself as a party to
any Buch proceedings, the guilt of which is
nov attadied to him by the verdict of the
1th regard to Alexander McLaren, I have
only to say, that he has been found guilty of
ddveHng ^a :speech : which answer^ for itself,
and I shall ada nothing more on the subject.
But there is one observation which, in my
former remarks, I omitted to state to the Jury,
and therefore now think it my duty to make,
Qpon the passage in the indictment taken
mn one ot the speeches, in reference to the
conduct of the clergy of Scotland. Your
lordships know well to what I allude. The
passage is^ ** Their Beveretai hirelings would
oonvince yon that you are suffering under the
visitation of the Almighty, apd thexefore ought
to be submissife imder tne chastening stroke."
I have asked myself thb question, after pay-
hig ererv attention to the ingenious and elo-
^oeat observatioxa piade ia order to give the
i
go-1(y W tUe pttssage; what-ebuid be the true
meaning: of those who were accessory to this
most seandalous libel on the clergy of Scot*
land. I have asked myself, whedier it was
meant to be applied to the E^blished Clergy,
who are thus oranded with being *' Reverend
Hirelings, who would convince the people that
they are suffering under the visitation of the
Almightv, and therefore ought t6 be submis-
sive under the chastening stroke.'' IsUiere
any thing in their character to warrant such
imputations against them ? Did not all those
who attended that meeting know, that there is
not one of the Established Clergy who ia not
eompletelv independent of the crown itself,
and that they hold their situations as securely
as any perBOns whatever do their property r
What is there then in the conduct and darac*
ter of the Established Clergy which could
render them liable to the shamefol imputation,
that, as hirelings, they'oould be guilty of
incidcating any particular doctrines? And
what is the founaation of this charge? It is,
that they are guilty of having endeavoured to
impress on their heareis, that the distress of
the country is to be viewed as the dispensatioii
of Providence. Is there any man, with the
slightest impression of religion on his mind,
who wiU deny, that the severity of a bad
season, the pressure of a bad harvelt, proceeds
from we will of Providence? ' Or was it
meant to be impressed on the deluded and
ignorant hearers at that meeting, that the
Government, or any portion of the people^
were responsible for the distress prevalent in
the country, which had been occasioned by a
bad harvest, that had doubled the price of the
necessaries of life } And yet because resign-
ation to the Divine Will had been recom-
mended by the Qergyi they are branded as
hirelings.
On the other hand, I have asked myself
whether this charge was meant to be imputed
to the respectable body of dissenting clergy-
men, who, almost without a solitary exception,
have shown themselves to be attached to the
best interests of Ae country, and have been
distinguidied for Uieir loyalty and steady
allegiance ? Is it this dass that was meant to
be so branded? If so, they have to tiiank
those of their flodLS who. could gite countenance
to- the publication of such sdtodal against
them* This passage appears. to me to desig-
nate the true character of the publication as
most objectionable and inflammatory. It was
intended to weaken the affections of the peo-
ple to the government and established constitu«
tion of the countrjr, while the character of the
ministers of relision was likewise to be de-
Ipraded. I ask, what would be the consequences
, if such ]^roceedings were unchecked ?
Notwithstanding this circumstance, however,
whidi it was my duty not to omit to notice, I
am happy, that in reference to the strong
testimony borne to their good characters in
timea patf^ bached by the recommendation of
the Jury, we are juimfied in the discharge of
149J «7 Q^QftQIi (II.
fruf ^4hmitF M*f<vw
IM
our liMirad 4ttlr4"'te OMMonncifla. jdbA flM
pImII be impri^^ned ^ f^ roi^iiftf withip jkhf
T«i|b#Qai pt the Caii«^«r«^ of ];4MNmh ((hia#
ipfkkii^ the pimialM^iit ^f kygnMP^^Anl id
(ihfkU 6^4 WMurity 0 |beep the pi^^fs^ for thirfif
Ittfwf «q4fer the p^^^r ^ SJOMJut.; dad Aat
^ijdpaiider M'l4ureo» 19 i«foen^ to his jof^
fnmfit%TWf§, ihaV «9ly 4ii4 ifcwrito |;i^ jUk^
Hipfi peruid undfir tf]# pcM^y of 40^
JU(99(ao4er WLui^n apd ThiMB^ Bs4rd<
p^r fi iag#t oMofyl 9*4 Mtt»n(ive ^ wdcucfLlpojil
pf Ae ««M^ ciicnwitanofn «if 4hft ^^ie tita^
fvw ^ihihitad wmst f qu, t mr of your
fOWItigr has foand b^h lod ewihiQf ^«l» the
to(Bf|B*q^^ gdiUypf ihf orwa of 8edjltioi^
9» ^Pktffc^ Ml th# iodfctpiaiNt. b ii^ I pwi
yipmni )iK»th'9f yw^ a fviinCal dufr for #a« If
Ijlippunpelo yoiib v> pafareiice ia tVJ# ^^eidial,
the tudgi^^ ^ch tho CoDijt ihM fou^^ ii
g^MfjWiy to inlaid against yw. { say, I do
il JvM» a iaof TO nag^ vi^m i pM^ m
Ifal lalPOilg MPtimooy iUw4 ^wai b^iff* lO r9«r
fpaw go9d ch^uEftctpai, I laiaopt thai yoia
M fcunaittad yomatnia Ao haouilM on tWa
wrfo^kaaiate day of M^a TKh lof De$ea»lbary tba
m#4oimt^,attd tt#<otheiir atoi"va»M to gUro
fprfalatifo toiirl^at a iiiiir has prfmowcad Aa
ba stditio^ { ^ tniat and L^ th«t tha
aaaul^ ^ t^l wms^cX, apd ^t Ahift .opin^ony yia^
^wm )ip9fd' pvoQouaoe^ Jby tha whaW Court,
paVtoro kf dnaoffaci^ipl^th of ypu; Aat it
prMl taaah y/o^i, thai ho^ay^ ^pa,iqaDtfy ippo*-
ceat four fwcydioga aow^ w^ .bee.a» th^
di4iaai|to uijcruaay Mid na^fht taye beafb if
the asaiaiple 1^ :heea^eiieii% foU9W€)d» pror
duaftiya of wAf^Ml to the iataraMa .of your
country. I trust also, the salutary chacfc |^an
0 ^aacaadinga of tips description, iirill have
an Mpfpitaol affect on the pwblio mind, by
ahofaiiig, that/mioted af tha >isht of patitiop is,
jmUtJIfBd as tha peofiW lOf l&a free eovwtnr
aia tip s(Ma thair tgnajvoicaa lU) government and
Ihvs dagislatM^ ^ i^> fwapt .ou(t vhat nay
^paar to Aem as rpmsdies, that ijght afforda
vpaoiiaan or.wolaotioa i/> tho«^ ^ho^ in ijba
pmoMcmiou ai t^atjagafal pbjeat» toe sight of
Ihak 4ui|[9 a«4 in> swt^y /of Aa oina /af
laditian.
WWla |bi a ut^iaaM of tWt oonfttif an ear
^ad iia atala their gijavaaoea to the I^^islatui^
^hey awai be canifu)^ that oaiUiar in the pr»*
^us proaeediii|p,4ha speeches and reaaluLioua*
«or ip the peutipu* Otemaelves, they inseit
natter vhicn is cleariy of a criaiaal naloiu,
^aditious in Us tendency, and likely to pvodaoa
Uistiog mischief to their ^pualiy* It inII taadi
thep, thai a)thoagfa emiflad W exeacisa Ihaf
righlt, t)tey miast not. In its vMefmdp be guil^
ofj^ Tiolatioii of law. I t^te^oia trust that
the reoik pf this trial will ha of importani
banA ^ yM^ in the aouma of ycnar latnn
liyes, and that this Court shaU sot, with negaai
tp j9ia ofptbais, hara aoop nmasio^ again to
$ini«Md?avtiou tha Clime ojF saditioa. lUli^
wifSP timat, >that coiuidaring ithp raaomBsandftr
tipuiaf Aha jury, and the knicpt pnwahmaad
whiah, uadar ab ^be ciraumat^mcAi, is about 4»
be awud^d agajinst you, jmi witt &mkf la^
>olva, ahi^ i^eu you agiMwi ratwa taaooatg^
in wluiifpu fonwarly aoT/ed in ^ iMpact^falo
fooy iMmiaill lie iinoeialy byslinyaar heaits^
md #maohiad u> the !^9 aatarasts of ynar
90iMitiy md the canstiaation ja^dea which you
haiia4ha ha^pinaia lia
^e Lord Justice Cleit and Lords Ctmr
missioners of Justiciary having cpnsidered-
l^e verdict above recorded^ in result ^ereot
decern and adjudge tke said Alez^mper Id^Lareji
and Thomas Baira to be carried ftom the bar
to tl^e Tolboodi 5>f Caaongate of Edtnbui^b^
therein to be detained for six mpntfaf from
diisdate, and thereafter unt^l ihey shall fin4
sufficient caution ^d s^yrety, acted in the
books of Adjournal^ tot 'their good bdiaviour
lor the space of three years from and i^er the
ezpiTalipn of the s^ period of imprisonineny
and t^ under the respective penalties foU
towing: viz. The s^d Thomas Baird under
the penalty of 200^ sterling, and the said
Alezandpr McLaren upder t)ie penalty of 401. f
and upon the lapse of the spiid period .of im»
prisonment, and finding caption as aibresaid,
grant warr^t to and oraain the magistrates of
Canongate and keepers of their l^lbooth t^
set fkt said .Thomas Baird .and Ale^^ai^er
M^uven ^ liberty.
(fSiSDtd)
D.B^i^][.P.IX
1451
Trid of miUam Edgar.
A. D. 1817.
C146
699. ProceediDgs in the Bigh Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh,
on two successive Indictments, raised by his Majesty's
Advocate, against William Edgar, for administering
unlawful Oaths, April 9th, May S6th : 57 Geobge III.
A. D. 1817.
COUBT OF JUSTICIARY-
Apml 9y 1817.
I
lit. Hon. DaM Boyle, Lord Justice Cierk.
. hold Bemand*
LordGiOa.
LoidJPata%.
Lord HaloR.
Cowuelfot the Croitn*
lEU. Hon. Akttmder Maemiockie, Lord Advo-
cate [afterwards a lord of Session and Jufiti-
daij, with the title of Lord Meadowbank.J
Jhma Wedderhmjif Esq. Solicitor-General.
H. Warratier, W. S. Ag^ent.
Camudfor William Egfgm-.
Mm, Oarkj Esq.
Geo. Crmrntotoif Esq.
Tko$» 2%0MMOii, Esq«
Jbnef Momcrieff Esq.
Frtmd$ Jeffrtjf^ Esq.
J. F. GrmU, Esq.
Hemy Coddmmf Esq«
J» A.MiBrrmf, Esq.
G. W. Boyd, W. 8. Agent.
William Edgar and John Keith w6re placed
«t die bar.
Lord J^iUce Cferft.— William Edgar and
John Keith, paj attention to the itioictment
against yoii^ which is now to be read.
<< William Edgar and John Keith, both
present prisoners in the Castle of £din-
boigfa, yon are indicted and accused^ at
the instance of Alexander Maconochie of
Meadowbanky his majesty's advocate, for
his mijesty's interest :' Ihat albeit, bv an
act passed in the fifty-second year of his
present mi^esty's reign, intitaled, * An
act to render more effectual an act passed
in the thirtynKventh year of his present
majesty, for preventing the administer-
ing or taking aniawfiil oaths,' it is mler
' oUa enacted, * That every person who
shsil, in any manner or form whatsoever,
adminiBler, or c^use to be administered,
or be aiding or assisting at the adminis-
tering, of any oath, or enpsement, pnr-
porting or inteading to bina the person
taking tiie-same to commit any treason or
VOLXSKOL I
murder, or any fekmy poniAahle by law
with death, shall, on conviction thereof
by doe course of law, be adjndged ffuilty
of felony, and suffer death as a ielon,
without benefit of clergy.' Andfuither,
by section fourth of the said act, it is en*
acted, ^ That persons aiding and assist-
ing at the administering of any such oath
and engagement, as aforesaid, and per^
sons causing any such oath or engagement
to be administered, thoogh not present at
the administering thereof shall be deemed
principal offenders, and shall be tried as
such ; and on conviction thereof by due
course of law, shall be adkidced guilty of
felony, and shaH soffiBr deam as felons,
without benefit of clergy ; although the
persons or person who actually aikiinis-
tered such oath or engMement, if any
such there shall be, slmlf not have been
tried or convicted,' And farther, by sec-
tion sixth, of the said act, it is, enacted,
'That any engagement or oUigation
whatsoever, in the nature of an oath, pur-
porting or intending to bind the person
taking the same to commit any treason or
murder, or any fdony punishable by law
with death, shall be deemed an oath within
the intent and meaning of this act, in
whatever form or manner the same shall
be administered or taken, and whether
the same shall be actually adminisCer^
by any person or perscms to any other
person or persons, or taken by anv other
person or persons, without any admini»*
tration thereof by any other person or per-
sons:' Yvt Tnvs IT IS AHn^orvaniTT,
that vou, the said William Edgar and John
Keith, are both and each, or one or other
of you, guilty of the said crimes, or of one
or more of them, actors, or actor, or art
and part : In a» far a$ you, the' said
William Edgar and John Keitli, having,
at Gclasgow, and in the vicini^ thereof, in
the course of the months of NovembcHr
and December 1816, and of January and
Febnuuy, 1817, wickedly, maliciously,
and traitoroudy conspired and i^reed
with other evil-disposed persons to break
and disturb the piu>lic peaoe, to change,
subvert, and overthrow the government,
and to excite, move, and raise insurrec-
tion and rebdlion, and espedallyto hold
and attend secret meetings, for the pur-
pose of obtaiiMDg annual parliaments^ and
1471
57 GEORGE til.
Trml of. WObwm E^ar
iu&
universal suffrage, by unlawful and tio^
lent meansy did then and there, both and
eacb, or one or other of you, wickedly,
maliciously, and traitorously administer,
€t cause to be administered, or did aid
or assist at the administering, to a gr^at
number of persons, an oath or engage-
ment, or an obligation in the nature of an
oath, in the following terms, or to the*
following purport : — * In awful presence
of God; I, A B, do voluntaiily swear,.
That I will persevere in my endeavour-
ing 'to> fbim a brbiheihood of affection
amongst Britons of every description, who
are considered worthy of confidence; and
lltat I will persevere in my endeavours to
obtain for all the people in Great Britain
and Ireland, not disqualified by crimes or
insanity, the elective franchise, at the age
•f twenty-one, with free and equal repre-
sentation, and annual parliaments ; and
that I will support the same to the utmost
of my power, either by moral or physical
strength as the case may require : And I
do further swear, that neither hopes, fears,
rewards, or punishments shall induce me
to inform on, or give evidence against any
member or members, collectively or iodi-
Tidoally, for any act or expression done
or made, in or out, in this or similar so-
cieties, under the punishment of death, to*
be inflicted on me by any member or
members of such societies. So help me
C^od, and keep me steadfast.' Which
oath or obliaation dhl thus purport or in-
tend to bind the persons taking the same
to commit treason, by effecting by physi-
cal force the subversion of the established
government, laws, and constitution 'of
diis kingdom. And, more particularly,
you, the said William Edgar and John
Aeitb, did, upon the 1st day of January
181 7» or on one or other of the days of
thai month, or of December immediately
precedittg, or of February immediately
following, at a secret meeting held for
that and other unlawful purposes, in the
House of WiUiam Leggat, change^keeper
in King-street, Tradeston, in the vicinity
of Glasgow, or elsewhere at Glasgow, or
in the immediate vicinity thereof, both
and each, or one or other of you, widcedly,.
maliciously, and traitorously administer,
or cause to be administered, or did aid or
assist at'the administering an oath or ob-
ligation in the terms above set forth, or to
tiie same purport, to Peter Gibson, John
M^Lauchuune, Jcihn Campbell, atid Hugh
DieksQo^ all presept prisoners in the
Castle of Edinbofgh ; as also to James
M'£wAn, now or lately. caTding-^naster at
Hamphiies Mill, Gqrhals of Glasgow^ and
ll*Dowal Pale or Poat, bow or lately
weaver in PiacadAUf Mtreet, Anderston, in
the vimnilgrofiGlaMcrw, wfai», oonsvious
of tbdr j^t-iia ne 'pettBMS, lune ab-
fmmA&km^ ladL:ib«n4iWfi» ; aa abo to
John Connelton, now or lately cotton-
spinner in Calton of Glasgow, or to one
or other of them, and to other persons,,
whose names are to the prosecutor un-
knojvD, the said oath or ooligation, thus
binding, or purporting to bind the per-
sons tsStiog the same to commit treason,,
as said is. (2.) And further you, the said
Wifliam £dgar and John Keith, did, upon
the 4th day of January, 1817, or on one
or other of the days of that mouth, or of
December immediately preceding, or of
February immediately, follpwing, at the
house of Neill Munn, innkeeper and
stabler, in Ingram-street, Glasgow, or
elsewhere at QlasgAw, or in ihe imme-
diate vicinity thereof, both and each, or
one or other of you, wickedly, malici-
ously, and traitorously administer, or cause
to be administered, or did aid or assist at
the administering an oath or obligation in
the terms above set forth, or to the iaroe
purport, to the said Peter Gibson, John
M'Lauchlane, John Campbell, Hugh Dick-
son, M'Dowal Pate,, or Peat, and James
M'Ewan ; as also to James Hood, An-
drew Somerville,^ John, Buchannan, an^
James Robertson, all present prisoners ill
the Tolbooth of Glasgow,, or to one w
other of them, and to olber persons, whose
names are to the prosecutor, unknown^
the said oath or obligation thus binding,,
or purporting to bind, the persons taking
the same to commit treason, as said is.
And you the said WiUiam Edgar having
been apprehended and t^ken. before
Daniel Hamilton, esquire, one of the
sheriffs-substitute of Laaaikshire^ did, in
his presence at Glasgow, on the 6th day
. of March, 1817, emit and subscribe a de-
claration ; and having been taken before
Robert Hamilton, esquire. Sheriff-depute
of Lanarkahirsy you did, in his presence^
at Glasgow, upon the 7th and 8lh days «f
March, 1817, emit and subscribe two se-
veral declarations : And you the sai^
John Keith having been apprehended, and
taken before the said Robert Hamilton,
esquire, did, in his presence, at Glasgow,
on the 6th and 7th days of Biareh^ 1817,.
emit and subscribe two seveiral declara-
tions : All which declaratioas, beipg to
be used in evidence against each of ^<m
respectively, will be lodged in due Ume
in the hands of the Clerk of the High
Court of Justiciary, before which yon
are to be tried, that you nay^have
an opportunity^ seeins the.samt* At
least, times, and places foke^aid, the said
oath or aogagement, or au oath or en*
gagement to the saoie nnipost^ was
wickedly, malicionly, 4m traitoaoualy
admiaiateied, or caused to be atoiiiia->
tend; and aoae pmene did -M or
assist at the admiaistexkig theraof^ and
you the said William E^^pnr and, Jolm
"ntilii ' ttfc./kfltfi and:satrfi- ei '4Hie %^
ItfM
fir AAmmttniiig unbmfiil Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
CISO
trther off jfOQj piiKy dMrao^ ^tdrs or
aetoiv or art «nd part. All which or
paft thereof, being fouod proren by the
venKct of an assize, before the Lord Jas-
taco Geaeia], the Lord Justice Clerk, and
Lords Commissioiiers of Justiciary, yon
the raid WiHiam Edgar and John Keidi
ongkt to be punished widi the pains of
lair, to deter others from committing the
iifce Climes in all time coming."
<' H. Hon Deummovh, A. D."
UST OF WITNESS£8.
t. lUerf EamiUonf Esq. aheriff-depute ^f
«. Doaiel BmuitoH, Esq. one of the sherifb-
substitute of Lanarkriiire.
:3. Darnel M'Catium, clerk ta John Dl?ysdale,
dienff-clerk of LanaikAire.
4k Maifkem Bunu^ derk to George Salmond,
pracorator-fiseal of Lanarkshire.
5. Joim LbMcj eleik to the said John Diys-
dak.
«. Jatipk Rod, writer in Gkisgow.
7. Mtmtkr Caldtry 6bjeriff>offioer in Glas*
gow.
8. Jama Thornton, clerk to the eaid John
Drysdale.
9. Jkrmmkr £baUa% cfaange^eepery Old
Wynd'Of Glasgow.
10. Marion MPLarmj or M'LaohHm, now or
lately servant te die said Alexander
Honter.
11. Jokn Robartumj innkeeper and stabler. Gal.
lowgate Glasgow.
18. Jgne9 CampbeU, wi£» of Thomas Dow,
steam-boiler maker and smith at Gird-
wood and Company's foundry in Hutch-
eaontown, in the vicinity of Glasgow.
13. Jamet Bentcid, now or lately servant to
lieill Munn, innkeeper and stabler iu
ingiam-street, Glasgow.
14. Atium Wiliom, now or lately servant to the
said Neill Munn.
15. Mattkem Fnfe, spirit-dealer in Wilson-
street, Gfasgoif .
1«. Jem Boyd, wife of the said Matthew Fyfe.
17. WilMvm Li^gn^, change-keeper^ in King-
street, comer of Centre-street, Trades-
ton, in the vicinity of Glasgow.
18. -EBtfA Dichony present prisoner in the
Castle of Edinburgh.
19. PUer GtUon^ present prisoner there.
^30. Join M^Limcklanef present prisoner there.
m. WUtiam Simmon^ present prisoner there.
33. ioiMef Bttody present prisoner in the Tol-
booth of Glasgow.
33. Jofai CampheU^ present prisoner in the
castle of Edinmirgli.
M. ThmoM AidoiTy present prisoner there.
H. HoM£ Druicmovd^ a. D.
UST OP ASSIZE.
County cf Edmburgk.
Ctttmet Sbott, of Ballemo.
Bidtard WooU^ of WUf^use.
Wkiie, tobacconist in Dalkeith.
Bobert lAftt, baker there.
Joftft Woody merchant there.
John Brawny farmer, Carrington.
Andrew Johrutou, farmer, Primrose-barns.
Counfy of Haddington,
William ilicAeson, junior, of Drummore«
John Sonunervdl of Moreham.
WUliam Hcq/, farmer, Ilowden.
John Brodiey farmer. West Fenton.
Bobert Uopey farmer, Feuton.
County of UnUlhgow,
WUliam Gien of Mains.
William Dawion, younger, Bonnytoun.
John Trotter y farmer at Stacks.
^bert Taylor, residing at Blackness.
George TumbuU, farmer at Northbank.
Cify of Edinburgh.
Robert FraseTy jeweller in Edinbuigb.
lliomas Bichardton, merchant^tailor there.
IXivt^ Whitelawy watdi^maker there.
Peter Feddie, trunk-maker there.
William Trottery upholsterer there.
Alexander BuueUy coach- maker there.
John Inverarity, upholstcret there.
George Yule, mercha** there.
Alexander Aintlie, saddler there*
John Steel, confectioner there.
James Innet, gunsmith there.
Daniel Forrest, hosier there. ,
Peter SawerSy saddler there.
Creorge Hunter, merchant there,
William Boss, tailor there.
Charles McLean, draper there.
John Laing, saddler there.
John Mcpherson, tailor there.
Francis Davutson, confectioner there.
William Cooper, boot-maker there.
William Dumbrecky hotel-keeper there.
ToumqfLeith,
John 3iPKemiey merchant in Leith. ^
Archibald Cleghom, corn-merchant there.
Thomas Mortouy ship-builder there.
Robertson Paterson, painter there.
Charles Bobertson, merchant tliere.
John Sanders, agent there.
JoAit Glover, wright there.
An. Gillies.
d. montpevvt.
David Douglas*
L»rd Advocate, — From certain circumstan-
ces, I find it proper to move the Court to
desert the diet against John Keith pro loco et
tempore. He will therefore be committed to
prison upon a new warrant.
[This motion was accordingly agreed to.]
Lord Justice Clerk. — ^William Edgar, what
do you say to this indictment? — ^Are you
^uilt^ or not guilty of the charges contained
in it^
WiUiam Edgar, — ^Not guilty, my I/>rd.
Mr. CSra»i^(Wfi« — ^I am of Qounsel in this caae
1511 ^ GEORGE III.
for the prisoner at the bar. Hie indictmeot,
which your Lordships have jtiBt heard read,
charges the prisoner with a capital offence,
that of administering an oath purporting or
intending to bind the takers to oommit the
crime of treason.
My lords, this is not a point of dittay re-
cognized by the ancient and common law of
Scotland; neither the nature of the offence
itself, nor the manner in which it is to be
charged, is pointed out by any precedents or
authorities familiar to your Lordships. It is
an offence recently introdnced by a special
jBtatute ; and, so far as I know, no trials havft
taken plape hitherto upon that statute in Scot--
land, acdordinir to your forms.
It will bjB admitted, that this crime is of a
nature peculiarly deUcate. The life of the
prisoner at the bar may depend on Che con-
struction to be put on words alone, without
reference jto overt acts by which they may
receive a clear and unambiguous interpretation.
To administer an oath without judicial authority
is perhaps riot a very commendable prajctice,*
and in a moral point of view it may sometimes
be improper, as tending to lessen the obligation
4>f an oath, when thus applied to frivolous
or improper subjects, o^on frivolous and im-
proper occasions^ But, my loids, at the same
time, it h not in itself an illegal thingf it
is prohibited by no law; and I understand,
jand am well informed, that it is a common
* Lord Coke says (3 Inst. 165) ^ Oaths that
have no warrant by law, are rather nooa tor-
nienta guam tacramenta; and it is an high con^
tempt to minister an oath without warrant of
law, to be punished by fine and imprisonment."
The cour^ of King^ Bench has often repre-
hended, and discouraged as much as possible,
the taking of voluntary aflSdavits by justices of
the peace, in extrajudicial matters. In the
case of Bramah v. The — '—Fire Insurance Com-
parui, Mich,T. 1800, in B. R. Lord Kenyoa
C, J. said ^* He did not know but tliat a magis-
trate subjects himself to a criminal information
for taking a voluntary extrajudicial affidavit,**
3 Chetwymtt Bwm^ 529.
''It is much to be questioned," says Mr.
JuUiee Bbdatom^ ^ how far any '' magistrate is
justifiable in taking a voiluntary affidavit in
any eztn^judicial matter, as is now too frequent
upon every petty occasion : since it is more
than possible, that hj such idle oaths a man
may frequently in Jiro contckntut incur the
guilt, and at the same time evade the tem-
poral penalties, x>f periuiy." 4 Qmm. 137.
It must be regretted that the highly improper
practice of administering what the learned
commentator terms'' idle oaths,*' should be still
continued by any magiatrates, notwithstanding
the reprehensions contained in those books
with which ihey are generally 8iq>poaed to be
acquainted.
t Seethe preceding note, and the observa-
tions of Le Blanc J. in EaMi case, ant^ Vol.
10, p. 1609;.
Trial of WUUamBdgm^
[15S
and daily piactice. It is practised in many
associations and Maternities; for example, in
masonic meetings, when there is not the least
intention on the part, either of the persons who
administer, or of the persons who taae the oaths,
on the one part to impose, or on the other to
undertake an unlawful obligation. To make a
common pralctice of this nature the ground of
a capital punishment, when the guilt or inno-
cence of the act depends on the interpretation
of the mere words used, may appear not per^-
haps altogether in unison with the mild and
equitable spirit of British jurisprudence. Your
lordsbqis are well acquainted with tbe statnte
1. M^ry, chap. Ist, which swept away ficom
the law that mass of constructive treasons by
which it had been previously polluted— a stai
tnte hdd by the natu>n at die time it was en-
acted, as one of the greatest blessings ever
conierred by the legislature, and still looked
up to by their posterity vrith admiration and
gralitade. Though constnietive treason was
tnus abolished, yet the statute upon whidi the
Sresent indictment is founded tends to intro-
mee a capital felony, wbiah, though not pi^
nished as treason, is yet punished with death,
the n^ifliiMi sifpJidMn of the law.
This statute was no doubt passed at a time
when banda of armed men were committing
evey species of atrocity, when they were
buminr, robbing, and murdering, and in
particular when they were.compellii^ persons
by force to swear oaths, unquestionably and
clearly imposing an oblisation to oommit
felonies.* In this state of things, a speedy
and efficacious remedy was necessary ; and
no doubt this statute was passed with Uie best
intentions, and may have been productive of the
most salutary consequences. All &is being
avowed, yet.considmd as a standing rale,
incorporated in the criminal law of Scotland,
and applied to other occasions than those
contemplated by the legislature, it was not per**
haps penned with all .the caution requisite,
and may involve principles which it vroiild not
be very safe to admit permanently into our
system of jurisprudence. But it is not your
lordships province to judge of the merits of
the enactment, and far less am I entitled to
pronounce an opinion upon diat subject. - It
makes part of the statute law of Scotland, and
that is enough. But althou|^ I am not enti-
tled to inquire into the expediency of the law,
it is my right, and it is my duty, to inquire in
what manner the words of it stnU be constni-r
ed — ^in what manner, being part of the erimi*
nal law of Scotland, it shall be applied and
accommodated to our form of juoidal pro*
ceedings. And, after folly considering the
subject in this more limited view, I trust
I shall be able to satisfy your lordships that
the libel in this case is not relevant, according
to the principles of the criminal law of Scot-
* See the debate in the House of Commons
on the motion for the introduction of thia ata^
tute 33 Hans, Farl. Ctfb. 31.
1531
^ AMmtkring utJtu^Oalki.
iLD. 1817.
tia4
land. This is a subject of the nlDMNit impor-
taoce, and tot iririch the attention of your
lordships is now most earnestly requested.
In tliis indictment the mijor proposition
sets fiHtfa, that, ** Albeit, by an act passed in the
fifty-second year of his present Majesty's reign
intimled, 'An act to render more effectual an
act pused in the tbirty-seTenth year of his
present Msjes^, for prerentinff the administer-
mg or taking unlawml oaths,^ it is, inUr aUOf
enacted, l^at every person who shall, in
any aaaoier or form whatsoever, administer,
or canse to be administered, or be aiding or
MSisling at the administering of any oath or
engagesBcnt, pmrporting er iotendiog to bind
the peiaoo tBiting the same to ooo&mit any
treason -or murder, or any felony punishable
hj law with death, shall, on oonviction thereof
by doe- eonrse of law, be adjudged guilty of
tdofo^j and sufief death as a felon, witbout
benefit of dergy/" There are then other
Manses of the statute recited in this major pro-
poaitioD.
1 have no objections to make to the migor
|NopQsition of this indictment. It is oorrect
SB ledtiBg the elanse of the act eonstituting
the crime sriiieh is now to be tried; and,
theiefofe, in oonsideiing this proposition, the
«iily thii^ to be attended to is, toe nature of
the crime which' is here stated to be punish-
able with death. It is the administering an
«ath, ** purporting or intending to bind the
penon taking the same to commit treason or
WBider, or any folonjr punishable with death.''
Upon readmg this clause, your Lordships
wiU be satisfied, that it is not sufficient to con-
stitnCe this crime that an oatb was adminis-
teredr— it is not suflBdent that the person
administering that oath had criminal intentions
at the time— or that he was engaged at the
time in criminal practices — ^it is not enough
that the person who takes the oath intends to
eommit, or is in the eourM of committing
tfiminal practices. All that is insufficient to
constitute the crime here set forth. It is ne-
cessary,—it is the essence of the crime, — ^that
the oiik administered shall itself purport
or intend to bind the taker to commit the
crimes specified in the statute* It is quite
possible that two persons may be actually en-
gaged in committing the crime of treason, and
wlule thus occupied, that one of them, with a
view of practisiiig a deceit on those who were
present^ and of ensnaring them into the traitor-
ous conspiracy, should administer an oath to
his aaaocmte, under the pretence of binding
him lo commit the treason. But if that oath
did not in ftct impose the obligation, it could
not wanrnnt a oonvictioii under this statute.
It mt^t be an orert act of treason, and all
lhe.persons present, be who administered the
eath, he who took the oath, and the spectators,
might be punishable as traitors, yet still an
indictment under thepresent statute could reach
■oue of them ; for to make the statute apply,
it is efssntial dmt the oath administered pur-
ports or iateiKU to bind the patty taking it io
commit treason or feloOT. An oath not con*
taining that obligation, however nefarious and
detestable in- itself, may be the ground of a
different prosecution, but it cannot be the
ground of the charge now before your lord-
ships. All this is too dear to require any
illustration ; it must be manifest to every one
who reads Uie words of the statute.
Having said thus much on the major pro-
position of the indictment, we now come to
consider the minor proposition. Here, as in
other cases, there axe two subjects of inquiry ;
1st, Whether the fiicts set forth in the minor
amount to the charge in the major? and, 2nd,
Supposing that they do, whether they are spe-
dned with that precision and minuteness whidi
are required, by the law of Scotland, to oonsti-
tttte a relevant indictment ?
The minor begins in these terms: '^Yet
true it is and of verity, that you, the said
William Edgar and John Kdtb, are boUi and
each, or one or other of you, guilty of the said
crimes, or of one or more of them, actors or
actor, or art and part : In so far as yon, the
said William Edgar and John Kdth, having,
at Glasgow, and in the vidnity thereof, in the
course of Uie months of November and De*
cember 1616, and of January and February
1817, wickedly, malidously, and traitorous^
conspired and agreed, with other evil-disposed
persons, to break and disturb the public peace,
to change, subvert, and overthrow the govern-
ment, uul to ezdte, move, and raise insur-
rection and rebdlion, and espedally to hold
and attend secret meetings for the purpose of
obtaining annual iiarliaments and universal
sufirage, by unlawnd and vident means, did,
then and there, both and each, or one or other
of you, wickedly, matidously, and traitorously,
administer, or cause to be administered, or
did aid or assist at the administeiin|^ to a
great number of persons, an oath' or engage-
ment, or an obbgation in the nature of an
oath, in the following terms, or to the follow-
ing purport." — And then the words of the oath
are recited. — *^ In awfol presence of God, I,
A B, do vduntarily swear, That I will per-
severe in my endeavouring to form a brotner-
hood of affection amongst Britons of every de-
scription, who are considered worthy of con-
fidence ; and that I will persevere in my en*
deavours to obtain for all the people in Great
^tain and Ireland, not disqualified by crimes
or insanity, the dective franchise, at the age
of twenty-one, with free and eqinU represen-
tation, and annud pariiaments; and that I
will support the same to the utmost of mv
power, either by moral or physical strength
as the case may require: AndJL do further
swear, that ndtber hopes, foars,* rewards, or
punishments, shall induce me to inform on,
or give evidence against, anv member or mem-
ben, collectively or individudlyy for any act
or expression done or made, in or out, in this
•or simikr societies, under the punislunent of
deadi, to be inflicted on me by any member
or members of such societies. So bdp me
16S)
57 CBOBOE IIL
Im theiiidiolmeBt» thai tids oath, «r bI ^mm
mn '••Al af tli« 8MI16 farpofl^ i«u ftdiiiiiri»*
4«re4.
li is here Mt fitrtby thattW prinMr at the
bar WW is the couie of coomiiCtia^ certain
Mnoastriaie^ ISraBecrhaa^ your lovAsMj^
will obserra^ an aot kid aa a aabatantiva
chagga a^ui tha piiaaatr; and it it tiapos-
aiUa tittt tkay ihouid ba to laid in this indict,
■leal, kft a prisMiar oaa ba chirged with no-
ikiBf Ml die ntmay but wiuit anounta to the
ariaat laid in tha aaajor prapoiition« I( is
aaid, that tba mitosiar lunriaf cositDilted tbota
•ananaty did adamitter Ihe oath. But thote
cnnes are noH hiid with a view to iniict pa*
«iahBftettt fla bin fof then, though peibapt
they are stated in motkm probtiihm of another
critne. it is inooaspetent in the minor propo-
rtion of the iodietmeBt to say that the ptisoner
at gnilty of a felony aot charged in the nftjoty
ia Older to pnnish him for that felony. Tha
^haiye in thn indictmeBt is for administering
ma nnlawfol oath ; and wbateTer facts comiect-
jed with a eeparate criase are set forth in the
aainor only, they make no part of the charge
•against the prisoner at the bar.
I trust I shaH aftarwaids show, thbugh it is
fiat at preaent the time to make inqoiry into
IhiSy that however atroctoos the crimes here
Jiffirmed to have been committed by the pri^
•aoner may be, as they are in UicmselTCs totally
iffeloTant to infer the crime with which he is
vaaHy charged, so at the same time it is in-
coaspelenty according to the law of Scotland,
4o bring any pioaf of those crimes. This I
jhall postpone for after«oensideralioa, pro-
«aeding, in the mean tinie, to consider the
oath wideh was administered, which is said to
purport an oUigalion on tha taker to ootnnit
treason.
Tha oath is ta tbese words >^* In awfol
oreaenae of God, I, A B, doToluatarify ^wear,
That I will persevere in my endcaTouriag to
form a brotherhood of afihction amongst Britons
.of every daaeriptiom, who are considered
•worthy of confidence; and that I will per-
aevare in my endeavonrt to obtain for all the
people in Great Britain and Ireland, not dis-
anaiified by Crimea or insaai^, the cibeotive
vancbise, at the age of tweatr^one, with free
and equal representation, and annnal pariia*
manls ; and that I wiH support the same to
te atmest of my power, hither by moral or
physical strength^ as die caae mar reqaiiv:
And I do further swear, that neither hopes,
foata, lawanfc, or punishments, shall induoe
me to inform on, or give andenoe against, an^
momber ot mcftiben, coHeotively or iiMli«».
dually, for any aet or evpression done or made,
.ia or out, in this or similar societies, nnde^
-the panishauiat of deaith, to be iniioted on nne
by any member or members of aueh societies.
So help me G«d, and ke«p me stedfast/'«M.
Then it is tfl|id, ^ Which oath or oiligatioa
did thnapwpart w iadend to band the persona
tafcitg iio^ma m aottmit maton^ by mctiag
TfUffmOminSdg^
Lisa
by phjnieal force flie sulM<Mion of the estaA>-
Kshod igov9mmm%, laws, and oonstitation of
this kingdom."
Bert the prosecutor recites the oath, atad
aajia that it purports an <Mgation on die pter-
son takiag it to commit treason, by effecting
by physical fotoe the snbvorsion of the estab-
lished goremment, laws, and conslituftioa of
this kiagdom* Bnt it is not enough that the
piosecutor says it has that purport. If, on
eondidering the oath itself, your lordshipa are
of opinion that it does not imply what tho
prosecutor alleges, his tnere avermeat that it
ia an oadi of a certain purport will not mako
it so ; and he is wot entitled to have that
question sent to the jury, for that would bo
taking from the Court the question as to tho
reloTancy of the indictment.
Suppose in an indictment for perjury, tha
prosecutor, after allegibg in general terms that
this spedftc offeiice has beeb committed, pro-
eeeds ix^ the minor proposition to give the do*
position of the prisoner in detail, and aAer«
wards to contrast it with what be alleges to be
the troth, asserting that there is such a manifest
discrepancy as necessarily implies the' com^
missioa of the crime chai^g^ — still his mem
assertion on this snUect will not be sufficient ;
and if the Court nail be satisfied, on com-
paring the alleged truth with the alleged felse*
nood, that there is not an absolute contra^
diction between them; in other words, that
what the prisoner has sworn may be recon-
ciled with what the posecutor says he ought
to have sworn, you will not hold the indict-
ment to be relevant, nor send the charge to a
jnry to be tried. That being the case, if your
lordships, on reading thb oath, be of opinion^
that it does not purport what the public pro*
seeutor says it.parpoiu^ then I say this ia an
irrelevant libel.
It is true that, besidet the word ^ purport^
iBg,** there is aaetber word used here, ** in<*
tending.'^ What is the signification of tho
word iniendiMg I ^hall afterwards consider, and
it is of material importance to this case ; bnt
let us see, in the &rst place, what is the signi^
fication of the term purport. This term, aa
every body knows, is applied to deaote the
meaning of words as gathered irom the word9
themselvea — ^the meaning as eipreued in eon-«
tradistinotion to the meaning which may bo
mmfechutd from extrinsic feels or circam-
siances. Look then at the words of the bath,
and see if it purports what the prosecutor saya
it does. No man who reads it can say so.
The words of the oath are, ** 1 wiH parsevero
in my endeavouring to form a brocherhood of
aCBOtion amongst Britons of every description,
vfho are consuiered worthy of' confidence.**
Nobody will pretend to say that there iaan
obUaation to commit treason here. There ia
aa obligation to form a brotherhood of affeo-
tioa. AH the subjects of this ookmtry are
btotfaers ; and it is boooming that they shoaM
dwell together in unity. Inis cannot pwrpoit
any thing to b» fimi thaiA ia iaipt^r.' Th^
457-1
Jor AJmmUtsriMg vmUi^^A Oaths*
A. D. 1617.
LIM
o^ then gpM on, " That I will perstv«ra in
my end^^iTcmn to obuia for «U the [^opl« oif
Orest BitMa tnd Ireland, not disqiu^ed by
criiaes or iosaat^^ tlie elective firamchise^ et
the age of twentT-ODe, with free and equal le-
pfBfentalioD, and aoaual padiaBMita." There
are few penons at preient, who are qua^ified^
^iiher horn their natural paUg or inforMMOioOy
tp jodge of subjecli of this kind, who witt b»
of opiaioii that either anaoal pariiamenti or
VDwersal saffrage would be of adrvaotage tp the
ipbabitaQfa of this countiy, or would ooaduoa
tio aay thing else than anarchy in the fi^ in-
stance, and deapotism in the eod* 9ulr
although this be true,, it ia well known to
your lordships, that it ia the piivilege of every
inbject in this oountiy, to fonn hia own opinioo
on aobjects of a poUtieal nature; and.haviiig
formed his opiaion, he may make u^e of law*
fol means to have such dianges produeed in
the ooostitntion or goveranent of the cooqtry
%sbe may think expedient. The lagi^Utare
Ipi^at diment tiqses alleied th(» duration of
padiament and the. mode of suffrage ; and if
ai^ pmoQ believes that annual parUaments
and universal txifftt^ would be of benefit to
the countiy, it ia no crime to use lawful en-
d«.vours to obtain these object^ which can
only be obtained lawfully by ap act of thi»
British parliament itself:; and you know» tha^
petitioos ibr such objecls ve daily presented
la.pvliam^ot, and daily received.
It is said in the oath, " I will penevere" in
^lese endeavours. If the endeavours are law*-
&1, the perseveriog in: them is np orime.at all«
It. is not said iu the oath^ or in a^y part of th^
indictaBent, that the prisoner was engaged in
ualawfiil prqeots for these, purposes. It is
ssid, indeed^ iu the indictment,, that the peD*
sons who administered the oatfi were engaged
in a tMflsonaible cpaipiraqr; hut there is^no
^>ecificatioii. of circjamstaneas to evinee tha
potoiMf^s a^ession to this. conspi'acj> . Df>r if
t^ effence of oonspin^y apy part of the sub-
stantive charge made a^^nst him in the in*
dielBsant. That being th^ case, tbeoa^i or
obligation to endeaivour to obtain annual paiv
Kanaants and univeisel suirage, is:an o)>Hg%>
tioo in itself perfectly inooeePlt. Your lei4r
ships will notsav that these eodaavouts ata
vnkvwfiU, nor witl you impute iniptoper moy
tives to the pa^ inproseeutiii^ them, for yen
are not antkorised to make such an in^dr
Bient. yfbm arpqtsenjpromisos to use eriN^
eadeaflroof to aoeen^ish Vk objeet, the gene-
ality of this ezpinssion vnll oeivar ciotend it
to uola^«f«l endeavouvs-^it west he .construed
with the comaan and necassaiy limsiatian^
Ihat he wiUiose evaiy endfnvewr.wbieh tefnay
hmUOfVH* Ifthis,pi»nciple.of4)QBStinctiaD
ware n9t«dQp4ed# the onh of jal^wmlion itsalf
auglit bnem^arted intn wa ohiigalian to
MnmittmesaA. "• I do Mhft% .proaiiM, it
fJb» nii^oaief mjfpovNBT^ u^/mppoit, wMnnytain^
^M-tSntod^MiisiimMiontof Aa Oa^^ fnup
it by lawfid mmm l»if«itjVri
The oath in the indietmeat then goon on tfl
sqy, '' that I will support ik^taam to.the ^tmcil
of my power, either by moral or physicfyi
strength, as the case may aai|niBe/* Support
wbatr UereisanainbifguitymtheoMth; audi
an ambiguUy which shews how hamgrUms it in
to admit constructive treasons reared 14ms
words uttered by persona not critically an*
quaiated with the imperfect infltmment «f
language. Interpret this passage any wi^ yon
ehusa» i^ will not anUHUit to any thing criminaU
Even supposing that it binds the party takiM
the oath to*obtain the olyects which:aie apedted
ipMtrbymoralioQphvsicalibro^whatisthe isMltl
it is, that lasrliil omaou am to be ohtainsd ^
lawful measures. No person cnn he hUmen
£or exerting his utmost! effoKs undnr tel
limitation^ Or take the only other oonstnao*
tion which can be putiupon this clawa<of tiki
oath, and auf)pofin;tha party to jwenr^ that tag
will siipport annual parliamems and unmemal
suffuge tp the utnumt of his pownr, mknaMnii
0^$ ihall W 2ncn aklmmdi that he wiU wm
his best endeaivoum tp^continua and. perpetuata
these iroaginaiy. bl^mipgp, when Aaiy ahatt onon
have been psoonred for theceuntiy; lathm
an unkwiful obligation? licevtmnlyia imt4
If lawfol d^cla are obtained in a lawfnl
mnnner, then, it is the dnty of gnod mbjanli
to support and continue them* So ihn whaii»
ever construction you put upon this clauat<of
the <mii> whether ^mt snfipeae it tn relet to
anteiiprises for obtaining what does not afarandy
exists or for suppoiting imptoremania alW
th^ shall ba .established bylaw, H is in eithei
case perleotty jfrioeentt^-With segflird to thn
Uims '' motel aed.physimi atmngth,'' Imay
remark, a man may support what is lamM
either by the.one«oa the othet^ and yet baAree
Irem blame. The indindnala attempting tn
piQcam annnaliparliamanls and-nnifamid Jttfc
hagft, mlc^i emplnr their mond.sMngth for
that pnrp0f e by usinf. trgumentSi; or thaif
phynioal atrangili, for instanne^ by being dam
patched with lettem m>d.mssaagis,.or goinjg
about to seboit ammbemof pasUmnent for thait
snppettrf Ajmrsen may eieot bnalingi, e*d
may keep on the rabble-4ie amy employ. hii
phynsal Ibsae in twenty dtfismnt'ways withmH
doing any 4hing4lmt ia unlawfol.
The oath eondades, "M4^ I. doi fnsthnr
swnas, that naithnr fasfiei, foam, raiwmdi».off
punishments, shall induce me tO'infom^.on, ni
grie^videnaa against, anymmnber. or mmm
bem, eoUnitivaly or inditadnally, foe anymda
^^w **^^^n^vn^n^p^^^^^w a^^^^an^a? ^^* ana^n^^^^n earn jnna ^n^^^m^ ^^n» nnamm
or.svmte aacietins, under tha.pnnishnwnt^
death, toube iuAlclad *on Jmi hy nny, mmBhar.or
membaw. «f. anoh. saeielics*. SDhelpiiitn
God^ and Imep mnetedfitfl*'' Itadmitnicnm^
itiaimpro|ierjfor any person .to Andmlnkni an
bbligatmnnait fto.giTe midmse^ B«it4hni.ia
notaooUigationrlnnanmntlraan>ns itinnnty
it mjnisdflnmmnr miHiimliishi wmtew
*Npt»one nl
laCsiihn'nB^hiaan
not by folony, aiuder, or treason.
1501 ^7 GEORGE tit.
Read the oath from beginiung to end, and say,
does it impose any obligation to commit
treason T Itead the words a hundred times
oyer, and still it will be imposdble to say that
such is its purport. For it may be explained
to mean an obligation to endeavour to obtain
lawful objects, and cannot fairly be explained
to mean any thing else. I am speaking of the
purport of the oath, and not of what might be
the intention of the parties at the time ; and
if that oath does not purport treason, there is
an end of the present indictment.
The public prosecutor immediately adds,
^ Which oath or obligation did thus purport
ot intend to bind the persons taking the same
to ooramit treason, by effecting by physical
tooe the subfersion of the estaUished govem-
menty laws, and constitution of this kingdom.*^
No doubt Uie prosecutor makes that averment.
But I say the averment is utterly unfounded,
and that the oath does not purport the obliga*
tion vdiich he says it purports. It is for your
lordships to judge whether it does so or not ;
and if you are of opinion that it does not, then
nodiing that the prosecutor affirms on the sub-
ject can have the smallest influence, as he is
not entitled to go to the jury, and leave it to
thAsm to determine what is the purport of the
oath; for that would be to take the relevancy
of the indictment out of your hands into his
own.
The prosecutor has given you a ffloss or
comment on the oath, and you will judge if it
be coirect. The civilians nuTe a nickname, I
forget what it is, for a gloss which extracts a
meaning from the text exactly the reverse of
what it naturally bears. Ibis gloss is precisely
of that nature.
In the oath there are the words, '^ I will
support the same to the utdiost of my power,
eimer by moral or physical wtrmgtK" in the
prosecutor's comment the word force is substi-
tuted for strtngjth, Tliat may be thought im-
material, and to have proceeded from inatten-
tion, but it is not so. It has been introduced
in order to insinuate something different from
what the oath purports. Strength in common
language applies to bodily exertion. Force
applies to an assemblage of armed persons.
Although you can speak of an aimed force,
you cannotspeak of an armed strength; acircum-
stance which shows that the meaning of the words
is not the same. The prosecutor by this clause
means to insinuate, that the parties were to en-
deaTour by an armed force toootain their objects ;
a purpose which cannot be inferred from the
woMs of the oath at all. It is further said,
that the oath was to bind to the ^' subTcrsion
of the established goremment, laws, and con-
stitution of this "kingdom," but there is nothinff
flrom the beginning to the end of the oath
about eHtdimg' any thing. The parties 'bound
themselves to use endeuTouis to ^ obtain
ananal parliaments and universal suffrage;
and these, if obtained in a lawful manner, are
not a subTe'isibn of the government, laws, and
The gUMS| tliexe-
Tritd of WUtiam tdg^
[tea
fore, has extracted a meanine from the text
exactly the reverse of what uie words bear..
The public prosecutor cannot be allowed to'
do this ; ana Uie libel on that account is irre-
levant.
But I go forlher, and I request you to ob-
serve what may not at first sight be apparent,
but which, on full consideration of the law,
vfill immediate^ occur to all of vou, that even
on the supposition that this oath did purport
what the public prosecutor says it does, yet it
would not purport an obligation to commit
treason. For I maintain, that persons bound
to effect by physical force the subversion of
the established government, laws, and consti-
tution of the kingdom, are not necessarily
bound to commit treason. It b well known
to your lordflihips that there are two great
species of treason in law. We shall dismiss
from our consideration at present a great many
treasons, such as debasing the coin, murdering^
judges, Ibc. with which the public prosecutor
does not and cannot pretend that this oafli
could have any connexion whatever. There'
are just tvro kinds of treason specified in the*
statute of Edvrard Srd, to which it could pos-^'
sibly refer; Ist, compassing the kinff^s death i
2nd, levying war against him. I shall after-^
wards speak of a third treason, established by'
a snbseauent act, the 36th of the king.
In order to make an indictment for ei^erof
these two kinds of treason relevant, it is not
enough to say that the party intended to effect,
or has effected by force, the snbversi<Mi of the
government, for that b not necessarily com-
passing the death of the king, or levying war
against him. Though some of the acts pei^
formed in subverting the government might be
overt acts of treason, they are not necenarily
so.
In order to establish the first kind of treason^
two things are necessaiy. You must have at
wicked imagination in the mind, namely, tha
compassing of the king's death ; and you must
have overt acts, which the law considers as
nroof sufficient to establish that imagination.
But it is not laid here that the oath bound those
who took it to compass or imagine the death
of the king. I cannot illustrate my argtimoBt
as it applies to the case before you, better thanr
by appealing to an extreme case, with which yoa
are aliwellacquainted-^die trials of theregiodes
in the 1 7th century. Yon will recollect 1km the
indictments were there laid ^* for compaldng
and imagining the death of the king f* and the
overt act of Siat treason was cutting off the
head of the king. It would not Imve been
relevant to have merely charged the act of
putting the king to de^tb, as the crime of
treason— the crime consisted in the imagiiMtion
of the heart ; the death of the king was the
evidence that that imagination existed. In the
same manner, the subversion of tilie laws and
constitution of the kingdom is not treason^
tfiougfa it is probable in effecting that subvert
non overt acts maybe coBUQittod|irhidk iihid
evidtnoeoftieasoab
fir AJmHuUrimg mdiHofii Oatkt'
1611
TIm oUier tpeciat of treason which I
tkmed, was levying wv againit the king. To
ooDstitale that ciimey the use of phytic^ force
in the snhvenioo of the laws or ooDStitutioo of
the kiagdoiD is not sufficient. Ohe of two
things is neoessaiy; either, on theone hand, the
perMOS vsing th^ force most be assembled in
we gnise of wajy as it is expressed in the
Nonnan jargon of the law, mrkUi mgdtrgmrrmo ;
they most proceed sub speck beUiy amie4 with
warlike engines, with ooloots displayed, and
to the sonnd of tnunpets and drums : or, on
Ihe other hand, there anst be so great a mul^
titnde assembled, that their nnmben may €on»-
pcnsate for the want oC the pride, pomp, and
dicnastanceofwar. Certain pmons assembling
together and proeecoting an illegal oljeotby
mo^ does not nfecessazily oonstitutealevyingof
war agahist the king, — unless it have the chano-
teristics • I ha:Te mentioned, it is not treason.
I am unwilling to detain you in k case of this
kind by quoting authorities on the subject. I
coold quote a great many, but I shall content
myself with referring you to Hale and Foster,
in their dmpteis on Uiis subject.
There is a third treason, that of conspiring
to levy war in order to accomplish certain ob-
jectsy as to put the king under restraint, to in-
timidate partiament, or force the pariiament te
enact certaia laws. This treason was intro*
dnoed hj the d6th of the king, e. 7.*
I ask, then, whether this oath, gmating that
A. D. 1817.
Il6ft
TOfriott aceompUshed by foree ; yet no lawyer
will maintain that this is a case of high trea-
son , that it is a case of compassing the king's
death, or of levying war against him, or of
conspiring to levy war.
1 repeat, then, that although this oath did
Surport what the pubhc prosecutor says it
oes, but which most ceruiuly it does not,
still it would not support the charge in the
major proposition. If the prisoner was ac-
cused of having subverted the constitution by
force, could that charge go to trial as a charge of
high treason? assursdly it could not; and for the
same reason a charge of having administered
an oath purporting to bind the taker to sub-
vert the constitution by force, is not a charge
of having administered an oath binding him to
commit treason.
I haTenow^Bonsideredthe oath as ** purport
tag" to bind. That word, as I have endea-
Toured to explain it, and I trust I have
sonndiv explained it, implies nothing more
than the meaning of the oath as it may be
gathered from the words set forth. But then
the public prosecutor says that this oath pur-
ported, or mUmkd; and the question comes to
oe. Does the use of the word itUend make any
differenced I apprehend it does not; for the
mtembnesii of a writing or speech in the or-
dinary case is just the same thing as its pur-
port. You will observe the Act of Parliament
does not say, if the person administering the
it pwpovta what the prosecutor affirms it pur^^ "baUi intends to bind to the commission of
poffta^ iwposet an obligation to oemmlt any
one «f these three distinct species of treason?
I have sdfcady stated the reasons, by which
jom lordships mast be convinced diat it does
not bind the taker to compass or imagine the
death of the king. Just as little does it bind
him to levy war against the king, or to con-
spise to levy war against htm.
I have said 'that force may be used, nay,
saeeessMly used, to subvert the constitution,
and yet no war be levied against the king.
I shall give an instance of this, which appears
to me dedri^e on the merits of the present
qneetioiK Suppose dmt the House of Lords
(which of course they never will do) should
pass a IhU to abolish the House of Commons,
or their own House, as a branch of the XjOgisla-
ture (and if ouch bill passed into a law, it
would eflhet the complete sabversion of the
coMstitution); Suppose, in the next place,
that this bill, vrhen carried to the House of
Comnront, ^ould diyide the House equally,
and of eonsequence its fete shoald depend on
the easting vote of the Speaker. In those
cntuBslaiices, if twenty or thirty individuals,
not armed modoguerrmOf but widi stidu in
their hands, shoald go down and compel the
Sjpedcer by threats or violence to vote tor this
fadl, — ^dbe bill having afterwards received the
rmT assent, would operate as the subversion
of the constitution, and it vMmld be a snb-
* Hade perpetual
c. 6.
VOL. xxxni.
by Stet. 57 Cieo. 3rd
treason, that his intention shall infer the crime.
This is not the meaning of the statute; for it
requires, that there shall be on oath or engage"
useiU '< intending" to bmdf &c. It is the
intendment of me oath, not of the peraon,
whidi the statute mentions; and, thererore,
though it were perfectly dear that the prisoner
administered this oath, and that it was his
intention to bind the party taking it to com-
mit treason, yet that is not enough, if the oath
itself do not bind to that effect. Now, that
oamot be inferred from the words of the oath ;
for if you interpret them fairly, thev mean
nothing but what i% or at least may be, per
feetly innocent
But then, peihaps, vre shall be told that the
public prosecutor vrill prove, by facts and dr-
cumstanees, that the intendment of the oath is
dillhrsat from the purport; and it occurred to
me, that he has some such idea> from tlie dr-
cumstance that he has dravm the narrative of
his minor proposition in the way in which he
has. I have various objections to this view of
the subject, to which I must call your parti-
cular attention.
in the Arst plaOe yon will observe, that in
the libel itself the prosecutor gives up the
diar^ of M/aid^g, and relies on that of ovr-
portmg altogether ; for in the clotw of the libel
(where, though the same detail is not necessary,
yet the efine must be set forth with the same
criticd accuracy) he says, '*At least, times and
pllices foresaid, the said oath or engagement^
or an oa^ or engagement to the eame purport^
M
1681
57 GEORGE IIL
TriiU of WUiiam Edgar
was- wickedly^ mBlickNuily, and trntofoarij
admimsieredy or caused to be adnunistered/'
<cc. He does not say it was an oath to .the
aanoe intent; and Iherefovai unleas he esta-
blishes that an oath of this purport was admi<-
nistetedy he does nothing at all. But this is
not the objection on mrhich I chiefly rely.
It is an established principle in the law of
Scotland, that the minor proposition shall be
laid specifically^ and that every materiid cir-
cumstance shall there be stated which is to be
made the subject of proof against the pri-
soner. The prosecutor is not at liberty to
make out the intendment of this oath m>m
fects^and circumstances to which he only
alludes, in a vague manner ; the libel is defec-
tive unkss these facts and circmnstances are
distinctly specified. Would it be sufficient in
an indictment under this statute to say, that
the prisoner, at the times and places mentionedi
administered the oath of allegiance, but under
cover of that oath he intended to bind the
party to commit certain crimes ? No. It
would be necessary for the prosecutor to set
forth what were the focts and circumstances
which established the criminal quality. In a
trial for a calumnious or seditious libel« would
it be enough to specify that the prisoner re;-
peated the first stanza of Chevy Chase, without
specifying bow it happened that words having
a natural, obvious, and innocent meaning,
were in reality directed to a totally different
and criminal object? The prosecutor must
set forth the facts and circumstances from
which he draws his inference, otherwise the
indictment is not laid with that minuteness
which the law requires. But your lordships
win observe, that no fact is here specified
from which such an inference can be deduced.
It is stated in the narrative, that the prisoner
''having wickedly, maliciously, and traitor-
ously conspired and agreed with other evil
disposed persons to break and dbturb the
public peace, to change, subvert, and over-
throw tne government, and to excite, move,
and raise insurrection and rebellion, and espe-
cially to hold and attend secret meetings^ for
the purpose of obtaining annual Parliaments
and universal suffrage, did then and there
wickedly, maliciously, and traitorously admi-
nister, or cause to be administered, or did
aid and assist in 4he administering, to a great
number of persons, an oath or engagement,
or an obligation in the form of an oadi,'' &c.
In the first place I say, that supposing the
prisoner committed all these crimes, it is no
necessary inference from that hypothesis that
be intended to administer an umawful oath.
Thev do not create the smallest presumption
to that effect ; for a man may be engaged in
treason himself, and yet have no intention to
impose an oath binding his associate to commit
treason.
But there is another view of the case. Sup-
posing it competent from facts and circum-
stances to prove that an oath which does not
purport any obligation of the nature libelled,
(164
was nevertheless intendad by the parties to
impose that obligation, yet. the tacjts an4
ciicumstanoes hero resorted to are of a kind
which precludes the prosecutor from making
use of them for that purpose. . If the nana*
tive of this indictment were to be proved, it
would infer that the prisoner had commilied
treason; but. will your lordshfps permit the
lord advocate to prove that a. man has been
guilty of treason in order to convict him of
a felony. I submit that this is manifestly in-
competent. It is a general role in criminal
law, and ia so laid down by Mr. Bumet in his
work upon that subject (p. 611). His lath
canon u})on evidence is in these wocds:
"One cnme cannot be proved by evid«n^ as
to another. | If A be charged with three .acts
of theft, a proof of tvro of them cannot be
offered in evidence of his guilt as to the
third.'' Your lordships will see at once the
principle upon whi^h this rule is founded, and
indeea it is afterwards stated by the learned
author whom I have just quoted. He say^
^Mt is to avoid the risk of a jury being influ-
enced by the proof of one crime in judging of
the proof of another." It would be most £m*
gerous to the subjects of this country were it
held, that because a man had perpetrated one
crime of which he was not accused, the jury
might conclude that he had perpetrated ano*
ther of which he was accused. This may
perhaps be a moral, but it is no legal ground
of interence. If I know that my servant has
stolen an article from me on one day, 'and if
another is missed the day following, I ^ may
very naturally conclude that he who stole the
first stole the second also. But if the servant
was tried for the second theft aloncr your
lordships assuredly would not allow the pra^*
secutor to go into evidence of the first. It
could answer no purpose, but the improper
purpose of creating a pr^udica in the mind
of the jury. It is therefore a salutary and
expedient rule, and a rule which I trust will
always be receiv^, that one crime cannot be
proved in order to establish another. As the
prisoner therefore is charged with having ad«
ministered an unlawful oath, and as for that
crime and for no other a conviction is de-
manded, the prosecutor cannot be allowed to
prove in. support of that charge, that he cgm-
mitted another crime, namely that of treason.
Nothing could be more unmir or more con-
trary to the principles of criminal law.
Inaccurate opinions have sometimes been
received on this subject. I have used the ar-«
gument myself, that every thing is evidence
which tends to produce belief in the minds of
the jury. That is not the law of Scotland or
of any civilised 'country. The law judges
what should be allowed to produce belief in
the jury, and, for the reasons which have just
been assigned, it will not allow evidence of
one crime to be used as evidence of another.
Though the prisoner was convicted of being a
traitor, the highest crime which can be com-
mitted in any state, that circumstance could
jesi
Jor AdmbmUrtHg uiiiawfkt Oaths.
A. D. I&17.
Ll6d
not hm penutted to have the towdlest influ-
ence in convicting him of a lesser ' offence
not supported by evidence applicable to itself.
There is another leason why the narratiTe of
die minor proposition cannot be competently
sent to proof, k is there stated that* the pri-
soner vras engaged in a treasonable conspiracy,
hot it is not stated with whom he was engaged
in that oODspiracy. Nay, it is not sUted that
the other conspiiators were persons to the pro«
secQtor unknown* Even upon the suppositiooi
therelbrey liiat this charge nad been laid in the
major, vriiich it is not, it could not be sent to
proo^ because the prosecutor has not given that
nfecmstion with regard to it, which according
to the forms of die law of Scotland he was bound
lo give, that the prisoner might be enabled to
prepare his defcnace. Where a conspiracy is
chaiged against an individual, the other persons
€onspirii% 'most be specified, or at least it
most be stated^ that those persons are unknovm
to dw prosecutor; if eren that is sufficient.
If that remark is applicable to the charge of
coDSptTUcy, how mucn more so is it to that of
treason T To oonvict.a person of treason, many
requisites most occur which are not found here.
No man can be put upon trial for that crime
unless a bill is found against him by a Grand
jury ; and after the bill is foond, man^ forms
must be observed unknown to the criminal law
of Scotland in other cases. For example, the
prisoner is entitled to challenge a certain num*
ber of his jury peremptorily, and without cause
Aevm. He has various other privileges unne*
cessaryie be' stated. - But none of these pri-
vileges have been allowed to the prisoner here,
because he is put upon bis trial for a felony. It
is impossible that your Lordships will allovr
lum to be tried for treason by our forms of
procedure, when it is enacted, by special
statute^ that treason can only be tried by the
IbrmS of the law of £ngland.
It is no answer to this argument, for the pro-
secutor to say, we are going to try the prisoner
for treason, bat we are not to punish him for
treason. We'Ssk for no other punishment but
that which is applicable to the crime laid in the
mgor propositMu of the indictment. If the ju-
ry find the prisoner guilty of treason, though
lie escape the punishment, his character is blast-
ed, be is a convicted traitor, and he suffers an
injury vrfaich the prosecutor is not entitled to
inflict. On the other hand, suppose him to be
acquitted under this indictment, the acquittal
is of no* benefit to him, for not only might his
diaracter be ruined, but he may be again
btoufht to trial for treason in a regular way.
I4>rd Advocate, — ^He cannot be again brought
totiial*
Mr. €>fmn$tam. — ^The lord advocate thinks
diflbentiv from me^ but be is wrong. ' If the
pfisoiier be acquitted of administering the un-
lawful oalh, that act cannot be laid as an overt
act of tseaeott in an indictment for that crime.
Bsi^'ltefie tnasbnable practices are stated for
dir{Pttrpofe4>f prons^^that the oath admini-
stered imposed an obligation to commit treason.
Now the 'lord advocate cannot be prevented
from trying the prisoner for thesie practices as
treason, dthough the prisoner shouM be ac-
quitted of the present charge. The words of
die act are '^rronded also, and it is hereby
declared, that any person who shall be tried
and acquitted, or convicted of any offence
against this act, shall not be liable to be indict-
ed, prosecuted, or tried again for the $ame offence
or fid as hig^ treason or misprision of high trea-
son."
From these words it appears, that after a
trial on this indictment die prisoner cannot be
tried for treason on the ground of having admi-
nistered this oath, but 1^ may notwithstanding
be tried for treason on account of any one of
the acts which his lordship narrates in the mi-
nor proposition, as evidence that the prisoner
and nis associates were engaged in treasonable
practices.
This being the case, what would be the result
of a trial under this indictment, supposing
that the prisoner is acquitted P It would be
just a precognition, and'what is more, a public
precognition taken, for the purpose of convict-
ing him afterwards of high treason. And as
he might be tried twenty times for administer-
ing unlawful oaths, all these trials might be
vrith no other view than that of trying lum for
hi^ treason at last. I put it to your lord-
ships,^ if o'ppression of this kind could be
endured in this country,— if there would not be
an end of all liberty and all security?
I lay it downltherefore as dear law, that one
crime cannot be used as proof of another.
There is nothing set forth in this libel in order
to prove the wtent of the oath as contradistin-
suished from itsptirporl, except facts which in-
fer other crimes, and which, on that account,
cannot be admitted to proof. The whole nar-
rative of the minor proposition must be blotted
out as incompetent, and that being done thera
is notfaingleft but the words of the oath, and these
words do not purport any obligation to commit
treason. The prosecutor may aver the contrary '
— he may say, that whatever may be the appa-
rent purport, thereat intendment was an unlaw-
ful ooUgation : but if he makes this averment
something further is necessary ; he must state
specifically the facts and circumstances by
which he is to prove, that words, innocent ia
themselves, were used with a guilty intent ;
and these fiicts and circumstances must be
relevant to ground that- inference, and com-
petent in themselves to be proved. Further,
as already said, it is not the intention of the
parties, but the intendment of the words which
must be criminal.
But if the nanradve of the minor proposi-
tion be strode out, and I have shovni that it
must be so, then there is no specification of
&cts vvhatever to establish an intendment
different from the purport (^ the oath. What
s^ificadon is necessary in the minor proposi-
tion of a criminal indictment according to the
law of Scodand? AU our authoriUes say that
167]
57 GEORGE III.
Trial of fViitiam Edgar
[168
the minor pnmositioa must set forth a AiU and
accurate detail of all the dicumstances matetial
to the case. But if the lord advocate atten^pts
to extract and elicit from innocent words a
different meaning from that which ^y obvi-
ously bear, and does not specifytbe cutnun-
stances from which he infers that hidden
meaning, then the minor proposition b im-
perfect for want of specification, and the Ubei
u irrelevant.
I had formerly occasion to refer yonr lord**
ships to the practice in trials for perjury : and
it appears to me that there is a great affinity
between trials for that crime, and the present.
Perjury consists in taking an oath which pnr^
ports falsehood : the present eritnie consists in
administering one which purports an unlawful
obligation. In both there is the use of an or-
dinary solemnity, with the criminal intention
in the one case to deceive, and in the other
case to bind to the commission of a crime.
The crimes are analogous. In a caae like the
present, which is new, it is most desirable to
refer to analogous cases, in order to gather
' what are the rvdes of proceeding. Let us con-
sider then what is your proceeding when vou try
a person on a libel lor perjury. Mr. Hume,
in stating what are the specifications necessary
in a libel for peijury, observes, that ** it is
more especially requisite, that in all process
for perjury the prosecutor be not allowed to
lay his libel generally, or in ambiguous tenns;
since otherwise he would take the cognisance
of the relevancy of the charge to himself, out
of the hands of the Court^ to whom of right it
belongs. He has to explain, therefore, wherein
it is that the falsehood lies, and must support
(or as we say, qtu^) his charge with such a
statement of the circumstances of the £&ct, as
justifies his averment of a fidse oath having
been taken, and shall ground a clear inference
(if they be proved) concerning the situation of
the panel's conscience on the occasion." It
thus appears, that in a charge of perjury, in
order to make the libel relevant, it is not
enough to assert that the prisoner has sworn a
false oatlu The prosecutor must point out in
detail the circumstances on which he rests his
averment, that what was sworn is £dse. If that
be the case in a trial for perjury, — in the analo-
gous crime now in question, if the prosecutor
libels words in themselves innocent, he must
specify facts relevant and competent to be
proved, in order to make out the proposition
that these words were used with a guilty in-
tendment— an intendment understood by both
parties. Therefore unless you require a speci-
fication of facts, which I apprehend is essenti-
ally necessary to extract a guilty intendment
from the words of this oath, in themselves in-
nocenlj you depart from one of the best es-
tablished rules of the law of Scotland. What
is said by Mr. Hume as to trials for |>eijury,
is equally applicable to a trial under this act.
I have sJready taken occasion .to observe^
that one of the most vaiuablb statutes in our
code is the statute of Ut Maxy, cap. 1. It is
in our code, for it b a law regaidmg treesoo,
and of consequence introduce along with all
the other laws of England upon that subject
by the 7th Anne, cap. 21. i prsY your lord-
ships to attend to the preamMe of tliat statute
of the 1st Maiy. ** Forasmuch as the state ni
every king, nJer, and governor of any realm,
dominion, or commonalty, standeth and con-
sbteth more assured by the love and frvour of
tiie subjects toward their sovereign ruler and
governor, than in the dread and fear of laws
made with rigorous pains and extreme pnnisb-
ment for not obeying of their sovereign ruler
and governor : And laws also justly made lor
the preservation of the commonweal, without
extreme punbhment or great penalty, are more
often for the most part obeyed and kept, than
laws and statutes made witii great and ex-
treme punishments and in special such lawa
and statutes so made, whereby not only
the ignorant and rude unlearned peofde, bnt
also learned and expert people, mindinK
honesty, are often and many times tnpped and
snared, yea, many times lor words only, with*
out oUier fiict or deed done or perpetrated :
The queen's most excellent majesty, calling to
remembrance, that many, as wdl hononralile
and noble persons as otherof good rep«tation»
within this her grace's realm of England, have
of late (for words only, withovt other opinion,
foot, or deed) suffered shameful death not ao*
customed to nobles ; Her highness, therefore,
of her accustomed clemency and mercy, mind*
ing to avoid and put away die occasion and
cause of like chances hereafter to ensoe, trust-
ing her loving subjects will, for her deniency
to them shewed, love, serve, and obey h^
grace the more heartily and futhfully, than for
dread or fear of pains of body, b contented
and pleased that tne severity 'Of such like ex-
treme, dangerous, and painful laws, shall be
abolished, annulled and made fhistrate and
void." This preamble explains the extreme
danger and mischief arising from laws inflict-
ing the pains of treason on offences whidi are
not accurately defined^ and more particolarij
for words spoken, and accordingly the whole
body of constructive treasons were swept
away by that act.
Now, the statute upon which the present in-
dictment b founded introduced a constructive
felony, on which it inflicts the same punish-
ment as that which is inflicted in treason, at
least in all material respects the same. I did
not read the preamble of the act of queen
Mary, to throw blame on the statute now
under consideration, bnt to show the difficulty
and danger attending the application of every
law of this description, as tne legislature itself
has clearly expressed in that preamble'. But
the statute having been enacted, what b the
proper correcdve for the evib to whidk I
allude f I do not know what b the prac-
tice on the other side the Tweed; tot I
do. not know the detaib of ciisninal pn>-
eedure there, bnt I know that in Scotland
the corrective is to be fbmid iaeur foons of
1691
far AduuKhUriKg taUmfiil Oaths.
A. D. 1617.
iiio
crunnnlpiooedim; and wlatererdefiKti there
may- be in the law of Scotland^ there are aome
exceUcnciefy and one of them is that minnte-
Beaa of ^iceification which the public proeeco-
toris boond to obeerre in his indictment. Hie
nroper piecaation for preventing this statute
Kom being made a source of oppression and
iiyostioe^ is to observe oar forms of criminal
proeedore; and I maintain that one of our best
£mns will be neglected^ if yon allow a proof of
the minor proposition here to go to a juiy^
when there is no specification in the hbel to
show tlwt the wofds ef the oath were nsed in
n sense different from their ordioary sense.
Their ordiniT sense as I have endeavoured to
prove, or rather as I think must be manifest
aft first sight, is perfectly innocent ; at least it
is not an obligation to comnut treason. If this
libel be allowed to go to trial under other '
jndgesy the administration oi any oath* of the
oath of allegiance itself might be made the
mund of a prosecution under this statute.
Tbe author whom I have already bad occasion
to qnoce, says, that the nile of the minor pro-
position containing a specification of all the
nets on which the charge rests, was at-
tended to anziooslyy even in the worst times.
We know well whai are the times to which he
anodes, indeed they are pointed out by the
defisinns to which he refers ; namely, the pe-
riod between 1679 and 1668, when your books
of adioamal are stained with tbe most atroci*
one murders perpetrated under the colosorof
law-^y judges the most unprincipled that
ever sat upon that bench. If in that period,
and jnndet these judges, the rule in question
was not departed from even in the trial of
slate criuMM^ it will not be departed from
in these liberal and enligfatenea days, and
while -yonr lordships preside in tliia Court.
On these grounds, I relate to your lord-
ships with confidedce what is the genuine
eoBvictJon of my own mind, that this is not a
relevant indictment, and that if it be sent to a
jury, a precedent will be established fraught
with the greatest danger,
[Mr. Cranstoun made an apology for occu-
pying the Court so long.]
Lord Justice Clerk. — ^I express the opinion
of the Court, that there Is no reason for such
an apology. We have all heard the very able,
eloquent, and argumentative pleading for the
panel, with the most perfect satisfaction.
. Mr. Dtmumnd. — ^A very difficult task has
devolved itself upon me^ thiat of answering one
of the ablest arguments which I ever had oc-
casion to hear ; and I have this impression
so stronglv on m^ mind, that unless I had
some- confidence m the merits of the cause
whidh I am to support, I should feel the
greatest diffidence in attempting to answer the
speech of the learned gentleman. I trust,
however, that the ease will- speak pretty
Strongly for itself; and my learned friend who-
i#.io foitow me, will, aaich More ably than I
can do, supply what I may happen to omit.
The charge against the panel at the bar is
for a statutory offence. He is charged with
administering an oath of a particular descrip-
tion. The rules of law are clear with regard
to the manner of describing a criminal act. The
words of Mr. Hume are, ** That a libel is not
good, unless it give such an account of the
criminal deed as may distinguish this particu-
lar charge from all other instances of the same
sort of crime, and thus briuff the panel tb the
bar sufficiently informed of that whereof he is
accused.^
If this description of the duty of the prose-
cutor be correct, I apprehend this indictment
must dearly ffo to trial; for it sets forUi the
crime charged in a manner to distinguish it
from ev«ry other instance of the same sort of
crime. 'Die criminal deed is the administer-
ing ef the oath, and the oath itself is set forth
in the indictment. £ven if it had not been in
the power of the prosecutor to obtain the terms
of the oath, yet, by this statute, it was compe-
tent to him to charge its purport. But the
prosecutor has fortunately had more in his
power, for he has obtained the oath itself, and
he has recited it at length in the indictmeqt.
Mr. Hume proceeds afterwards to describe
the manner in which the criminal deed should
be set forth ; and as the learned gentleman
who went before me dwelt some time on this
subject, I shall be under the necessity of
Suoting at length Jdr. Hume's views of the
uty of the prosecutor. {Mr. Drummond here
read from vol. 3, j[). 325, and subsequent pas-
sages, and maintained that the description of
the offence in this indictment was sufficiently
specific]
I apprehend that the prosecutor is correct
as to the times and places, and the individuals
to whom the oath was administered, as no ob-
jection has been stated to the indictment with
regard to these points. And, considering the
particular character of this crime charged, and
that it is of a secret nature, and extremely
difficult to detect, I think your lordships must
be satisfied, that the prosecutor has given aa
foil and particular a description of it as the
panel could expect.
This is a crime, in many respects, of a yery
peculiar character. It is necessary, indeed,
as was correctly stated by the learned gentle-
roan, that the oath itself should bind to the
commission of treason, or of some capital
felony. It is not sufficient that the party ad-
n^inistering the oath, or the party taking it,
should have treasonable, or other criminal in-
tentions ; but it is necessary that the oath itself
should b4nd to the commission of treason, or
some other crime. This was most correctly laid
down by the learned genQeman, and any infer-
ence which the prosecutor may think himself en-
titled to draw from the oath willnotbe sufficient,
i£it do not clearly appear that the oath itself is
of the precise purport necessary to inculpate the
* 3 Comm. 310^
171 j 27 GEORGE III.
nanel on the lUttute' fouiKled upon in th^ iih'
dictment. On this pari of die cate I am ready
lo meet the learned eentleman ; for it appean
to me very clearly tnat this oath does contain
an obligation to commit treason, and that,
upon a rair construction of it, no man of good
tense can firil to be' of this opinion. The oath
fliysy ** I win penefere' in my endeavours to
obtain for all the people in Ciieat Britain and
Ireland, not disqualified by crimes or insanity,
the elective franchise, at the age of twenty-one,
with free and equal representation and annual
pariiaments; and that X ^Q support the same
to the utmost of my power either by moral or
Sysical strength, as the case may require.''
le learned gentlem'an stated, that the oath
binds the person ' taking it to support the en-
deavours made to obtam annual parliaments
and universal suffrage, and he stated so cor-
rectly. He observe«i tiiat the oeih could not
bind them to support what was not in exist-
ence, and that therefore it was to obtain, not
lo support, annual parliaments and universal
suffrage, things not in existence, that the
oath had been administered and taken. It re-
mains for you to consider, whether the oath to
support with moral and physical strength
endeavours made to obtain annual parfia-
ments and universal sufVaaiB, is an oath which
eobjeets those administering or taking it to
the charge of administering or taking an
oath purporting to bind those taking the same
to commit treason ? and upon that narrowed'
construction of the oath I join issue with the
opposite counsel.
It was said verjr ingeniously, that physical
strength may be mnocently employed m many'
wavs for the support of endeavours to obtain
vnhrersal suffrage and annual parliaments^-
that it may be employed in the erecting of
hustings for meetings to petition parliament on
the sulnect-— that it may oe employed in run-
ning about and soliciting members of the
legislature to give their support to such peti*
lions. These are certainly exercises of physi-
cal strength, but not of the kind referred to in
the oath. The oath binds the persons taking
it to use aU their i^jsical strength, as the case
may require. The instances which have been
mentioned of the application of physical
strength are not the only ways in which physical
strength may be employed in order to obtain the
objects spoken of; yet, by the terms of the oath,
there is no limitation as to the kind of physical
strength which the parties were to use. • Tliey
were to use the whole of their moral and
physical strength; and the terms force and
strength have beretlie same meaning. If an
innocent purpose only had been in the view
of these persons, then why were they anxious
for concealment ? — What follows in the oath ?
** And I do further swear, that neither hopes,
fears, rewards, or punishments, diall induce
me to inform on, or give evidence against,
anv member or members, collectively or indi-
viaually, for any act or expression done or
nude, in or out^ in (his or -similar societies.
Trial of fVWmmEJgar
cna
under the punishment of death, to be inflicted*
on me by any member or members of such
societies. So help me God, and keep me
stedfest.*' This is a remarkable part of the
oath, and surely such concealment was not
necessary in erecting hustings, or doing aAy
of the things which were suggested by_tbe
learned counsel in his illustrations. There
can be no use for such concealment, where
lawful means are to be employed for the attain-
ment of lawful objects. Every person vrfao
reads the oath must see that it proves in the
strongest manner, that illegal objects were in
ti)e view of the parties. This is obvious, with-
out travelling beyond the four comers of the
oath itseUl It is so obvious, that no argument
can prevent the indictment from going to trial.
The oath alone, without going to any other
article of evidence, is directly crimtoal, and
implies that the purpose for which the meeting
was assembled was an illegal purpose, and the
association ah illegal association.
It was said by Uie learned gentleman, that
the word '< force*' had been ^ artfiiify*' subeti-
luted in the indictment for the word **• strength.*^
Bnt according to my construction, they have
no different meanin^-<-they are synonymous.-
But I may answer his statement bv a' remark
of his own which is well founded, that any
inference from the oath adjected in the indict-
ment does not signify, unless the oath itself
neeemarily imply that inference. The artifice,
therefore, if there bad been any (and there
was assuredly none), could have no effect, as
your lordships are to judge of the oath itself,
and not of the oondusionsHlrawn from it by
the prosecutor.
It is also libelled in the indictment (and to
the proof of that no objection has been stated),
that this oath was administered at secret meet-
ings. To a proof of this averment, no object
tion has or can be made ; and if it shall be
proved that this oath was administered at a
secret meeting, this is an additional circum-
stance of evidence whidi must go to the assise,
to show that the purpose of the oath' was
illegal and criminal. That the oath was ad-
ministered at a secret meeting is charged, I
observe, with regard to the meeting first
libelled on in the indictment.
It is argued, that the narrative of the indict-
mentr— the general statement of treasonable
conduct which precedes the statement of the
particulars founded on^is not relevant to be
proved. I apprehend, however, that many
examples mint be given from the daily prac-
tice of the uourt'of such narratives as this
going to a jury. One example that occurs to
me--H(I am sorry that I am under the necessity
of speaking from memory alone, as I am cer-
tain that it I ' had had timeto make an investi-
gation, I could have produced many examples
on the point)— an example, I say, occurs to
me,* which is probably in your recoHection.
The cise I allude to vras that of a charge for
uttering ^rged notes. The forgery bad been
committed ia Englebd ;-^that qrifli^ therefoie.
173 J
Jar Aimimleri»g vAt^ OaOs.
A. D. 1817.
1174
tbe Court had no joiisdlction to tiy. Yet yon
tilmitted the statement of the forgery in the
narrative of the indictment m modam proialiom$
oCthe dine. of uttering the forged notes in
Scotland, and as relevant to infer the know-
ledge of the forgery in the ntterer. This is
setUad lair; and the oath here charged is at
least as intimately connected with the . state-
ment of treasonable practices mentioned in the
narrattye^ as the crime of nttering forged notes
was with the perpetration of the forgery! I
am not going too far in saying that the oath
is nothing ebe than an OTert act of a general
treasrmable conspiracy, opt now charged
against the parties. The whole import and
constraction of the present charge^ indeed, in-
volves the existence of another crime. The
administration of the oath is a criminal act,
binding the takers to ciu9»iC .aoptl^ar cdme ;
and how is it possible to separate, the two?
How can any circomstanceii regarding the one
be eKplained without mentioning the other P
We are bound to show that there was treason
which would have been speedily matured, if
the purposes of the persons who administmd
and who took the oath had been carried into
effect. We are to prove what they were
hatdiiiig— what they intended— nand it is im-
possible to lay out of .view the preparations
they were making for. committing treason, in
^caking, of what they bound themselves to
aocompUsh. Thus the rule of not admitting
proof of one crime in evidence of another,
must be received with some qualification, .and
it btf always been so in practice. [Mr . Drum-
nond here referred to Hume's Com. vol. 3.
p. 411, and. to the case of Thomas Somerville,
who ^as tried for perjury in 1813, as men-
tioned in the corresponding part of the supple-
ment, p. 2^6.] There, you have (evidence of
one crime admitted to.prove another, although
the one was quite different from. Uie other.
But here the crimes are intimately and almoet
ittseinrably connected. It is an established
rale in the English law books, in cases of trea-
son, not only that one overt act not laid as a
charge, may be adduced as proof of one that
is laid, but that a general proof of rebellion or
conspiracy is allowed before proceeding to the
particular acts charged ; and the well known
case of Strafford* was quoted and received as
an authority on this point in the trials of Wattf
and Downle,t — ^in which the existence of a
treasonable plot was allowed to be proved be-
fore the overt acts charged. Hie principal
3uestion is, whether, the matter offered in evi-
ence.be pertinent to the point in issue f
It was said that we are not entitled to try
a. man for treason in this form, and that there-
fore we cannot indirectly try the treason as
pioo(oCaift>ther crime. * I appeal, in answer
to this,- to the act of parlian^nt under which
we are now proceeding. The whole act, and
< »■
♦ 3 How. St. Tr. 1381.
t 2 How. Mod. St. Tr. 1167.
I 8How. Mod. StTr. 1.
particttlaily the last daose,. piooteds on the
understanaing that we are entitled to go on as
we are doing in this trial, althoogh the crime
tried be treason. . <
^ Provided also^ and it is hereby dedared,
that any person who shall be tried and ao-
quitted, or convicted of any offence against
tfiis act, shall not be • liable to be indicted
prosecuted, or tried again for. the same offence
or fact, as high treason, or , misprision of high
treason ; and that nothing in this act contained
i shall be construed to extend to prohibit any
' person guilty of any offence against this act,
and who shall not be tried for tiie same as an
offence against this act, from being tried for
the same as high treason, or misprision of high
treason, in sudi manner as if this act had not
beeu ntadeh"
Even iflhiseet had aever existad, I shonid
have been prepared to maintain, on the or-
dinary rule^ of law, the competency of trying
under a lower denomination of crime : what
might have been tried as treason but the dause
now quoted is quite conclusive. There is,
therefore, nothing in the ciroumstanoe that the
criminal proceedings set forth in the- iiarrative
of the indictment happen to be of a treasonable
nature, that can make any difference in the
case ; and I submit, that as they form part of
the res gata at the time of administering the
oath, and, naturally enter into the history of
the transaction, they ought to be admitted to
{>roof, and found relevant with the rest of the
ibel. The^ are intimately and inseparablT
coi^iected with the proof of the crime cnar|;ed,
and afford the clearest and most relevant mii»
da than can be imagined of the guilty purpose
of the panel. It seems unnecessary to add
that if it be relevant to introduce this statement
narraiivif the same specification is not requisite
as if it had been made the "subject of a sub-
stantive charge ; and I should not have made
this remark at all, unless there had appeared a
disposition to argue upon this narrative, as if
the relevancy of it were to be tried by the
same rules as a charge in the indictment. . .
It was said by the learned gentleman, that,
the particulars charged as what the parties
bound themselves to commit, would not have
amounted to high treason even if they had
been carried into effect. But how it can be
maintained that the employment of force to
accomplish public measures of this description
is not treason, I cannot conceive. It appears
to me to be beyond the ingenuity of even the
learned gentleman himself, to persuade any
person, that, a public measure of any sort may
DO accomplished, not to say the fundamental
principles of the constitution subverted by
force, by a number of persons conspiring to«
getherfor that purpose without levying war
agaist the king. According to my view of.
the law, I might have been entitled to charge
the administration of the oath itself as h«h^
treason. The wor^s.of the statute 36 G. ifl^
c. 7. seem completely in point, as tq the trea-;
sonable nature of the association and the oath..
174]
57 GEORGE III.
Trial of WaUam E^ar
1176
^ tf asy person or penonn, fcc. shall obmpttsSy
, imagine, meat, dernse, or intend deam or
destraottbnj^ See. kc* or to deprive or depose
him, &c. or to levy war against his Majestj,
in order, by force or constraint, to compel him
to change his measures or counsels, or in order
fo put any force or constraint upon, or to in-
timidate or overawe both Houses, or either
House of Pariiament-«--4UDd suoh compas*
sings, imaginations, tnTentions, devices or in^
tentions, or any of them shall express, titter, or
declare, by publishing any printmg or wnting,
or by any overt' act or deed^"- £vea under
the first head of the statute of Sdward III.
it might have been maintained to be treason
to conspire for the <cttainment of universal
anffirage and annual Parliaments by foroe; and
the oath and secret meeting might have been
given in evidence as overt acts.
But it is unnecessary to enter upon the
question, whether the acts libelled as having
been done, might have justified a charge of
treason. It is «iough for the present purpose
to say, that if the force which the parties bound
themselves bj this oath to use, for obtaining
annual parliaments and universal suflVage, had
been actually employed for those purposes
. (which are not only of a public nature, but
utterly subversive of the whole frame of the
constitution) this would clearly have been that
species of treason which consists in levying
war against the king.
It vras said, that the coneluding part of the
indictment does not correspond with what
goes before, as the charge of intending is omit-
ted, and that of purporting only relied upon.
It is .true, that the prosecutor relies completely
on the charge of purportmgy because the pur-
Eort and open meaning of the oath is so clear ;
ut the proper answer to this critical objection
is, that it is quite unnecessary and unusual to
repeat in this part of an indictment the whole
expressions previously used, as it sdways bears
such a reference to what goes before, as to
point the attention to the preceding description
as that which' is here spoken of. Thus, ^' Times
and placesybreaauj the said oath or engage-
ment,'' &c. This is the usual style, and it is
not customary to repeat all the preceding
epithets and qualifications which are included
and held repeated by the reference to what
goes before.
I am sensible that there are many things
which I have omitted, but I will not detain
your lordships longer.
Mr. SoUcUof General. — In concluding the
debate on the part of the crown, I must be
pardoned for observing in behalf of the prose-
cutor, that nothing is or can be more remote
from his intention, than to introduce into the
law of the land any of those constructive
treasons tp which reference was made by my
learned friend at the commencement of his
speech for the panel. Nothing can be more
remote from the intention of the public pro-
secutor in Scotland at any period. And if
such a profligate design existea, it would meet
with a sure and signal defeat from the ind^
pendence of the bar,^and firaim the vigour and
integrt^ of the court.
The present prosecution does not involve
any eharge of constructive treason. It is
founded upon a statute of recent introduction ;
a statute quite plain and explicit; a statute
which, very unfortunately for tne country, the
late comiption of the public mind and of ^e
moral habits of some part of the population
has rendered necessary for the protection of
the state.
In answering the argument nudntained for
the panel, I must take leave to recai to your
lordships' notice two of the species of treaeoov
which were not introduced, but vrell definedv
by the statute of £dward III. These two
species of treason are,— ^irtf. Compassing the
death of the king^ fe60iu%, Levying war
against the king.
Your lordships are all aware, that by dedar^
ing and defining the first species of treason,
the legislature Stowed upon a mental act —
upon the imagining, or compassing ip the
mind, the death of die king— the character of
a completed crime, punishable by a luj^ sane*
tion ; and it provided, that in the case of this
highest offence against the state, mere intMH
tion (which in other -cases is not cognizable by
the criminal tribunals to that effect) shoiM
held the same rank in the scale of guilt kmi.
of punishment with a completed act. It rein
dered the compassing or imagining^ Uiemere
conception or design of destroying the king^
punimable with the pains of treason. There
IS a remarkable distinction, therefore, between
this class of erimee and all others. It may be
said generally, almost without exception, that
the mere compassing of any other -act, the
mere compassing of murder, for- instance, the
criminally imagpining suoh a deed is not a
cognizable crime, at least is not cogniiable as
the crime of murder. But in this department
of the law the ease is different. The imagi-
nation of the king's death is the statutory
crime> and nothing more is required than an
overt act, by which this imagining is infened
or proved.
As to the next species of treason^ that of
levying war against the king, I do not mean
to give an opinion upon die question, whether
the mere imagining of it, as proved by the
administering or taking an oath, or by any
thing short of the total or partial execution of
the act of levying war, would be held to foil
under the statute. I am not here called upon
to offer any opinion on sneh a question. But
you wilt see by and by the reason why T
have ealled jc^t attention to the drcomslancea
which have now been stated.
On die supposidoa, that by the former and
existing law it was donbtfiil whether in the
geneml case the mere intentio% or imagining;
or compassing to commit any treason, when
not reauced' into action, is in itself treason,
the statute of the 52d of the king was intro-
duced, the object of which was, to bring the
Jbr Aimmideriiig mlm^ Oaikt.
«7Y)
frfftifffr €f committiiig treasoD, when so &r
matuTed as to be reoaeied obligatory hy an
oath, into tlie class d crimes pooishabk
with death. Bjr tbe previefiis law, it might
perhaps be donbttiil tihether such criminal in-
tention could in oertata cases infer a capital
fNuishaient. Bot when the intention is ap-
piozimated to esecotion by an oath, and is
manifested by snch as overt act, when it is
accompanied by an oath, to commit and con-
ceal it, tiie legislature has enacted that it shall
be pfinished as a capital crime. That the act
described so distinctly in the statute is a
iiigb dfence, an ofenoe from which the great-
caa>danger to the public may be apprehended',
and by -which the deepest depravity of heart
in the perpetiator is proved, no man will
▼entnre to aispute. I can see no reason why
the highest sanction should not be affixed
4. 0; xm-
well as its i^^plication to the picvtotts law, and
its necessity m the drcumstsACM and chancte?
of the countiy, on which I have insistei^, to be
correct, J solicit your attention to the first, and,
in my mind, by far the most important objeo*
tion Uiat has been made, as to the mode in
.which the libel is laid. That ob|ection con-
sists of two points in law, as I understand it
In the firit place, that the oath taken does not,
upon a fidr construction of it, amount to the
oflenoe stated in the major proposition ; or, in
other words,' to the statutoir offence. And
thett, supposing it did, it is alleged, secondly^
that in the indictment there is a vrant of
specification of circumstances, and detail of the
manner in which the intended treason was to
be committed.
I call your attention, in the jirs< place, to the
terms of the oath, for I have no hesitation
hich are used. '^That every person
who shall, in any manner or form wluitsoever,
adviaister or cause to be administered, or be
aiding or assisting at the administering of any
oath or engagement, purporting or inteodiiig
to bind the person taking the same to commit
aay treason, or nraider, or any felony punish-
able br law with death, shall, on eonvictioo
thereof by due course of law, be adjudged
guilty of fiilony, and Mbr death as a felon,
without benefit of deigy.*' It is plain, in
looking to tbe terms of the statute, that it did
notcoi^eniplatean ad uriiich has been done^ but
one wlucfa is to be done ; which exists only in
intention, bnt which, at the same time, exists
in a amtnred intention; an intention passing
froB the heart of one man to the heart of
anodier, and attended by the obligation of an
oadi te the eonoealment and accomplishment
ef the jBu^ined crime. And sure I am, that
it iaimpoenhle for aoy<one taking this view of it
not to be of opinion, that the act defined is not
BMrely a statutory crime, but must be feU and
eeafaMed to.be a crime by the common sense
aadimiversal feelingsof dvilixed man. At all
tiaMsand in afi pUiMs it is a crime, and in no
plaeeor comtrj is it more criminal than in
Holland, utere there exists, in many districts of
it at leasts a religious feeling amountiag-almost
to fanaticism ; and .where a union of political
and laligSons pasaions mast create in tha vul-
gar mfaid a darker, and more atrodous cha-
tlie commission of it. I submit that all this is I in sa^ng, thai if this oath do not of itself, and
as dear as the sun, and that neither the ; in fair and honest construction, amount to the
legishaure nor the public pfo^cutor can be ' crime laid in the major proposition, there i$ no
barged with any design of introducing coo- ! case before you. For I have no intention (I
atractive treason, by* demanding the ioflietion I disclaim it, and no one can with truth impute
of a capital puidshment on such a crime. | it) to press a severe or harsh construction of
Taking that view of theobjects and purposes ! the oath. The terms of this oath have been
of the statnte, and considering it with refer- ; often read to you, and, however disagreeable
to the prindples and system of the law i it mav be to repeat that which you have so often
heard, the importance of the case must be m]^
apology for again readiug its words and sub«
(offdships wiU be f^eased^to attend to the | jecting it to a critical examination. .
I may here state, that in construing the oath
there can be little room for difference of opinion
as to theprittcipleon which you ought to proceed.
I am willing to admit, that the panel .at the bar
is not to be ensnared hj any subtle, recondite^
and remote iaterpretation of the oath, by any
interpretation different from that which an or-
dinary man would put upon it, on reading it
from beginning to end. But I maintain with
equal confidence, that the panel cannot escape
from the law, and the public safety is not to
be eikdangered, by a construotioii in his favour,
which is recondite or subtle«-4y an interpr^
tation of the oath, which it plainly could not bear
in his own mind, and which plainly he knew it
did not bear in the minds of those to whom it
was administered. Between these two ex«
tremes, it is your peculiar province to strike
out the middle .course, and to adopt that just
and rational interpretation which will not only
command tihe acquiescence, but the approb%*
tion of the public prosecutor. *
What does the oath sayP ^^In the awful
presence of God, I, A B, do voluntarily swear
that I will persevere in my endeavouring to
form a brotheriiood of affection amongst
Britons of every description, who are consi-
dered worthy oi confidence." I concur with
my learned friend in sayino^ that this part of
the oath, if taken by itsdl^ is perfectly inno-
cent The oath goes on, ** And that I wi|l
penevere in my endeavours > to obtain for all
Ifhe people in Oreat Britain and Irdand, not
Holdiaff, as I do, with a confidence not in- disquulified by crimes or insani^, the electiva
ferior.to vuki whidi has bean expressed on the franchise, at the age of twenty-one, with free
dde^ the inteimuliQnof the statute, as and equal lenresantalioDi and annuel parlis*
VOL. xxzm. N
1791 57 GEORGE IIL
^Tud tf WiUum E^r
C180
nents ; and that I will«8upport the tame to tlie
utmost of my power, either hj moral or
physical strength, as the case may require:
And I do further swear, that neithtr hopes,
fears, rewards, or punishments, shall induce
ine to inform on, or give evidence against, anj
member or members, collectirely or indivi-
dnally, for any act or expression done or made,
in or out, in this or 'similar societies, under the
punishment of death, to be inflicted on me by
any member or members Df such societies. So
help me God, and keep me stediast.*^ Two
questions have been raised on this part of the
oath. The counsel for the panel has main-
tained two propositions. First, Thai the words
** tttpport the mant^^ mean, that the oath-taker
was to support annual parliaments and univer-
sal suffrage, after these mighty improvements
were estiu>lished by I'egular and constitutional
means. And, tecmdy That even if the words
nf^pori Mc same mean, to support the eodea-
voars to obtain these objects, yet the p^/ncal
strength to be used was capable of being used
in a manner not illegal.
On the first point, your lordships hava to
consider what is here uuderstood by the word
seme. What is the antecedent to this pro-
noun ? I submit, there are only two ways of
giving a sound construction of this word. It
must- eitfier apply to the whole of the previous
branch of the sentence, or to a part ot it. If
the first is adopted, and if it be held to embrace
the whole of the previous part of the sentence,
and if the antecedent be considered as thus
extensive, then the construction put upon it
by the other side vnll be destroyed; for if the
word *' same" embraces all tba previous part
x>f tlie sentence, it includes both the use of
physical force in obtaitiing annual parliaments
und universal suffrage, and its employment in
Maintaining these objects after they are accom-
plished. This is a mode of construction so
perfectly fair, that the panels cannot object
to it.
' But this is not the construction which a pe-
rusal of the oath naturally dictates. It is dear
that by it the obligation to accomplish the
wished-for changes by physical strengtii was
contemplated, and that this. was the sole pur-
pose of the oath. I maintain, that taking t^e
whole of the oath together, comprehending the
'obligation to conoeaJment, it is impossible to
consider it without condudinff, not by a remote
and distant cotistruction, but Indirect rational
necessary inference, that the parties had in
thdr minds a criminal accomplishment of their
designs, and the moment criminal intention is
granted tome, it folfows that there can be no
criminal accomplishment of this design, but
flueh as would oe treason. The reasonable,
the ftur constmction, • thai which -obvionsly
mnst have have been in the mind of the giver
aikd taker of the oath, is, that the wvrd same
bad no other application than that wksich I
^bave stated, viz. to bind to the use of phy-
sical strength for the attainment of the'object.
-This is the eorveet| graminatical ooBBtnictum^
pointed out, not only by the juxtaposition of
the vrords, but by the general sense of the whole
passage and of the vriiole* oath ; and it fs im^
possible to put an^ other inteipretation upon
It, without sacrificing the pubuc safety, and
public law to a forced and subtle construction. '
I do not dweti longer on this point, bo-
cause truly it lies in a nut-shell, and if by
merely- stating it, I do not shew that I am in
the right, I despair of doing so by any length
6f argument.
Now, your lordships have to consider^
whether, supposing it were established that the
obligation in the oath is to support endeavours
to obtain annual parliaments and univecsal
suffrage* by physical strength, the act which
was thus meditated, does, li accomplished,
amount to treason. That such purpose woidd,
if accomplished, have constituted treason, is
proved by the concurrent testimony of all law*
yers ancient and modem. The essence of
treason consists* in the application of force
to the accomplishment of an alteration in any
general law. How did tty learned Mend get
out of this dilemma? He maintained ml
physical strength forttie accomplishment of any
diaiMre in the laws of this kingdom, might by
possibility be exercised without committing
treason ; and this he iflustrated by supposing the
case of the Sneaker of Uie House ox Commons
being forced ny threats and violence to consent
to a bill for the abolition of the House of Lords,
or of anv of the branches of the constitution,
which bul having passed the House of Lords,
had its fote dependent on the Speaker's casting
vote. That whimsical case can scarcely be
called a case in illustration ; but if it were
neoessaiy for me to enter into that supposed
case, I would say without hesitation, that here
was treason, not merely under the act of '^e
36th of the king, but under what I may call the
previous common law of the land. Many de-
cisions might be referred to, to establish this.
But I have no occasion to enter upon sudi an
inapplicable question.
The other instanoes of the possible exertions
of physical force in the accomplishment of the
purposes contemplated by the panel and bis
associates are utieriy absurd. It is said, that
physical force may be exerted in the canying
of messages, in the erection of hustings, in die
keeping off the crovrds, and in various other
ways which are all innocent, and whid^ are sJl
Gondaeive to the attainment of the objects in
view. I contend, that in these illustrations
the tounsel for the panel forget or overiook the
distinction between the terms moral said
physical, as employed to characterise humlm
action. When a man delivers an oration, heis
tmdeiBtflod in Ammon language to exercise his
moral power or strength. But my learned
friends must admit, thateome pbyncal force or
strength is also at the same time everted. To
make the penl^th which the poliiioal oaHoria
tovrrite, to carry the bench fromwhieh the
political orator is to deelaim, to keep off ti»e
cr^wd vrith which the poUtidal orator- woald
ISI]
for Atbkitdderiiig unlawful Oalht,
A. D. I8I7.
Il8i»
Otherwise be incominoJedy are all actions sub-
serrient to the moral powers which are to be
exerted. It is impossible to d^ny this without
GonfoQDdin^ the disdnction between the terms
moral and physical. Ko moral power can be
exercised by man without physical exertion^
Ifut when the distinction to whidi I have ad-
verted is reooUectedy the iUnstrationv which
have been offered are either in themf eUes ab-
sard, or are against the argument of the panel,
and most be classed with moral, and not pby*
sical exertiona.
The obligation in the oath is, to employ
moral and phjvical strength, as the case may
Mquire — tlAt is, such moral strength, as the
case may require, and such physicil strength,
as the case may 'require.— It is thus clear, 3iat
tbe terms of the oath do not bear a limitation
to that innocent sort of force by the criminal
example of which the learned counsel illus-
trated his argument. According to the dear
terms of tbe oath, such physical strength was
to be employed as the case might require, for
the accomplishment of the purposes which
bare been mentioned. What, I ask, are we
to understand — what is the le^ inference
from the construction I have given? It is,
that physical strength, «s the exigency might
require^ was to be used for the aocoqtiplish-
ment of a change in the constitution.
It is unnecessary to advert to the extreme
absordity of endeavouring to distinguish be-
tween tlMS meaning of the words sfrev^M and
Jane. They are certainly synonymous terms;
and for the present purpose, at least, no dis-
tinctioD can be stated between them, either in
popular or technical use. It is impossible to
acoompliah the alteration or subversion of
any part of the constitution by physical force,
^thonty in legal acceptation, levying war for
ihat purpose, or compassing the king*s death,
•r bein^ guilty of some oUier treason. ' The
application of numerical physical strength is
nothing else but the levying of war. JBut if
war be levied within the lungdom for any
|(aiiecal purpose, — ^for the purpose of subvert-
ing any of me branches of the constitution, —
th^ war is understpod to be r levied against
the king, who, being the executive, is bound
to protect the other branches of the Legisla*
tare. This is the import of all the antborities,
to some of which' I may now. direct the atten*>
lion of the Court.
The first authority to which I refer is that
tif Bladcstone, who states the law in a brief
and popular form. ^ The third species of treason
n^ ' It a nan do levy war affunst our lord tbe
hug in his realm** And this may be done
bj taking anns^ not only to dethrone the king,
wA aader pretence to reform religion, or the
tows, or to remove, evil counsellors, or other
grievances, whether real er pretended. For,
tbe law does not, neither 4^. it, permit any
private man, or set -of men, to interfere
Miciblyin matteis of such high, importance';
especially as it ^as; eitablished a sufficient
power, loi these purposes, in the bigb court of
Parliament: neither does the constitution
justify any private or particular resistance for
private or particular griefances; though in^
cases of national oppr^ion the nation has'
very justifiably ris^n as one man, to vindicate
the origins^l contract subsisting between the
king and his people." *
Ibe next authoritv to which I refer is that of
£w<er, a book which is daily cited by English
Judges, as an undoubted authority. I quote
from page 211. — "Insurrections in order to
throw down all enclosures, to alter the esta«
blished law, or change religion, to enhance the
price of all labour, or to open all prisons — all
risings, in order to effect these innovations, of
a public and, general concern, by an armed
force are, in construction of law, high treason,
within the clause of levying war ; for though
they are not levelled at the person of the king,
they are against hisjt>yal majesty; and be-
sides, th^ have a direct tendency to dissolve
all the bonds of society, and to destroy all
property, and all government too, by numbers
and an armed force. Insurrections likewise
for redressing national grievances, or for the
expulsipn of foreigners in general, or indeed
of any single nation livins here under the
protection of the king, or tor the reformation
of real or imaginary evils of a public nature,
and in which the insurgents have no special
interest— risings to effect these ends by force
and numbers are, by construction, of law,
within the clause of levying war; for they
are levelled at the kings crown, and royal
dignity."
the only other authority to which I shall^
refer, is that of a Judge, than whom none was
ever more highly or more deservedly honoured
during a long and splendid career. I. quote
from the summing-up of lord Mansfield on
lord George Gordon's trial. — *' There are two
kinds of levying war : — One against the per^^
son of tbe king; to imprison, to dethrone, or
to kill him ; or to knake him change measures
or remove counsellors : — ^llie other, which It
said to be levied against the majesty pf the
king, or, in other words, against him in his
regal capacity ; as when a multitude rise and
assemble to attain by force and violence any
object of a general public nature; that is
levying war against, the majesty of the king ;
and most reasonably so held, because it tend^
to dissolve all the bonds of society, to destroy
property, and to overturn government; and by.
force of arms to restrain the king from reigi>
ing according to law.
^Insurrections, by force and violence, to
raise the 'price of wages, to open all prisons,
to destroy meeting-bouses, nay, to destroy all
brothels, to resist the execution of militia laws,
to throw down all inclosures, to alter the esta-
blished law, or change religion, to redress
grievances real or preiended, have all been
held levying war. Many otiier instances
might be put. Lord Chief Justice lloli, iu
* 4Comm. ai.
gir Jobn Friend's cas«, says, ^^if pevsoin do
assemble themselves, and act witn force in
opposition to some law which they think in*
coDTenient, and ho^ thereby to get it re-
pealed, this is a levying war, and treason." In
the present case, it don't rest npon an impli-
eation that they hoped by opposition to a uiw
to get it repealed, but the prosecotion proceeds
npon the direct ground, tnat the object waiy
by force and violence, to compel the Legis-
lature to repeal a law; imif tAere/bre, witAoitf
fifty doubif lUU you the jomi opinion ofvsaUj
that J if thii mtdmide auembled with intent^ by
ccts y force and violence^ to compel <Ae L^U'
lature to rneal a Imo, it ii high tmmm.
^Tboogn the form of an indictment for
this species of treason mentions drums, trum-
pets, arms, swords, fifos, and guns^ye^ ntme of
ikt$e dramntoRca are etMentiaL The quettion
choeysiMy Whether the intent tt hy farce and vio^
knee to obtain an oljeet of a general andmtbtic
nature by any imtrwnents, or bydmt of their
numbertf Whoever incites, advises, encon-
nget, or is any way aiding to sudi a multitude
so assembled with such intent, though he does
not personally appear an>oog them, or vrith
his own hands commit any violence whatsoever,
yet he is equally a principal with those who
act, and guilty of nigh treason/'* .Many
other authorities to the same effect might be
accumulated. I need not quote Hume, who
«ves a very luminous abstract of all the
English antboritieron the subject, and gives a
summary which, in perspicuity and preci-
sion, is not surpassed by the boasted oracles
df English law.
I say, therefore, on these authorities, it is
utterly impossible to imagine that any change
*in the constitution can be accomplished by
physical strength, without necessarily implying
— not constructively, but necessarily implying
— 4hat it is done by force and violence. Levy-
ing war is nothing more than the application
of an act which is treason. The for&v or mode
of this act may probably be that of levying
war, to overcome or prevent resistance. It
does not consist in having drums, or uniformity
of dress, or the other usual appendages of
warlike pomp. It does not consist in any
particular kind of offensive arms, but in the
application of a powerNk and numerous force;
and it is impossible tl^t strength for the ac-
complishment of any change in die consti-
tution can be applied in any way, so as not to
include the crime of treason, either of levying
war, or of compassing the king's death, or m
treason, under the Stat. 36 G. III. That
which is accomplished by force can only be
dotie iub rpeae oelUf in so fer at those terms
have any intelligible meaning, and the same
quality must characterise that which is in«
tendea mt resolved to be donei I submit,
therefore, that the construction given by die
learned gentleman to the oath is erroneous,-
and that the only sound, the only legal, and
Triai qflViUiam Edgttr
tlM
•«MM«n
• 2t How. St. Tr. 644.
the only obvious eoi)stniction of it, i» that
which I have stated to your lordships.
It iHs contended forther, however, tha^
supposing a treasonable purpose to have ex-
isted, it is still necessary that it should be
proved by and appear in the oath, and in the
oath alone, in oruer to have the Tase braiught
under the statute. If I rightly understood
tiiis plea, two things were maintained, wMch
I own appeared to me to be inconsistent: It
was first maintained, that then is a want of
specification in the indictment as to the mode
in which the treason contemplated.by the oath
was to be effected ; next, it was maintained,
that in this indictment, charging the panda
with administering unlawfM oaths, we are not
entitled to go into any proof of acts of treason
said to have been committed \q them, for that
would be to make the proof of one crime the
Fr9of of the commi^on' of another. These
consider to be inconsistent objections.
Whether the treasonable purpose should ap-
pear in the oath itself, to bring the case witiun
the statute, it is unnecessary to ame, because
in the present case we do not desire to go
beyond the contents of the Oath. But in pas-
sing, I roust deny that this plea for the panel is
sound, or at all warranted by the terms of the
statute.
With respect to the other objections, I must
observe that from the nature of the crime
which the statute hasi defined, you neither can
require, nor can yon eiqiect, in charging it,
a specification of overt acts of treason. Ac-.
Corain^ to the previous argument of the panrt,
the prosecutor is not entitled to prove any acts
of treason, if such had been actually com-
mitted, and herein lies the monstrous incon*
sistency of his present argument. In my view
of the case, tM specification which the mad
thus . alternately opposes and demandt, is
morally impossible.
The charge hero is not for the accomplish-
ment and completion of the crime of treason ;
— the Charge is for the conception, the nia-
gination of treason, sanctioned by an- oath,
and so far by an overt act consisting in the
administration of an oath. When a crime bas
not been actually committed it is impossible
Co state the circumstances of mode, time, aii^
detail of execution. When a crime has been
. committed, it is of course an essential mode of
that criminal act, that it was accompanied by
time, place, and circumstances; and when a
Eanel is brought to the Bar on a diarge of
aving committed a ciim^ the prosecutor can
have no knowledge regarding it without
knovring some of the prominent dreuastances
of its execution. But you must all be aware^
that this rale cannot ap»ply fo what merely
exists in intention. Of intention hete, ytmr
lordships have evidence by the oath, and th«
oafli is such as the statute has made it a
crime, dther to adminfoter or to take.
The crime charged is the adaadniBtetisif an
oath of a certain kind,' and the mode of tbit
aot is admitted to be suflkiently ^kldled. H
1853
Jar AdrnmiiUring UmIm^ Oathi.
A. D. 1817.
UM
IB powble that^wben tlie otth was adnius-
tefedy not cme circmnstiDee was finally ra-
solved upon as to the detail of the ezecation
of tike treaaon ^-it is cpute pooible that no
ooe cncomaunoe nnqr hare b^en fixed on as
to the mode in whidi it was to have been
carried into elfeet ; — and no lesoliitions adopt-
ed as a> the ooune of proceeding to be folkm-
ed fiw the nocompHaoment of the atrocions
imiposea of the parties. Diflerent plans ma^
tare eiiated in the minds of difiierent consp-
lators; — ^therenay have been nnmeioasdttH
pvtea on the anbject :— end therefore^ from the
very naftnre of the statntoiy crim^ it is hn*
poanble that any snch detail as the opposite
yeity raqniin could be given ; and it is enon^
lo any thai the statute has not required it.
The nature of the treaaon which the oath bound
the parties to commit is as much specified as
it is poaaible fi>r the public praaecutor, or for
any human being, to spedfv* He has said,
that the treaaon contemplated waa iiM vdiich
cenaismd in compelling an alteration in the
aataifaliabed laws by force and violence. That
this would be treason^ who can doubt t
Wbethepy in the actual aeoomplislunent of it,
the erimhals would have levied war against
the king, in the sense in which the law uses
dwaetennsy or whether they would have com*
paased or imagined the death of ttie king, or
whether both these legal Crimea would have
been perpetrated in the actual conaammatvM
of dieirpurpeae, whocanpfetend tosay? To
demand, that the public diould divine and
specify the mode in which ^ treason was
•etnaliy'to be perpelmted, isaDsuid andim*
poasibte, because Uie modes ate various. To
deBBsad tfamt he should^spedfy all the modes
m whicii the intended treason ought to be per-
petrated, is plainly unneceasary and uaeMtt*
It ia aofficient fivr him to satisfy your lortehipi^
'that the object contemplated if the oadi could
ftot be aoeompUAed but by means of treason ;
and on tins I have already statod m v argument,
na Ihe w<»d8 of the highest anthontieB of the
Aaw.
Bat it was also rather inconsistently urged,
tfiat if we had stated treason to have been
committed witlTall itactreamataiiceSyWeslMmld
not have been entitled to ofier any proof of
this averment, or to give any detttl of the
teta haai, as the panel is not on hia trial for
high treason; and one otrjeetion to |he indict-
aaant la to thenairative of details widi vriiioh
the Btatotory ofieace is iatrodueed. On lo<dc-
iag into the statute, I think it is hardly neeea*
aaiy togointothuquestiony beeanse itianot
oeeioimre that the commission of o¥cit acts <£
ummm Aotdd be aJleged. I submit tOto^thA
avfaat my leamed iriendy who Hamediately ^liro-
«eded me in behalf of the public praeecutor,
acnted on this put of the sntgect, was agrees
•hie to the law of Scotland, and suffieieiitly
obviates a& that was urged in .the way of ob-
jectien to ttfirpart of th» ease.
IncomlneioaL it ins etrondy and powei^
.ftiB9^«i«fi, o^a hWbhi|i In % «ub oC ibt
paiAL tftet, though acquitud On diis oaaarion.
Be might be afterwards tried for treason. If
he were to be acquitted of this chaige, and
afterwards brouffht to trial ibr treason, I sus-
pect we ehould near ficom his couasel an eflbc-
taal atgument a^nst sodi second tiiaL I
content myself with aaying, that nor view and
interpretatioa of ttie statute it totaUy and abso-
lutely different ftom that of my leeroed friend,
Mr. Cranstonn, and that m eonceivei ftom
the temn of it, it is impossible audi a second
trial could be atteaipted. It is said, in the
last chKise^ '« Ibat any person who shall be
tried, and acquitted or convicted of any offeneo
against this act, sleff not k fittfe lo fte MKiid;
proeeoul0^ or tritd flgwii fbt ths toawcwisMCji
or factf as high treaaon, or misprision of hlgii
treason; and mat nothing in this act eootaiMd
shall be cousfaued or extend to prohibit any
perMm guilty of any offenee against this ne^
and who ahidl not be tried for the same aa aa
offence against this act^ftom being tried for
the same as high treason, or miipriiian of
higfatreaaoui in such manner as if tins aet had
not been made.^
This chutte wae intended to gnrd aganat
two inconveniences. '1st, It waa intended tf
protect the eubject ftom being tried again aa
for tijaaon upon the facts on whieh die ttailtt-
toiy crime shall have been already prosecuted^
In odier words, it would be impoeaude to give
in evidence, in any subsequent trial of this pti*
soner, any of the fi«ts whidi have been Ad-
mitted to proof in the present case, ted. It
was intended to guard apinst the posaih&ty
of the enactments of thn itatute beinff ce»*
strued to afibct the prindples of the nw of
treaaon previously establislied. If, theirefoN!^
the pubuc prosecutor were to attempt to bring
the prisoner to trial for treason ilter an oo-
qnittarin this case> he could not bring in evi»
deuce iiiiy one of die fhets tfhieh were mere
or len connected with, the present ehaife*
11iisfa.the plain and aeoeesary oCnstrnction of
the clause in the statute^ and entirely removea
the olijeelion. •
• I have to cdl your attention to an aothori^T
upon Ae question that has been started io»
lating to 'the speeifloation of the erime. It haa
been maintained, that we are bound to tpecify
the general nature of dm conapiiacjr heme wo
can proceed to phove the <iriaMnil mtentign of
the perties. On this tnWect I may nfor to
the gesetal tsims inwUdi ah BAgtiah aldtct-
ment haa been laid and fcnod relevant.* Sodb
A dediion, idthough it eaimot afibot the law of
Scotland as a oenclutive uutbority, vat ia;r#-
spaotdbteia its way, and worthy eteonaiffcv*
utiom I Mbmit that in describing the iUefal
iodfltieB, Ao temife uM in this English in*
dietment'tre more geavial thato Aoia wUdi
dm praiechtor has employed on lids ocaasioii,
and to which an otgectxm has been taken. On
dmwhol^ I ma&maitt tiuit dm indietaMnt be-
jm
^ JSL V. Mcon^aod :o<faer% « JBL 41^
,1 Aim. tm ; 3 CUl» Crim, JLetcylO).
n;
1871
ff! GEORGE III.
Trial of miUam Edgar
[188
fore yoQy in the £)rm in which it is liid/ (Might
to be ftmnd rdevant.
Mr. GfarA.^— Tliis indictment 'proceeds upon
nn act of parliament passed in the 52nd year
of his majesty's reign, against' administering
nclawfiil oaths ; and accordingly certain clauses
of the act are set forth in themuor proposition,
ts containing the description of the crime to be
diarged. This being the accusation, I need
not remark that it would haVe been easy for
the ]^nbUc prosecutor, if he had a case faitting
within the act of parliament, to confine him-
self to it in the minor proposition of his indict-
ment, by 'Stating in plain terms, that true jt
was and of verity, tiiat the panel had admi-
nistered such an unlawful oatn as that which
was prohibited by the statute— reciting the
terms of the oath— averring that an oath in
theie terms ftll under the statute as being a
tnosonable oath — stating how and in what
TCspectit was treasonable, and to which of
^ different species of treason it iqpplied —
and specifying- the time, place, and occasion
of connnitting the crime. The relevancy of
such an indictment might perhaps have been
sustained. But the pifblic prosecutor has not
confined himself to the proper charge appear*
ing on tiie major proposition of his own inclict-
ment, but has attempted most illegally to in-
tiodnce' matters totuly unconnected with it,
for the purpose of embarrassing the prisoner
with accusations of a kind totally dmerent,
and which cannot be the subject of inquiry
with reference to this charge.
In aid of his argoment the public prosecutor
has founded on an Englidi case, in which one
was convicted on evidence of circumstances to
rre Ids intention in administering an unlaw«
oath. I mention this now, because it is
proper to Udce an eariy opportunity of distin-
gniMiing that case from tne present. I know
veiT little of the English case referred to; but
on hearing it read, I observed quite enough
to perceive that it was a case totally diiSerent
fipom the present— proceeding oa another act
«r Parliament, different in its terms from the act
which is now fbonded on by the public prose-
cutor. Under the former act it is competent
to prove the intention of the unlawfid oath by
dreumstances extraneous to the oath itself,
though that is not oompetent in the present
case, in which the Court and jury must cour
sider the terms of the oath and nothing else.
It has to-day been noticed more thvi once,
^t besides the act of pariiament libelled on,
there is 'another ael^elating to unlawful oaths.
But when yon attend to the language of that
act, you will see the difference between the
terms ^re used, and those which are em-
ployed in this act of the 52nd of die kin^, and
yovL will see the reason of that difference, and
now it ought to afitect indictments founded on
these acts.
■ The indictment before the Court is founded
en the act passed in tiie 52nd year of his ma*
jesty, directed against those ^ who shall, in
imy manner or form whatsoever^ administer,
or eanse to be administered, or be aiding or
assisting at the administering^ of any oath or
engagement, pwrportmg^ or nUendmg to bind
the person takioff the same to commit any
treasoq." &c. These persons are liable to the
punishment of death, and every person iriio
shall take the oath is punishable by transporta-
tion. By the 4th section it is enacted, that
persons aiding and assisting at the administer-
ing of any such oath, shall l^ deemed principal
omnders, and liable to the same punishment
of death. By section 5 it is not necessary to
set forth the wqrds of the oath, and it ** shall
be sufficient to set forth the purport of sodi
oath, or some material part thereof.'* By
section 6. *^ any engagement or obligation
whatsoever in the nature of an oath, purport'
ing or miendmg to bind the persoa taking the
same, to commit any treason, &c. shall be
deemed an oath, within the intent and meaning
ofdiisact.''
Now, by comparing this act with the former,
it appears, that as the penalties are more severe,
so me description of the crime is more limited
than in the former act It is necessary that
the oath or engagement shall j?Hrpor^ or intend
to bind the person taking the same to commit
the treason, or other crimes punishable with
deadi, wbidi plainly signifies, that the purport
or intendment of the oath only, or, the true
meaning of its words, shall be considered in
any prosecution against those who administer
it. The purport of an oath has no reference
to the in^tion, criminal or otherwise, of the
party who administen it. The words of the
oath may be innocent, and vet the intention
may be very criminal. On the other hand, the
words may oe veiy mischievous, and vet the in*
tention may be otherwise. But the legislature
imposes the penalty according to the purport of
the oath ; the intendment is the same with the
purport in speaking of the oath ; and either ot
these terms may be considered as synonymous
with the true meaning of the oath separately
considered, and without regard to the intention
of the party who administers or takes it.
In one view, this statute is uncommonly
severe, inflicting, as it does, a capital punish*-
ment for administering an oath which may be
followed by no crime whatever. And even ia
taking tibe'oath according to its. purport or in-
tendment, there is much severity; because the
notion or opinion of the party who administers
or takes it, as to its meaning -and object, may
be very different from the opinion of a court
of law as to its true construction, and so the real
intent ef the partv may be muchlesscriminalthan
the ' intent whioi is imputed to the oath itself,
by the judgment of the CourL Bu^ on the
other hand, while the act is foil of severity on
tAese points, it is lenient, in so for as it restricts
the charge to the purport, intendment, . or true
meaiiingof the oath, and does not admit of aproof
(Which might be veiy loose and unsatisfactory,
and very hard upon the prisoner to be tried)of an
intention on his part, that went beyond the true
meaning of the oeta which he administered. '
fir ^Mmdermg unla^ Oaths.
18P]
For tbttftfit docf not allow it to be proved,
tlttt ihoogfa the words of the oath were appa-
rently ioDooent, yet that under colour of an
-inoocent engagement the moat criminal inten-
tions were concealed or C07d!red. In what way
soever te pablic prosecutor may make a
diaige of that kind (which supposes, no doubt
(hat a neat crime had been committed), it is
plain that he codd not make such a charge
under this acL And the statute tempeis its
own severity with lenity in an6Aer important
circumstanoe. Those who aid and assist in
administering tbe oath, are liable to the punish-
ment of doth ; but those who were present at,
and consentinff to the administering the
oath, are not liable as for administering it, and
it seems to have been the intention of the legis-
lature that they should not be so liable.
This act may be contrasted with that which^
WIS passed in the 37th year of the kin^, in
which, though the punishment to be inflicted
upon offenders was less severe (transportation
for seven years), there is a much ^^reater an-
xiety to prevent them from sscamng; and,
•coordinglv, the cases in which mat puniab-
ment may be inflicted are much more numerous
and comprdiensive. It is enacted,* ^^That
any person or persons who shall, in anymanner
or form whatsoever, administer, or cause to be
administered; or beaidiuff or assisting at, or
praad and conaadmg to the administering or
taking of any oath or engagement, purporting
or mUnded to bind the person taking the same
to engaee in any mutinous or seditious purpose ;
or to disturb the public peace ; or to be of any
association, society, or confederacy formed for
any sudi purpose; or to obey the orders
OfT commands of any committee or body of
men, not lawfully constituted, or of any leader
or commander, or other person not having
authority b^ law for that purpose ; or not to
iafomi or give evidence against any associate,
confederate, or other nerson; or not to reveal
or discover any unlawful combination or con-
Ibderacy; or not to reveal or discover any
illegal act done or to be done; or not to reveu
or discover any illegal oath or engagement
which may have been adnkinistered or tendered
to or taken by such person or persons, or to
or by any other perKm or persons, or the
import of aiqr snob .oath or engagement;
ahalL on conviction thereof,*' &c. And by the
third kection it is enacted, ** That persons
aiding and assisting at, or prtitnt at and am-
aeafni^ to the admmbtering or taking" of
^he oath, &c. shall be deemed principal
otfendei&
Here is a very numerous collection of crimes;
and as to the oath itself, not only are the
persons liable to the' statutory punishment,
' who are present at and consenting to the ad-
ninistering or taking of it, but every oath is
eomprehended, where it is of the nature sped-
•tfed, either in its purport or meaning, or where
•It is intended, by the par^ admioistering
,^ 37Geo. 3cd, c. 133, s. 1.
A, D. 1817.
1100
or' taking it as..aq^ path of thai deseriptaon,
whatever mn be .its particular words. For
the terms of the act are ^- purporting or w-
tendtd.Xo bind f fmrporOMg refers to thf mean-
ing of the oath; tntaided refers to the intention
of the party. An oath purporting to bind, is
mtendea hj the party for that, purpqse. The
purport of the oath, and. the intention of the
par^, may be diflertot; but the statute makes
him liable for both; not merely the meaning
of the words emplq^, but- his own iptention
(pQosibly a secret intention) in using thev,
which may be ynuch more miscbievons or
wicked than the plain or true meaning of the
words. Accordingly, in the Engliui case,
which was tried upon the 37th of tte king, the
meaning, object, and intention of the party,
distinct from the meaning. of the words, was
allowed to be proved. There was dearly roosa
in that act for the construction put upon it bj^
the learned judge* who presided at the triaL
But whatever 1^ the constructioB of that ad,
there is not the least room for such a oqnstnM>>
tion in the present case, where the words, as
well as the objecte of this statute, . are so
very diflerent The words ^ potporting or in-
tending to bind,** plainly require en osM whicb
purports or intends to bind, and refer e>-
dusively to the intendin|( or intent of. the oath,
without regard to the intending or intent of
the party, further than his intent to administer
or take Uiat oath. And this was apparently
admitted bv Mr. Solidtor General, when he
observed, that the meaning, purport, and in-
tention of the oath, are to be referred to in
V
1
this argument, and not any. c^ospiracjf or
traneous drcumstances. Inos there is a
son sufficiently evident for ezchiding a proof
of circumstances whoe the indictment is laid
unon the 52nd of the king, which might be
admitted where the indictment is laid on- the
37th of the king. And if it be oompetent
under the 37th to prove the intent of the
party by dicumstanoes whidi do not appear
from the oath, it was intended by Uie 52|mI
. that no evidence beyond the terms of the oath
itself should be allowed for proving the tnteni
of the party.
If the observations I have now made are
well founded, the public prosecutor is. entirely
wrong in attempting to introduce in the
minor proposition of the indictment a long
detail of circumstances, with no other object
than to establish the supposed wioked intent
of the prisoner, by evidence thai is extraneous
to the administering of the nnlawlid oath. The
prosecutor ought to have confined himsdf to
that charge ; and I must again observe, thai
he had it in his power to frame an indictment
without obiection, by the proper redtals of the
statute and of the oath, with proper aUegntioos
that the oath was prohiUted oy the act of naih-
liament. But instead of adopting thif plain
method of proceeding, he. has d^K!q|ea the
pand yriih an indictment that is evposed to
mnumeiable^obieotiQns. .; , . i .
* Lord Alvanley ; C JB. 4*0, n.^
IMI
57 GBOROB Ifl.
Tritd^mUkmOfg^
[IW
noobjedtioii
would be fiiiBcieiit to' ofest the iadieCtteiity if
BO other could be * stated. Bat I sheU rtmark
upoD some of the other olgeotioiis. A good
deal was said upon the competency of a gMie-
-nl charge of high treason made in an indict-
mept, without pointing out any particular
apecies of treason. There can be nodo«bt
whatever^ that where tire party is to be tried
lor the crime of high treaiony a general charge
of high treason made against him in tiie in-
dictment would be good for nothing, and
would at once be dismissed. For there are so
many different kindii of high treason, eadi of
them distinguishable from all the rest, that
it would be Just as welT to charge a man with
> iMtring committed a crime, without saying what
crime, as to charge him with haring committed
treason, without saying what treason. But it
seems Jto have been thought by the prosecutor
that in this indictment it is sufficient to refer
to high tteason generally without distinguish*
ing between one treason and another, b^use
the pandl te not to be tried for committing high
treason, but for baring administered an oaUi,
pfurporting or intending to, bind the person
IhaifejostMfoifedtolcablc. Itseemathebto beinlispiEtable, thai
the species of treason, should hare oeen alleged
or assigned in this indictment, and that the
totel want of the specification in it is as olijeo-
tionaUe as it would be in a trial for high
treason. The objection is founded on the gieat
and indispensable rale in criminal justice,^thal
the panel ought to have notice of the pvecise
accusation against him ; and the want of such
notice in this indictment makes the case pre-
cisely the same as if the prosecutor had
attempted to proceed without an indictment
at all.
Another objection to the indictment was
strongly and doquentlv urged by Mr. Crans-
toutt, that you cannot, n>r the proof of a crime
that is charged^ prore any other crime that is
not charged. This was stated, on the authori^
of Mr. Burnet, and of long practice. But one
or two cases were cited against us by the
counsel for the prosecution. I do not admit
that these cases were correctly stated ; but, ai
all erents, they do not establish that the pro.
secutor is entided to prove the extraneous cir^
cumstances alleged in the present case. One
of the cases related to the uttering of foiged
taking the same to commit high treason. In a notes within Scotland, and it was said, that id
ohaige of this kind, it has been thought unne- order to prove the charge of uttering in Scot^
eessary to spedfy the treason which the oadi . land, it was competent to prove the forgeiy of
purported or intended to bind the person the notes, although that crime was committed
taking the same to comnnt But it seems to in England. That was a case of crimm cmh
be obrious, that there is precisely the same fimwm, in which the criminal act was begun in
reason to specify the treason in this case as in ' one place^ ooniinmd and completed in another,
a trial for high treason itself. If it be unneces- ; If I recollect right, a case occurred some years
•salT to spedfy the treason in this case, would
it be snfflcient to aUeffe, that the oath pur-
ported or Intended to bind the person talcing
nie same to commit a crime^ without spedfy-
ago, in which evidence of one crime to prove
another was allowed, and the panel was con-
victed on a proof of that descriptioo. But that
oonriction was not approved of in another
wg what crime, or giving any notice whatever , quarter, and when the circumstances attending
to the pahel of the nature of that offenee whleh it were known, the man got a pardon, in re»-
Ihe oath purported or intended to bind the pect of the manner in which his trial had been
person taking the same to commit! It is i^ain, conducted. One of your lordships will pro-
-that in such a case the pinel would have no bably support me in this account of the case to
iiotie# at all of the crime for which he was to , which I now allude. I do not recdlect the name
1m kied. An oalh, binding the penon taking of the party.
^^ ii -- i!!r jJT*^ J^!wl5" iL-^r« 1.U «des with what Mr. Clerk has suted ; but 1
s^'ss^sr/rrXir^ir^i do.otp.rti<^i„.yr«»u..ith.ci«««.t«K«.
defence emnpletely conclusive against the ai- Mr. Clerk, — There are no dkta in the work
leaation, that the oath led to the commission of Mr. Hume, nor in that of Sir Greorgo
6r one crime, would be no defence at all, if , M'Kenrie, inferring that a crime m^j be
the prosecutor sliould not insist on that, but on > proved by another crime which is not libdled ;
a diferent sllegafion, namely, that the oath led and the authority of Mr Burnet, who was a
to the commission of another crime. The very attentive observer of the proceedings in
panel might be prepared to defend 'himself criminal cases, is directly against the doctrine,
as to the application of the oath to one-half of . He lays it down expressly, that one crime
the erimes & the Statute-book, aiid yet, baring
no distiOct Notice of the prosecutor's views,
ndght be in iio state o# preparation to defeord
himself as to the a|[yphcation of the oath to
adiother erim'^ of which he had no notice, and
of mtika he had never thought. The same con-
dd^tioii shei^ that among the different
•pedee iH lrektf6n,that jparticiilaT spedes should
be poiBtel oat in the mdietment, to which the
pKose^utor is- to imist that the oeth was appti^
cannot "be proved by another. Thus the autho*
•ri^r as well as Um justice of the case, is on the
sioe of the accused.
But there is another objection to a moof of
the oonspitacy here mentioned. The allegation
is in snbatance a charge of high treason ; and
would your lordships allow sudi a charge to be
proveo, under this indictment, In direct con*
tradiction to the Act of Pariiament upon whidi
you try crimes of treason? Without the inter-
1091
J«T Admmslerittg unlaHofid Oatht.
A. D. 1S17.
[104
ventioa of a mud juiy, treason' cannot be
tried. But if it be ntteriy incompetent to
prove an allegation, it muist be equally incom-
petent to maJce the allegation. No party is
entitled to allege what it is not competent for
him to prove. And, if the public prosecutor
cannot be allowed to prove the crime of
treaaoUf it is impossible for him to proceed on
this indictment.
To another objection, no sufficient answer
has been made, that if the proof of treason is
entered on, the trial is a pnblic precognition;
and if the result in this present trial does not
satisfy the prosecutor, tne panel may be tried
agiun upon the same &cts. What was said in
answer to this? From the very terms of the
act of parliament the panel cannot be tried
again for the same offence. What is the same
•TODce T The prisoner is now to be tried for
administering the oath, and not for high trea-
son. The two crimes are altogether different.
The prisoner, if he is acquitted, cannot be tried
for hi|;h treason, on account of his having
administered a treasonable oath; but there is
nothing in the statute against his being tried
for a separate treason, extraneous to the charge
of having administered the oath. But, accord-
ing to the idea of the public prosecutor, the
oath may be connected with overt acts of
treason, which might be distinctly an# sepa-
rately charged; and if it were permitted to
prove thete overt acts incidentally in this trial,[the
prisoner, might, on such a precognition, be
afterwards tried for treason.
Another objection is, that the requisite speci-
fication ci die aUegedconspiracy has been with-
hdd by the prosecutor, the prisoner not having
Veen fovonned. with the names of any of the
persons alluded to as engaged in the conspiracy;
and this objection is of itMlf fatal to the indict-
ment. It IS stated in the indictment, that the
prisoner wickedly, &c.conspired,&c. with other
evil-disposed persons, to break and disturb-the
pablic peace, &c. But no one of the persons
engaged in the conspiracy is mentioned. Why ?
We luive not even been told that the public prose-
eatardoei noi kmow the names of these supposed
persons ; but if he was ignorant of their names,
■e should have said so ; for in an indictment,
the public prosecutor should give a full detail of
what he knows to the panel, for the preparation
ofhis defence. When a fact that should bostated,
if known to the prosecutor, is unknown to him.
He sboald . at least state that such fact is un-
known to him. He should do evenr thing to
apprise the accused of the nature of the proof
vdijch he has to meet. Where that is not fair-
ly done, the prisoner is entitled to object that
be has not received the notice on the subject to
vrfaidi he is entitled by law. If a panel be
^taiged with a wicked conspiracy, he should be
udbrmed of the other persons with whom
he is supposed to have oeen engaged^ if the
praeecntor knows who they are ; and he ispre-
mmeti to know them, if he ^pe9 not state
that they are mdinown to him. How hard
woold it be if the law were otherwise ! • A con-
VOL. XXXIII.
spiracy charged may be one of fifty supposed
conspiracies. If the conspiracy is not identi-
fied by the names of the persons engaged in
it, how can the prisoner know what the prose-
cutor really means to charge?
The other objections to this part of the indict-
ment, though they may be less material, are
still of ver^ great importance, and their validity
is recognized hr Mr. Hume, who employs
many pages of his valuable work upon ques-
tions of this description.
The gentlemen opposite admit that fair and
reasoniJ»le notice ox facts must be given, and
that Mr. Hume says so. He does indeed say
so. But, although they acknowledge his au-
thority, they assert, that such notice is not
always necessary. How does this agree with
the opinion of Mr. Hnme^ who says eipressly,
that where the public prosecutor has it in his
Sower to mention particulars, and where his
oing so may be essential to the information
of a panel for his defence, the Court will not
oblige the panel to answer without his gating
a fuU and particular statement of the charge
against him.
I come next to the argument maintained on
the import of the oath. It is asserted, that an
oath in certain terms was administered by the
panel. I do not profess to understand the
precise meaning of this supposed oath. It is
rather loosely and indefinitely expressed. To
understand it precisely is, however, not ab-
solutely necessary to the consideration of the
question before the Court, Whether this be a
lawful oath, is no^ the question. The oath may
be extremely wicked, and perhaps there is no
one who now hears me wno does not think
that there was a bad intention in it. But that
is not the question before your Lordships.
The question is, whether thai* oath amounts
TO AV OBLIGATIOH TO COMinT HIGH TREASON?
Where a man is indicted for the crime of mur-
der, the question is not, Whether he has been
guilty in other respects? whether he has
committed a robbery or any other crime P —
he has oidy to answer to the indictment for
murder. Ine question here is. Whether the
oath did purport and intend an obligation to
commit high treason? For the oath is not said
to be an ^ligation to commit murder or other
felony. It is alleged to be an obligation lo
commit tre^on, and to that allegation the ques-
tion is confined.
The averment of the pnblic prosecutor upon
this point is expressed thus in the indictment,
^^ which oath or obligation did thus purport
or intend to bind the persons taking the
same to commit treason, by effecting by
giysical force the subversion of the Established
ovemment, laws, and constitution of this
kingdom."
Mr. Cranstoun,. in his excellent speech,
completely demonstrated the fuiUity of this
averment, both in its form and in its sub-
stance ; but it appears to me that an argument
much less complete and powerful would have
b«eQ quite somcient in such a case. For can
O
i
195}
57 GEORGE III.
THalo/miUamSdgdr
ri90
it be possible to sustain an indictment aUeging,
with so little specification, an obligation to
commit treason? Who does not know that
tbece are a great variety of treasons distin-
guished from each other by difference of species,
in the same mannerandto the same effiectas other
crimes, which are known each by its species
and so distinguished from other crimes which
do not belong to that species ? Yet the indict-
ment contains nothing to mark the species of
treason which was to be committed. It ap-
pears from his words, that the prosecnior
wishes to charge the prisoner with a delin-
2nency that has a relation to some treason, bat
lat is all. His meaning goes no further;
and such is not a legal meaning when express-
ed in an indictment, as the substance of a
charge to be tried. Indeed, it is so indefinite,
that ] do not understand what it really imports.
Cleariy it does not sufficiently describe any
known treason. It seems to point at a treason
to be committed by levying war. But is there
any word about le^yin? war in the indictment?
Not one syllable ; and yet it is acknowledged
by every authority from Coke downwards^
that where a man is tried for levying war
against the king, the levying of war must be
specially set forth in the charge ; and however
brief and general our neighoours may be in
drawing their indictments (and they are more
so than we), this specification is required, that
the parties have conspired and actually engag-
ed in levying war [Mr. Clerk here referred
to Lord Coke and Sir Mathew Hale, and made
some further .observations relative to a charge
of levying war.]
All this shows, that if in the present case
the treason to be committed was levying war,
that species of treason should have been set
forth. But in this indictment, though the oath
is set forth, and certain words are used, in-
tended as an averment of its criminal ten-
dency, the averment is in terms so vague and
general, that it cannot be gathered from them
what the prosecutor means as to the species of
treason which the prisoner had in view.
Thus the meaning of the oath, whatever it may
be, is not sufficiently charged in an indictment
proceeding upon the statute 52 of the king.
And though an exposition of its actual mean-
ing may be attended With difficulty (perhaps
no <^rtainty can be had in expounding it), it
is easy to show, that it cannot be regarded as
a treasonable obligation, however objection-
able in other re8|>ects your lordships may thin^
it. In considenng this obligation^ I shall lay
«iside for a moment two circumstances that are
immaterial to the question. Whether it is an
obligation to commit treason ? one is, that it
is an oolA— another, that it binds to secrecy;
for these circumstances, though they are of an
aggravating nature, do not make the ohligaHon
more or less treasonable. As an engagement
may be treasonable, without being in the form
of an oath, so an engagement may be confirm-
ed with an oath, without being treasonable or
criminal at all. In one remarkable transac-
I tion of this kind, an oath, when moposed wss
I rejected by the most determined or the con-
spirators.
** No, not an oath :
what other bond
Than secret Romans, that have spoke the word.
And will not palter?^ *
The nature of a conspiracy is the same witk
or without an oath, though an oath may be an
aggravation of its wickedness. In the i^e»*'
' tion whether the engagement was, to commit
the crime of treason, I may therefore lay dot'
of consideration the circumstance that it was-
in the form of an oath. Again, an oath o£
secrecy may be wicked, even although the ia^
tention of the persons who t^e it is innocent
in other respects ; and it will not make an en-^
gagement or obligation treasonable or othei^
vrise, that the parties to it were sworn to se*
crecy. Ihe question as to the tme nature of
the obligation, as being treasonable or not
treasonable, evidently caimot depend upon
the secrecy to which the parties were sworn.
The form of an oath, and an oath too of se*
crecy, may and will greatly aggravate the o&
fence that is committed by entering into way
conspiracy, whatever its illegal object may be.
But neither the oath itself, nor the obligatioa
of secrecy, will make that treason which is not
treason, nor change an obligation to commit
any illegal act or crime, in itself not treason,
into an obligation to commit the crime of high
treason.
Keeping these important considerations in
view, that an engagement may be very crimi^'
tial without being treasonable — ^that die int^-
vention of an oath does not make it treason*
able, — ^and that even an oath of secrecy cannot
have the effect to change a crime, how wicked
and dangerous soever, into high treason, if
the crime is not in itself high treason, but a
crime of another character and description, — ^I
shall offer some remarks upon the terms of
this oath. And here I roust repeat, that the
oath may admit of no certain or precise con-
struction. It may be understooa in twenty
different senses by twenty different persons.
Perhaps no two men wonld agree with eadi
other as to it» precise meaning. But my p»re-
sent task is not to show the precise meaning
of the oath, but a different and an easier task,
namely, to show that it does not import an
obligation to commit high treason. For this
purpose- I shall offer a very few remtiks
upon it.
Nothing can be known of the nature of this
engagement, but from the words of it. The
party binds himself by an oath, and the first
part of his obligation is expressed iii theta
words : ^ That I will persevere in my endea-»
vouring to form a brotherhood of affection
amongst Britons of every description who are
considered worthy of confidence ; and that £
will persevere in my endeavours to obtain for-
* Shaksp. Jul. Cses. Act 2; Scene 1.
t97]
Jot Mminuitrhig unlatioful Oaihs,
A.D. I8I7.
1198
all tke peofle m Great Britain and Ireland,
not diaqnaiified by crimes or insanity, the
elective franchise at the age of twenty-one,
vilh free and eqaal representation, and annual
parliaments." The purposes here expressed
are, I piesame, innocent of treason, though it
wonld not be easy to tell the precise meaiv*
jng of the words, and it is evident that they
hsLve no precise meaning. On the con-
tiaiy, they are so extremely vague and
indefinite, that every person taking such
aa oath seems to be at full liberty to put
his own meaning upon it, without being at all
exposed to the reproach of refusing tb fulfil
Ins obligation. Universal sufir^e and annual
paxiiaments are very naturally supposed to
Aave been the objects in view ; but still there
is nothing in the engagement itself, nor in the
manner of expressing it, tiiat is treasonable or
even illegal in any respect. If the obligation
had stopped with the words to which I have just
lefierred, a prosecution for aidministering a trea-
aonable oam would have been utterly absurd.
But the obligation proceeds with other
words, which are supposed in the indict-
mast to be treasonable, ^ and that I will
SQpport the same to the utmost of my power,
ei^er by moral or physical strength as the
case may require." These words are the
foundation of Uiis indictment, and the material,
if not the only c^estion, as to the relevancy,
depends upon their meaning, or rather upon
die question, whether they sidmit of no mean-
ing or construction but one, the meaning
alleged by the prc^ecutor, who argues., that
they purport and intend to bind the party
taking the oath to commit the crime of high
treason. It is to be considered, whether the
words have that treasonable meaning, or if that
ia not their meaning, it is evidently of no con*
sequence what they mean.
The words of the oath now under considera-
tion bind the party to wpport the uxme ; and
there has been some argument as to the mean-
ing of supporting the uane, as the words occur
in this part of the oath. It was said for the
prisoner, that when taken along with the pre-
vious words of the oath, the meaning of the
whole is, that the party should persevere in his
ehdeavours, and in particular, his endeavours
to obtain annual parliaments and universal
iufirage, and also to support the same, namely,
the annual parliaments and universal suffrage,
when- obtained and recognized by law. Ao^
ooiding to this construction, the oath in-
tended any thing but treason. It was to sup-
port a l^al establishment when it should be
obtained, and not even to support an attempt,
though legal, to obtain a change of the exist-
lag laws. And this view of the oath seems to
be perfectly well-founded. On the one band,
there is an mcbngmity in saying, that the party
will support his own endeavours ; and, on the
tither, the expression, ** support the same,'^ is a
relative thai can only apply* to the last antece-
dent, unless it appears m>m the grammatical
«Mistxiictioii, or ttou^ the meaning of the con-
text, that the relative necessarily applies to
former antecedents. But that is not thecase here.
There is a disjunction, not only in the sense,
but in the grammatical construction, of the
subject of annual parliaments and universal
snfnrage, from the previous part of the oath.
The more natural construction of the obliga-
tion to ^ support the same " is obtained,
therefore, by referring it to a support of the
wished-for changes when recognized by law.
And there is another consideration, which
leads to. the same determination of the ques-
tion. There are many rules for the interpreta-
tioapf words ; but the great rule of interpreta-
tion in a criminal charge is, that in case of
doubt, that construction which is roost favour-
able to the accused must be adopted. And if
the prisoner is entitled to the benefit of the
rule I have just mentioned, J cannot see much
difference betwec-n the interpretation offered
on his part, and that which has been contend-
ed for by the prosecutor. For, whether the
phrase, ** support the same/' shall be referred
back merely to the proposed changes> when
obtained, or to the endeavours to produce
them, still it must be held, that the support to
be given is intended as a legal, and not as an
illegal support, and rather as a support of the
law itself, to be appealed to in every stage of
bis endeavotirsby the person taking the oath,
than as a support of illegal attempts to over-
turn it.
But the argument of the prosecutor is, that the
clauses now under consideration' do not merely
bind the person taking the oath, to support
his endeavours at innovation, but to '' support
the same to the utmost of his power, either by
moral or physical strength as the case may
require.'' The prosecutor seems to think, that
these words complete the treasonable obliga-
tion, and leave no doubt whatever as to the
meaning either of the party who administered,
or of the party who took tne oath. That there
should be no doubt as to the meaning of these
words, appears to be not a little extraordinary,
when it is considered, that if they have any
meaning at all, it is a meaning as vague, in«
definite, and uncertain, as can be imagined.
Yet the prosecutor thinks, that tliey can mean
nothing but treason, and he will not allow
that any other meaning can be put upon them.
Even the uneducated people, for whose use the
oath was contrived, must, without all doubt,
have understood, that it was the purport of
these words to bind them to commit treason !
These assertions are finely exemplified by
the abortive attempt made in the iudictment,
to put any intelligible meaning upon the words.
The prosecutor has not been able to apply
them to any description of treason, excepting
that constructive treason, which he would re-
vive after it has been abolished for several
centuries. And here it is proper to notice an
inexcusable gloss in the indictment, as to the
misaning of the words now under consider*
ation. The words of the oath are, f^Iwil)
sapport tiie same to the utmcet of my power,
199]
57 GEORGE III.
trUd of WaUam Edgar
raoo
cither by moral or physical itrtngthf* but it is
alleged in the indictment, that the treason was
to be committed, ^* bv effecting by physical
foiie, the subTersiott, &c. Here the word
itrenjgih is changed into the wordybrce, a word
of a different meaning. It has been said, that
th^ words are synonymous. If that is the
case, why change the one for the other? But
they are not synonymous. It is very true, that
on some occasions either word may be used,
without much, if any, difference of meaning.
But the same thing may be said of words, that
so far from being synonymous, have significa-
tions that are very different. The distinction
between strength and force is quite obvious.
Strength refers to jKntwr,— force to the violeni
$me of that power. Force always implies vio-
lence, but strength does not. A precept in
the Holy Scriptures is thus expressed, '* Thou
shalt love the Lord thy God with aU thy heart,
and with all thy itrengtk." How would this
passage read with the word force instead of
the word itrength? To support with moral
and physical strength does not mean that vio-
lence is to be used at all. So far from mean-
ing that violence is to be used in attacking
others, it does not necessarily mean thai vio-
lence which may be used in resisting the
violent attacks of others.
Thus, it has been assumed, with very little
ceremony indeed, that the moral and physical
strength referred to in this oath, was to be
applied for the purposes of treason. It seems
to DC just as reasonable to take it for granted,
that the moral and physical strength was to be
employed in the commission of any other crime.
Can a reform in parliament be promoted only
by the commission of treason ? No, it will be
answered ; but treason, if it was useful or ne«
cessary, was to be committed. Then, if the
parties wer^ not to shrink from the crime of
treason if necessary for the^e purposes, it must
be supposed that they would have been
equally ready for the commission of any other
crimes. But, I ask, whether, according to the
meaning of this oath, the parties who took it
were bound to commit murders, robberies,
thefts, eveiy sort of crimes, in order to pro-
mote reform in parliament? Is it possible
that any human Deing can be so destitute of
charity and common sense as to put that con-
struction upon the oath ? When I bind my-
self to forward the purposes of reform to the
utmost of ray power, by moral and physical
strength, am I bound to commit all or any one
of the crimes which have been mentioned?
Must I rob on the highway in order to promote
annual pariiaments and universal suffrage?
And if the oath is not an obligation to commit
crimes generally, is it not absurd to say, that
it is an obligation to commit the greatest of all
crimes, the crime of treason ? To maintain a
proposition so monstrous, is the best example
to prove the danger and atrocity of charsres of
constructive treason. Suppose one of the
persons who are stated in the indictment to
nave be^ engaged in a conspiracy; bat whose
names 4rt not commuoicated, had been told
that the oath being an obligation to support
the plan of annual parliaments and univemd
suffrage to the utmost of his power, by moral
and physical strength, so he was required to
commit some great crime, an assassination for
example. If such a conversation among these
conspirators can be supposed, the person ad*
dressed might surely answer, I engaged to do
every thing in my power to obtain annual
parliaments and universal suffrage, but I have
not engaged to do any thing that is against
law — ^there is no such obligation in the oath.
Could any one of the fraternity have replied,
you are bound by the obligation, and must now
perform the part you have undertaken : This
assassination wili support the cause of univer-
sal suffrage; and it is an act within your
power. This reasoning would hardly serve ;
and if there is no obligation to commit a great
crime, there is just as little to commit a small
erime. The oath does not purport or intend to
bind the party taking it to commit any crime
whatever, or even to infringe the slightest rule
of morality.
Nor is there any difference between a mere
paction in such a case and an obligation
strengthened by an oath, how tremendous
soever. As to the present question, the cases
are quite the same.
But it is said, that if the intentions of the
parties were so innocent, why take, an oath ?
Why this obligation to secrecy ? I have an-
swered that sdready. I do not know why
there was an oath at all. I do not know why
it was an oath of secrecy. I have heara,
indeed, that some politicians have not the
most absolute confidence in each other.
There are animals known by the name of rats,
of whom I sometimes read in the newspapers,
who are said' even to infest a certain great
assembly. Some of those who were engaged
in this association may perhaps have suspected
that animals of that species might get amongst
them, and, in order to prevent such an acci-
dent, they had recourse to the oath. Why
was there an oath of secrecy ? I see no rea-
son why they should have bound themselves
to secrecy, ant is secrecy to imply the great-
est atrocity of conduct? If they wished fbt
secrecy, does it necessarily follow that they
were to commit treason? Many enterprises
require secrecy. That there were persons
whom they did not wish to offend, might be a
sufficient reason for their secrecy. . Jt would
be very unsafe, indeed, to infer the illegality
of any combination from the circumstance
that it is held together by an oath of secrecy,
but it would be still more unsafe to infer a
treasonable conspiracy upon such flimsy
grounds. But the question is not, Whetiier
the obligation to secrecy was right or wrong ?
The only question is. Whether Uiere is in this
oath an obligation to commit treason? The
question is not. Whether the panel committed
treason in any way? but it is. Whether .there
is in the oath any obligation to conait trtSf
SOI]
Jor AimmUUring unkmfiit Oaiki.
•cm? OntbeM <iM«tk)D0^ I think it iiiinec«8-
lary to trouUe your lordslupft witili any farther
obsenrations.
lard Jtatke Clerk, — ^After the uncommonly
able arguments which you hare heard from
both sides of the bar, die question for your
lordships' consideration is. In what manner
jon are now to proceed in determining whe-
ther the present is a relcTant indictment P
Lord EermamL — ^I had no doubt in my
mindy when I first saw the Indictment, that it
was relevant. But a great deal has been said
to-day on the competency of alleging one
crime in order to proTe another. I have formed
no opinion on the objections which have been
stated to the indictment ; and being desirous
to understand them thoroughly, I wish to see
them discussed in informations. Several au-
thorities have been cited, particularly by Mr.
CranstouUy and it would oe proper to have
them fully stated, before giving any opinion
with regard to them.
Lord GiiSa.'—I am of the same opinion^
and strongly wish to see Informations.
Lord FUmilfy. — ^I am particularly anxious to
consider that point which we have heard de-
bated, and which is of general importance —
I mean, the question as to the admission
of the narrative part of the indictment to
proof.
With regard to the other objections, I have
read all the authorities, and should have been
ready to give my opinion upon them. It does
not appear to me, that the cases of forgery
alludea to are analogous to this case. If
special acts of treason had been stated, the
introductory part of the narrative might have
been admitted to proof. But as the minor
charge is not treason, but a different erime,
zny mind is not yet made up to the opinion
that the indictment is relevant. As far as I
am able to judge, I cannot help thinking that
the panel, if acquitted on tms indictment,
might be again tried'for treason. -
. Lord JuUiu Cierk. — I am much in the situa-
tion of my brother who has last spoken. In
leferenoe to the meaning of the oadi, I have
given great attention to what has be^ said ;
and I had looked into authorities, besides
those referred to to-day.
As -to the other point, it has been most ably
argued, and is deserving of most serious and
d^iberate attention — ^whether it be competent
to let the public prosecutor . into a proof of
the nairative of this indictment. Tnat is a
point which, in reference to ^is important
case, and all other cases of a similar nature, is
deserving of the. most mature consideration.
This, too, is the first time that an indictment
has been broi^ht before us founded upon this
statnte. I am .quite clear, therefore, that the
solemn and regular manner of deciding the
potottsin question is, to have Informations
mepai^d, in which the uguments may be
Jiilly czhansted. . .
A. D. 18I7.
XHTBaLocirrom.
lam
9thJpra, 1817.
^The Lord Justioe-Clerk, and Loids
Commissioners of Justiciary, ordain par-
ties' procurators to give in InfSmrinations
upon the relevancy of the Indictitaent, to
see and interchange these Informations,
and to print, and lodge the saose with the
Clerk of Court in older to be recorded,
and that within three weeks ftom this
date : Continue the diet against the panel
till Monday the 19th day of May next,
at ten o'clock forenoon, in this place;
and ordain parties, witnesses, assiiers,
and all concerned, then to attend, each
under the pains of law ; and the panel m
the mean Ume to be carried baiw to the
Castle of Edinburgh.
COURT OF JUSnCLARY.
May 19, ISIT.
Rt Hon. Dmd Boyle^ Loid Justice Gerk. '
Lord Semani,
Lord GiiHa.
Lord PUmiUy.
Lord Eaton.
Comudfor $he Crotm.
Rt. Hon. Alexander MaconochUf Lord Advo^
cate [afterwards a lord of Session and Justi-
ciary, with the title of Lord Meadowbank.]
Jamet Wedderbum^ Esq. Solicitor-General.
H. Home Drummondf £sq.
K Warrender, W. S. Agent.
Cowmlfor WUliam Edgar,
John Clerk^ Esq.
Geo. Cranttoun, Esq.
Thoi. Thornton^ Esq.
Jamet Monaieff', Esq.
FrandiJeJrwj Esq.
J. P. Grant, Esq.
Hemy CodAum, Esq.
J. J, MfOTigfy Esq.
G. TT. Boyd, W, S, Agent*
William Edgar Vras placed at the bar.
Lord Juttice Cierk, — William Edgar, attend
to the indictment against you, which is now
to be read.
** William Edgar present prisoner in
the Castle of Edinburgh, you are in-
dicted and accused, at the instance of
Alexander Maconochie of Meadowbank,
his majesty's advocate, for his m^esty's
interest: That albeit, by an act pass-
ed in the fifty-second year of his pre-
sent majesty's reign, intituled, * An act
to rendet more efiectual an act passed
in the thirty-seventh year of his present
majesty, for preventing thf .admuuSter-
] 57 6BOBGB IIL
ingor taking nnUtwIbl oaths,' itistn/er
aHa enacted, * That every person who
shall, in any manner or form whatsoever,
administer, or cause to be administered,
or be aiding or assisting at the adminis-
tering, of any oath or engagement, pur-
porting ot intending to bind the person
taking the same to commit any treason or
mvtr&ty or any felony punishable by law
with deadi, shall, on conviction thereof
by doe eontse of law, be adjudged guilty
of felony^ and suffer death as a felon,
without benefit of clergy/ And fui^ther,
by seetion fbnrth «f the said act, it is en-
SK^ed, ^ That penona aiding and assist-
ing at the administering of any such oath
or engagement, as aforesaid, and per^
«>ns causing any such oath or engagement
to be administered, though not present at
the administering thereof, shall be deemed
principal offenders, and shall be tried as
such ; and on conviction thereof by due
course of law, shall be adjudged guilty of
felony, and shall suffer deaui as felons,
without benefit of clergy ; although the
persons or person who actually adminis-
tered such oath or engagement, if any
such there shall be, shall not have been
tried or convicted.' And further, by sec-
tion sixth, of the said act, it is enacted,
* That any engagement or obligation
whatsoever, iii th^ nature -of an oath, pur-
porting or intending to bind the person
taking the same to commit any treason or
murd^, or any felony punishable by law
with death, shall be deemed an oath within
the intent and meaning of this act, in
whatever form or manner the same snail
be administered or taken, and whether
the same shall be actually administered
by any person or persons to any other
person or persons, or taken by any other
person or persons, without any adminis-
tration thereof by any other person or per-
sons:' Vet true it is and of vebitt,
that you, the said William Edgar, are
guilty of the said crimes, or of one or
more of them, actor, or art, and part:
Jn so for at you, the' said William Edgar,
did, at secret meetings, and on other oc-
casions, at Glasgow, or in the immediate
vicinity thereof, in the course of the
months of November and December
1816, and of January and February, 181 74
wickedly, maliciously, and traitorouslv
administer, or cause to be administered,
or did aid or assist at the administering,
to a great number of persons, to the
sufnount of several hundreds, etn oath or,
engagement, or an obligation in the nature
of an oath, bindhag, or purporting or in-
tending to bind, the persons taking the
same to commit treason; which oath,
engagement, or obligation, was in the
fbllowing terms, or t6 the following pur-
Sort , — * In awful presence of God, I, A
I, do voluntarily sw^ar^ Aat I will per-
TrialofmiUam^Edgdr
[304
ievere in my endeavouring ia form a
brotherhood of affection amongst Britons
of every description, who are considered
worthy of confidence ; and that I wiU
persevere in my endeavours to obtain for
all the people in Great Britain and Ire-
land^ not disqualified by crimes or insa-
nity, the elective franchise, at the age of
twenty-one, with free and equal represen-
tation, and annual parliaments ; and that
I will support the same to the utmost of
my power, either by moral or physical
strength, as the case may require : And
I do further swear, that neither hopes,
fears, rewards, or punishments, shall in-
duce me to inform on, or give evidence
against, any meinber or members collec-
tively or individually, for any act or
expression done or made, in or out, in
this or similar societies, under the punish-
ment of death, to be inflicted on me by
any member or members of such societies.
So help me God, and keep me stedfast.'
Which oath, or engagement, or obligation,
to the foregoing purport, did bind, or did
purport or intend to bind the persons taking
the same to commit treason, by effecting by
physical strength the subversion of the
established government, laws, and con-
stitution of this kingdom, and especially
by obtaining annual parliaments and uni-
yersal suffrage by unlawful and violent
means. And, more particularly^ you, the
said William Edgar, did upon the 1st day
of January 1817, or on one or other of the
days of tnat month, or of ]!)ecember im-
mediately preceding, or of February im-
mediately following, at a secret meeting,
held in the house of William Leggat,
change-keeper in Ring-street, Tradeston,-
in the vicinity of Glasgow, or elsewhere
at Glasgow, or in the immediate vicinity
thereof, wickedly, maliciously, and traito-
rously administer, or cause to be admin-
istered, or did aid or assist at the admin-
istering an oath or obligation in the terms
above set forth, or to the same purport,
to Peter Gibson, John M'Lauchlane, John
Campbell, and Hugh Dickson, all present
prisoners in the Castle of Edinburgh ; as
also to James M^'Ewan, now or lately
carding-master at Humphries Mill, Gor-
bals of Glasgow, and M^Dowal Pate, or
Peat, now or lately weaver in Piccadilly-
street, Anderson, tn the vicintty of Glas-
gow, vrho, conscious of their guilt in the
premises, have absconded and fled from
justice; as also to John Conneltoti, or
Congleton, now or lately cotton-spinner
in Calton of Glasgow, or to one or other
of them, and to other persons, whose
names are to the Prosecutor unknown, the
said oath, or engagement, or obligation,
to the said purport, binding, or purporting
to hind, the persons taking the same
to commit treason, as said is. (9.) '^^
further, you, the said Williain Edgar .did^
9051
llll&llg^^OaiAf.
A. D. Wrti
upon the 4di day of Jtmiarj 1817, or on
one or other of the dvjn of that monih, or
of December ifiiBediately preceding, or
of February immediately following, at a
^eeret meetiiig held at the house of Neill
MwiD, inn^keeper aod stabler in Ingram*
street, Glasgow, or elsewhere at Glasgow,
or in the immediate vicinity thereof,
wickedly, maliciously, and traitorously
administer, or cause to be administered,
or did aid or assist at the administeiing
an oath or obligation, in the terme above
set forth, or to the same purport, to the
said Peter Gibson, John M'Lauchlane
John Campbell, Hugh Dit^uran, M^owal
Pate, or Peat, and James M'Ewan ; as
also to James Hood, present prisoner in
the Castle of Edinburgh, Anarew Som-
merWlle, John Buchanan, and James
Robertson, all now or lately prisoners
in Che Tdbooth of Glasgow, or to one or
other of them, and to other persons,
whose names are to the prosecutor un-
known, the said, oath, or engagement,
or obligation, to the raid purport, binding,
or purporting to bind, the persons taking
the same to commit treason, as said is.
And you, the said William Edgar, having
been apprehended and taken before
Daniel Hamilton, Esquire, one of the
SbertffiHsnbstitute of Lanarkshire, did,
in his presence, at Glasgow^ on the
6th day of March 1817, enxit and, sub-
aeribe a declaiation ; and hai^g been
taken before Robert HamilU^ fisqmra,
Sheriff-depute of Lanarkshire, yOu did, ia
his presence, at Glasgowy upon the fth
and 8th days of March 1817, emit and
subscribe two several declarations ; whidir
declarations, being to be used in evidence
against you at your trial, will be lodged
in doe time in the han<u of the Clerk of
the High Court of Justiciaiy, before which
you are to be tried, that you tnay have an
opportunity of seeing the same. At least,
times and places foresaid, the said oath,
or engagement, or obligation, to the same
pvirport, binding, or purporting to bind,
the persons taking the same to commit
ireasoD, as said is, was wickedly, malici-
oQsly, and traitorously administered, or
csLuaed to be administered; and some
persons did aid or assist at the adminis-
tenng thertof ;^ and you the said Williahi
Edgar are guiltj^ thereof, actor, or art and
part All which or part thereof, bmg!
nand proven by the verdict of an asatze*,
hekm the Lord Justice General, the X^brd
JusticeCleik, ind Lords Comraisiiioners of
Justiciaiy, yoa the said William Eidgar
ought to he pQfdshed with the pains of
law, to deter others' nQm committing tfie
like crimes in all time coming.
^ H. Home Druxk oiTo, >1» D/^
LIST OF WITNESSES.
t. Bfiiferi HamUUmt Esq. sheriff-depafta. of
' Lanarkshire.
3. Darnel fioantoi/Era. one of the 4i«ni^
substitute of Lanarkshire.
3. Dankl WCaUum^ clerk to Joluji Dryi^ale^
sheriff-clerk of Lanar^hirs^
4. Matthew Butms^ clerk to George Salmond,
procuratorufiscal of Lanarkshire.
5. Jckn LeMUe, derk to the said John Xhj^^
dale.
6. Jo$eiA Beidf writer ia Glasggy,
7. Alexander Cal4ar^ sh«rilMip«r ia Ghun
gow.
8. Jaares Z^omsoa, derk to the said Joha
Drysdale.
9. Jletander Hynier, ehange-keeper, QM
Wynd of Glasgow.
10. Marion M^Laren^ 0x M*Lachla% now or
lately servant to the said Alexander:
Hunter.
11. JbAnEo6er2Mm, inn-keeper and altahl«r/>aln
lowgate Glasgow.
12. Jgne$ CampbeU, wife of Thomas IXmr,
steam-boiler makes and smith at GM-9
wood and Company's foundry in Huichr.
esontown, in the vicinity of Glasgow. .
13. Janet l^eauMj now or lately servant ta
Neill Munn, innkeeper aad stabler in
Ingram-street, Glasgow.
14. AliMon WUton, now or lately servant to the
said Neill Munn.
15. Matthew Fyfo, spiritrdealer in Wilio^*.
street, Glasgow.
16. Jean Boyd^ wile of the said Matthew Fyfek
17. William Leggatf change-keepei;, iio Kin^.
street, corner of Centra-fUreet, Tiadftth
' ton, in the vicinity of Glasgow.
18. John Mitchell, we^ver^ residing iRWilki*Vt
Laod« Charles-street, Caltonof Glasgow.
19. Eugh Vkkfca, present prisoner in the
Castle of Edinburgh.
20. Ptter Oiifion, present prisoner there.
21. John M'Lauchlane, present prisoner there.
22. IFt^iiam^ismion, presei^t prisaifier (hate.
28. Jamet Haoa, pteaeat prisoner there.
24. John Cam^Uf present prisoner there.
25. nomas Smclair, present prisoner there.
H. Homb DauMMOVD; A, J>.
t • • •
LIST OS ASSIZS.
County of Edinburgh,
Francii Carter^ Scdtf of BaUemo.
Bichard Wooley^ of Whitehouse.
Jame» White^ tobacconist in Dalkeith.
Robert lyle^ baker there.
John Woodj merchant there.
JoAfi Bfoidn, farmer, Carrington.
Atudreo) JohnUan, farmer. Primrose-bams.
County of Haddington,
William Aicheton, junior, of Dnunmore.
John SommerviU Ox Moreham.
WUliam Emfj farmer, Howden.
John Brodiey £urmer. West Fentoa.
Moheri Hope, fanner, FentOn.
County of! LinUtbgoio,
WiUiamGUn oiJAM»,
3071
57 GEORGE III.
Tml 6/ WiOam Edgar
[308
WiBiam Diwirmy'ypmifer, Bonnytoun.
Jchn Trotter^ fiinner at Stacks.
JMfft Toi/lory residing at Blackness.
George TurvkuU^ fanner at Northbank.
CUy cf Xdinburgkk
Robert Fraur^ jeweller in Edinburgh.
noma Bichardumy merchant-tailor there.
J}amd Whiiekmfy watoh-maker there.
Peter Feddie, tronk-inaker there.
WUiiam Thtiter, upholsterer there.
Aletumder BtmeU, coach-maker there.
John Inoerarityy upholsterer there.
George Yule, meroiant there.
AleMmder Jtfii&e, saddler there.
John Sieelf confectionet there.
Jamee hmee, gunsmith there.
Darnel Forreti, hosier there.
Peter Smoeny saddler there.
George Hunter, merchant there.
Wilham Ret$, tailor there.
Cktrlee M'Xeafiy draper there.
JoHn Laing, saddler there. /
John M'^ereon, tailor there.
Franek Dmideonj confectioner there.
WUliam Cooper^ boot-maker there.
WUUam Dwnbretky hotel-keeper there.
TowneflMth,
John M^Kennef merchant in Leith.
Archibald Clegkomy corn-merchant there.
Thmm MatrUmy ship-builder there*
FUierte Patereony painter there.
CAorfef Bobertion, merchant there.
John Sandertf a^nt there.
JMi- Cir/cwer, Wright there.
Ad. Gilliu.
d. movtpsvmt.
David Dot7oias«
Lord Jmttke CfeHfe.--William Edgar, what
do you say to this indictment? — ^Are you
^il^ or not guilly of the charges contained
mitr
WUUam JS<(giar.— Not guilty, my Lord.
Mr. Gronffotm.— The prisoner pleads to the
indictment which has just been read, I have
to state to your lordships, that he is advised
to object to the competency of the present
proceeding ; and I humbly submit that this is
the proper time for stating «tbe objection to
. your loraships.
Your lordihips will recollect that the pri-
soner at the bar was latelv indicted upon the
statute the 52nd Geo. 3 , mr the crime of ad-
ministering unlawful oaths, binding, or pui^
porting or intending to bind, the takers to
commit die crime of treason. That indictment
was regularly served upon the prisoner— he
was brought to the bar — ^he pleaded not
guilty^-and your lordships, upon hearine a
debate upon the relevancy, appointed inior«
mations to be giv^n in, and continued the
time for doing so until this day.
My lords, that criminal prosecution is still
] in dependence against the prisoner. The diet
has not yet been deserted so far as I know.
I need not tell your lordships, that his
Majesty's Advocate cannot desert a prosecu-
tion, either eimplkiter or pro loco et tempore,
without the permission of your lordsnips.
Bf deserting nmplicifer, I mean here, deserting
with a view to try upon a new indictment for
the same crime.
.While the first prosecution was thus in
dependence, his Majesty's Advocate has
thought fit to eiecnte a second indictment
against mv client, calling him to answer at
your bar mr precisely the same crime as was
charged in the first mdictment. I submit to
your lordships, that this proceeding is alto-
gether incompetent — because the diet in the
first indictment is not yet deserted; and that
it would be equally incompetent to proceed
at present on the second inaictment, even if,
on the motion of the lord advocate, the first
should now be deserted. I shall state, in
veiy f^w words, the grounds upon which I
think our objection is irresistible.
It is known to your lordships, that by the
criminal law of this country, as now firmly
established, every person who is brought to
the bar upon a criminal charge ii entitled to
have the indneuBoi fifteen free da3rs. What
benefit could be derived from the indnda if
he eouid be brought to trial, and during the
dependence of that trial induda might be
running against- him all the while for another
trial on account of the same crime? Why, he
would be placed in a situation in which the
law certamly never meant him to be placed ;
he would be perplexed and embarrassed, by
being under the necessity of defending twp
actions subsisting together at one and the
same time. Observe how far this principle,
if once admitted would go. The prisoner is in«
dieted, he is brought to the bar, an objection
is stated to the relevancy of the indictment,
and 3rour lordships, after an argument of twelve
hours upon the relevancy, find the indictment
irrelevant. The next moment his Majesty^s
Advocate takes a new indictment out of his
pocket, and the prisoner is immediately put
again upon his trial for the very same offence.
Well, the second dav you have an argument
upon the rele?ancgr of this second indictment^
an argument which also lasts twelve hours;
and when that indictment is found irrelevant^
what happens next? A third indictment is
produced by his Majesty's Advocate, and he
msists that the prisoner shall again be tried.
And thus there might be fif&n different
indictments, under which the prisoner is ac*
tnally kept upon his trial for fifteen days,
being the whole mdueia contained in the first
indictment; and upon the sixteenth charge,
the panel might be brought to trial upon a
relevant indictment, and without having had
one moment's time to prepare his defence,
I may be told that this is stating an extreme
case, one which is not likely to happen. Such *
a case certainly may not happen while my
te»}
Jhir AimmimvHg mfa^j^ Ouihi.
A. D. 1817.
{»!<»
fiknd is loid adiocilo 9 bttt if whm I Iwi^
•tated ought happen in ao estpeme case, it 1%
WMMigb |br my ammeiit. Eveiy poisiUa
dttojger ol tkis koto ooght w lie guarded
agaiMt, ibr expeneDce'- .taaches w that cri-
niDa) pBOWMtttioDS are often reaoxted to Aom
ambition^ ittreDge, aad other impfoper mo-
Aa % geneial rale, therefore, in the. law of
SootkocC I affirm that if a peiaoa is indicted
%9K%. crime, aad if he oomea to the har, and
ple»ob JO that indictment, then there is » a de-
pending psooem apaioat him, imm^vahkk he
cattttbt again be cited tO'anawer Tor the fame
cikaige, aad in that way be deprived entirely
of ih« beneit of hii MiCht* Ine moment he
baa pleaded to hia indictment, it ia incompe-
tent to have another indictment running
aigainat him for the aame ofibnee.
There are variona waya in which I might
iilaatrate the haidihip aad oppieation which
wooUL reaolt Aom a difiereni mle. Sappoae
a pand faas-pleaded to an indictment and haa
been actually pot upon his trial here, if the
dfaiectton whidi' I. am now stating ia not a
good objection, his Mi^eat/s Advocate mi^
aaisa another indictment, reqoiring him to take
hia trial at a distance^ for instance' at Aher*
deen, the day after the diet of the first landict^
men^ whidi is to be tried at Edinburgh, and
ahat i» the vaiy purpose of d^eiting the fint
indirtmeat and paoceeding upon the second.
In thia veiy case it b pomible that the panel
any hare fifty .witnesses to examine, and of
eonrae he ia bound to have Ihem here to-day
in caaa the trial ahonld go on on the fonaer
indictmenl. Bnt if the fornier is deserted,
and a new one called at Aberdeen to-mortow,
ia what manner,! would ask,. is the paod to
tianapnrt his wime^aea toAberdeen? ThetadMr
cac an giren by law for the very purpose of
pwiferting the accused against surprises of dua
land; bnt the practice-alteBaipted on -the part
of the Oown would defeat that purpose.
It ia in .-vahi to aay that the Court would io-
tarfem to give ledieas, if an oppreasive pio-
needing oriha aataie I hare supposed were to
he attempled. Ihat plea was once uiged,
when a pioeecnter, inaefiaaoe of all law, had
jHt given the eadiaaiy iadbicHr, and I am sorry
to say, thai it was listaned to by the Conit.
The Kbel oonta^ied indbaur of twelve daya
on^; and .iribea <tbe panel eomplained, he
waa toldj th«t i£ he had applied to ^e Court
iw hngfar tiflM, it monld have been allowed.
The olgeetion was eocoidingly repelled, bnt,
aa lfe«ilume justly observes, it was most
improperly repelled^ 2f the ordinary rales of
JaWy aelded by the maclioe of centuries, are
4a be diapeaaed witn» and a priioner lotted
iDversipoathe.Cooit:foraadieaa, iaitreimagb
aaaaffithat.he .wsllobtain aaa favour wMt
ha in icatifled ito teiMd aa a right? If thia
be dia.eaae> .all lenuaty, all liberty ia at aa
Tins vmiaasaad very gmathardahipa would
mialt, if^paaems^ admit, thAt after a panoa
VOL, XXKIIL
hatii^MM to one erimjnal.prosec«^o, and
iwhi)e it is in dependence —for example, while
ixiformations are preparipg^ on the relevancy
«-4be tnduci^ of another prosecution for thf
same crime may be current.
I do not 9ay that the question .which I am
now stating. to your loidshipa has been de-
cided in (enganii l^ the jQQurL If it has so
been decided, it has escaped m obaeryation,
and the learned counsel upon the other side
,of the bar will mention the cases in jivhich the
objection has occurred, and has been repelled.
For any thing that I luiow, there may he in-
.atances of trials having proceeded on indict-
.ments raised in the same manner as the pre*
sent; but tfiat must have happened where the
objection waa not stated ; and you will ,easUy
see, that in many cases . it might be for the
interest of the panel to wave .the objection^
In many cases a prisoner would wi^h to be
tried, without Any indnKUBi for instance, in a
charge of a subordinate or inferior nature^
there may often be an interest on the part of
the prisoner to wave thU objection. But what
I found upon is thia, tht^ as foraa I have been
able to discover, this objection haa not been
stated and.repelled ia lenaiiai.
Bnt. though I cannot refer to a precedent in
which it haa been sustained, I think there has
been a case decided which apjpears to me te
proceed on the vmy same prmdple^ and to
jdlnatrate aad support the argument which I
■have now the honour to maintain. .There are
instances of hdf a do«en indictments having
been served upon a prisoner, one after anothea,
.and calling him to attend at the bar at diS-
•ferent times ; and, in particular, that' happen^
ed in the celebrated caae of colonel Francis
X^harteris. Four difierent libela were executed
.against 'him to take his trial for the same
eriine, all cdluig him to appear ia Court at
diffi»ei}t<tiniea; .and when he appeared upoa
the first of thesd indictaoeats, he stated that
•ha ^as act beand to plead at all, until the
4ord advocate selected the indictaftent upon
whtoh he intended to oarry oa the trial; and
ihe Court found,- or it was admitted on the peat
of the prosecution, that this was necessary^;
and accordingly, befoide the trial prooeeded,
it was necessasy to desert three of the indict
ments-»and when they wareao deseoted, then,
and not till then, vraa ooleael Charteria rch
quired 4o plead.
Is not that case precisely the same m trta-
(Buk as the present P For, if before colonel
Cnarteris pleaded, every indictment, then in
^dependence but one was necessarily deserted,
— ^now that my. client haa pleaded, there being
but one indictment when he pleaded, it fol-
iows for the same reason, that other three in-
dictaaenta cannot be hung over* his head. K
yon ,do not jupport this objection, you place
n^ dient in that situation in which it was
deoided that colond Charteria could not be
placad. If ooload Charteria had plead^lo
hia hrat indictment, while the others li^em in
snmense, he would have been in the siiuation
3071
57 GEORGE IIL
TrM of Wmam Edgar
[308
WUHam Bmmon^jom^^ Bonnytoun.
Jchn TVntter^ former at Stacks.
JMfft Toifhry rending at Blackness.
George iSiirviiuUy farmer at Northbank.
CUy of Edkiburgk,
Robert FroKTy jeweller in Edinburgh.
l%oma» BicharAony merchant»tailor there.
Damd WkiieknPy watch-maker there.
Peter FeddSe, tronk-maker there.
WiUiam Droiter, upholsterer there.
Aletutnder lUmtUf coadi-maker there.
John Inoerarity, upholsterer there.
Cfeorge Yule, merdiant there.
Alexander Aindie, saddler there.
John Sieelf confectionet there.
Jamee Iimet, gunsmith there.
Darnel Forreti, hosier there.
Peter Saweriy saddler there.
George ^mier^ mer^ant there.
WU&m Ron, tailor there.
Ckarlee WLun, draper there.
John Laingf saddler there.
John M^PiUroony tailor there.
Pnmdk Tknidaonj confectioner there.
WUUom Cooper^ boot>niaker there.
WUUam Dumbrecky hotel-keeper there.
ToumofLeith,
John M^Kennef merdiant in Leith.
Archibald Clegkomy com-merchani there.
Thinmt Morion^ slup-builder there.
Rohert$ Patereooy painter there.
C4aHSef Boberteon, merchant there.
John Sandertf a^nt there.
JMii- Cir/cweri wnght there.
Ad. Gillibs.
d. movtpbhmt.
David Dot7oia8.
Lord Jtatiee CfeHfe.--William Edgar, what
do you say to this indictment? — ^Are you
guilty or not guilty of the charges contained
mitr
WUlimn JS<(g)ar.— Not guilty, my Lord.
Mr. Gmmifotm.— The prisoner pleads to the
indictment which has just been read, I hare
to state to your lordships, that he is advised
to object to the competency of the present
proceeding ; and I humbly submit that this is
the proper time for stating «the objection to
. your lorafihips.
Your lordships will recollect that the pri-
soner at the bar was lately indicted upon the
statute the 52nd Geo. 3 , for the crime of ad-
ministering unlawfol oaths, binding, or pur-
porting or intending to bind, the takers to
commit die crime of treason. That indictment
was regularly served upon the prisoner — ^he
was brought to the bar — ^he pleaded not
Snilty — and your lordships, upon hearing a
ebate upon the relevancy, appointed infor*
mations to be giv^n in, and continued the
time for doing so until this day.
My lords, that criminal prosecution is still
in dependence against the prisoner. The diet
has not yet been deserted so for as I know.
I need not tell your lordships, that his
Majestjr's Advocate cannot desert a prosecu-
tion, either impHeUer or pro loco et tempore,
without the permission of your lord^ips.
Bf deserting emqUiciter, I mean here, deserting
with a view to try upon a new indictment for
the same crime.
.While the first prosecution was thus in
dependence, his Majesty's Advocate has
thought fit to eiecute a second indictment
against my client, calling him to answer at
your bar ror precisely the same crime as was
charged in the first mdictment. I submit to
your lordships, that this proceeding is alto-
S ether incompetent—- because the diet in the
rst indictment is not yet deserted ; and that
it would be equally incompetent to proceed
at present on the second inaictment, even if,
on the motion of the lord advocate, the first
should now be deserted. I shall state, in
very fow words, the grounds upon which I
think our olijection is irresistible.
It is known to your lordships, that by the
criminal law of this country, as now firmly
established, every person who is brought to
the bar upon a criminal charge is entitled to
have the mdueia of fifteen fi«e days. What
benefit could be derived from the indnda if
he could be brought to trial, and during the
dependency of that trial induda might be
running against him all the while for another
trial on account of the same crime? Why, be
would be placed in a situation in which the
law certainly never meant him to be placed ;
he would be perplexed and embarrassed, by
being under the necessity of defending twp
actions > subsisting together at one and the
same time. Observe how far this principle,
if once admitted would go. The prisoner is in«
dieted, he is brought to Uie bar, an objection
is stated to the nlevancy of the indictment,
and your lordships, after an argument of twdve
hottis upon the relevancy, find the indictment
irrelevant. The next moment his Majesty's
Advocate takes a new indictment out of his
pocket, and the prisoner is immediately put
again upon his trial for the very same offence.
Well, the second davyou have an argument
upon the rdevancy of this second indictment,
an argument which also lasts twelve hours;
and when that indictment is found irrelevant,
what happens next? A third indictment is
produoed by his M^esty's Advocate, and he
insists that the prisoner shall again be tried.
And thus there might be fifteen different
indictments, under which the prisoner is ac-
tually kept upon his trial for fifteen days,
being the whole mdueia contained in the -first
indictment; and upon the sixteenth charge,
the panel might be brought to trial upon a
relevant indictment, and without having had
one moment^i time to prepare his defence.
I may be told that this is stating an extreme ^
case, one whidi is not likely to happen. Such '
a case certainly may not happen while my
imi
Jar^dminktm^mtlai^fii^Ottihs.
A. D. 1817.
ino
fiind is loi4 ad»acM«> bat if whit I buiit
•Urted might happen jn »d eztreine cue, ft j»
«ooagk Ck my tmmeoL £vecy possiUe
dttoger «P tNs k«ia ought ta be guarded
agaiiM^ Ibr experience teaches us that cri-
naipal pwocatioM are often reaoctc^ to from
ii]Bbiilie% lereage^ and other impioper mo-
i^f genenl rale, therefore, in the law of
Scettonn, I aflirm that if a penon is indicted
te« crime, aad if be comes lo the bar, and
pleads pi> that indictment, then there is. a de-
pending pmess apinst him, dttrmgfohick he
caanbt again be cited tO'answer for the same
dwcge, and in that way be deprived entirely
of «k« benefit of his imdmitr* llie mosBent he
bas pleaded to hia indictment, it. is incompe-
tent to hara another indictment running
ugainst him for the same ofihnee.
There are various ways iu which I might
illnstcate the haidship and oppression which
mntUL result fyua a diffurent role. Suppose
« pansl haS'pleaded to aa indictmeai^ and has
been actnsjfy pot upon his trial here, if the
ohyeetion w]i<& I. am now stating is not a
g«M>d objection, hie Maiest/s Advocate might
taiae anolhec indictment, requiring him to take
fcia trial at a distance/^ for instance* at Aber*
deen, the day after the diet of the first rsodict-
nent, whidi is to be tried at Edinboigh, and
that iar the very purpose of d^erting the first
indictq^ent and proceeding upon the second.
In tins very case it is posaible that the pend
wmj have fifty witnesses to examine, and of
coarse he is bound to have them here to-day
in casa thetiial should go on on the former
iadietmem. But if the Ibrmer is deserted,
and a aew one called at Aberdeen to-mortoWy
ia what asanner, I would ask, ,is the psn^ to
twiwport his witnesses toiAherdeen? Thetnda-
csa are given by law for the very purpose of
pwilsctiiig the accnsed against surprises of this
Bad; but the practicealteaspted on -the part
of the Orovin would defeat that purpose.
It is in vain ta say that the Court would ia-
terfssa to give ledressy if an oppressive pro-
cseding otibt aatnie I have supposed were to
be attempted. That plea was once umd,
when a prosoctttor, in oefiance of alt law, had
asS given the OB^bosKry ts^b^, and X am sony
so say, that it was bstened to by the Court.
The libel oonta^ied Mmm of twdve days
oofy; and .wbeft <the panel oomplained, be
w« told, thai i£ he had applied to the Court
iw hmgnr time, it would have been allowed.
The olgeetioB was aocoidinf^y repelled^ hut,
as Mr. Home jastly observes, it was most
amfioperly vq^elled^ l£ the ordinary rules of
J»r,. settled by the McUce of centuries, are
40 he di^MOsed wtin» and a prisoner loUed
0v«rsifMmlha.Couit>lQrsadiess« isk^enough
Snsay».tbii<be .will obtain as a fasoufv wlMt
bs is jeslsied ito dbsiasd as a tight? If thi»:
be Sl»><s0e, all ssttarily, M liberty is at an
Thus irasiMssjaod very gwathardshipt would
aHult, if 9#B' ones edmit| Ihat after.a pssaon
VOL. XXXIII,
}^,p|Mded to one «rinunal.pn)siicaJ;iQO, aad
iwldle it is in dependence —for example, while
iqformf^ns are prepariiig on tha relevancy
^Hthe tffduM of anodier prosecution for th^
samjB crime may he current.
I do not say that the question .which I am
now stating to your lorj^ships has been da-
cided ia tenmm by the jQcturt. If it has S9
been decided, it has escaped my observatioo,
and the learned counsel upon the other side
,of the bar wiU mention the cases in ;which the
objection has occurred, and has been repelled,
•for any thing. that I know, there may be in-
.stanoes of trials having proceeded on indict-
.ments raised in the same manner as the pre-
sent; but that must have hapnened where the
x>bjeotion was not stated ; ana you will .easily
see, that in many cases it might be for the
interest of the panel to wave .the objection^
Jn many cases a {prisoner would wi^h to be
tried, without any imdmrni foripstanoe, in a
ohaige of a subordinate or inferior nature^
there may often b^ an interest on the part of
the prisoner to jwave thi^ olgection. But what
I found upon is this, that, as far as I have been
able todiaco^»r> this objection has not been
stated and.reptiAed m krmim.
But though I cannot refer to a precedent in
which it faaa been sustained, I think there has
been a case deoided which appears to me ta
proceed on the very same prmciple, .and to
dhistrate aad support the argument which I
have now the honour to maintain. ,There are
instances of hadf a do^en indictments having
been served upon a prisoner^ one after aaothes^
,and calling him to attend at the bar at diS>
•ferent times ; and, in particular, that' happen«>
ed in the celebrated case of colonel Francis
Charteris. Four difierent libels were executed
, against him to take his trial for the same
teiine, all cdling him to appear ia Court at
diflfasei^t (times; .and wben be appeared upon
the first of tbes^ indictments, be stated that
■he ivas not bound to plead at all, until the
Jord advocate selected the indictment upon
whioh he intended ta cany ea the trial; and
Ihe Court found, or it was admitted oa the past
of the prosecution, that this was necessary^;
and accordingly, bsfoSe the trial proceeded,
it was necessacy to desert three of ihe indicW
ments— and when they weteap descEted, then,
and not till then, was oolosiel Charteris ra«
quired to plead.
Is not that case precisely the same m irta-
(BnU as the present? For, if before colonel
Charteris pleaded, every indictment then in
dependence but one was necessarily deserted,
— ^now that my client has pleaded, there being
but one indictment when he pleaded, it fid-
lows fi>r ihe same reason, that other three in-
dictments cannot be hung over* his head. H
you do not support this objection, you place
n^ client in that situation in which it was
decided that edonel Charteris could not be
.placed. If cokmd Charteris had plead^ to
Us first indictment, while the others were in
snsnensei hawooid have been in the situatuui
«lll m GiSOttGE III.
in wliich it is wished to p1ac« n^rdient «t
wesent. The principle of the rule in'cokmel
Charteris's case is so wdl laid down by the
learned author of the Commentariesy that I
cannot refrain from stating it in his words. In
Hie 4th iroU of Mr. Hume's works, or' the 2nd
▼ol. upon the Law of SobHand, as to the ttkA
ef Cnmes, page 34, after haTing* first stated
tiiat the Court erroneously and improperty, in
two preceding cases, had repelled that objec-
tion, he proceeds to stale die case of Ghsrteris,
^ On the one* hand, the prosecutor cannot say,
that he is hardly dealt wiUi in being put to
make his choice among his scTeral libels,
whereof some* one at least ongfat td be correct,
and executed in proper form. On tile either
hand, tiie panel snifiBrs a disadTantage in con-
ducting bts defence, unless snch an ellsotion
shall be made. For there may be blunders in
the body of one of those Ubeis, or in the Kst
of witnesses, or in the manner of exeoudon
against the panel or witnesses, which may be
more or less a^ailaUe to him,^aiid may, perhaps,
aerye to his acquittal, if the prosecutor insist
ezclusiTclyon mat one. Whereas, aocoiding
to the latitude allowed in Lindsay's oas^ even
after making good such objections, the panel
in nowise profits bv his success therein, and is
dius perplexed and encumbered with die care
«f a double set of pleas. I learn from a
printed petition and answers (lor ther are not
m the record), that' in the case of colonel
Charteris, the panel had been serred with no
fewer than four libels, calling him to several
4iets, and o^erwise differing one from ano-
ther; and of this proceeding he compliiitts,
•ad insists that the proseentor shall specify the
dittay on whidi he intends to go to trial. The
prosecutor does so accordingly, in his answers
to the petition ; and it appear» from the infor-
mations in the ease, that the colonel nerer had
to plead to any of those libels but one, which
alone appears in the record.^
You therefore see, that before coloneV Ghar-
teiis would open his mouth upon that indict-
ment, he was entitled to have every cither ia^
dictment for ^ same crime pat out of the
Trial^WiOiamtd^
(fflS
tiie lord advocate has followed a diiennt
eourse here, for he first caiied one indidment,
to which the panel pleaded ; and after your
lordshifM had ordered informations,. therebY
continuing the dependence of the trial, whidi
at Ibis very moment has not been deserted^— I
say pending Ifcat process to whidi the prboner
pleaded, he has been dtedliy another indict-
ment, which is also now otet ms Wad; and he,
nnd his counsel if they have dene th^ir duty,
have been encumbered and peiplesed fiftiseh
days in attending to different set»of pleas^ in
these prosecutions. If the objection in the
ease or colonel Charteris was sustained, yeo
•uffht to sustain the olijection in thisuaie a|po.
It majr perhaps be maintained, but there is
no prindple to bear out the statement, that the
second indictment, ▼irtuaUy'iihports an aban-
donment jof the fimtindictimeiit. Anindictment
mi^ be abandoned before the panetis-Mought
into court and pleads: The lord advocate mi^
bring twenty indictments ; but before bringing
tiie panel to plead, he most desert all- of then
but one. And I ask. Can won case be pointed
out to me, of three or four itfdictasents brought
against an individual, and of hi» being brought
to trial, not upon the last, but on the fiitt ef
these iuiftctments^ The prindpto ia^ tfaa^
where several have been served upon a paae^
the seeobd is understood to be a virtaal desbr&
tion of the first, the third of the second, and s«
forth. The prisoner is always entitled to plead
to one only, and that is always the last. But
tiie prindple by which » subsequent indictment
is held to imply an abandonment of a foriMr
indictment, cannot apply in the <saie befoi<a
us ; for the moment that issoeis jeined betwees
the prosecutor and the pttad, it is no longer in
t&e power of the public pieseMtor to abandon
the indictment, unlesshe db if for ever. Wheii
the prisoner has pleaded to* an iifdictment, ke
is then m mmitm m^ and ^ prasecnlov
must have the express sanction of the Court
for the deserting of the libd. This ift laid dnwa
in so'many words by the learned Commenlntor
at the 38th page of the volume already men-
tiened : ''^It is also a case which sometiinea-
happens, that,, thbogh still-resolved on bringi^
the pand to justice,, the presecutor sees canee^
however, not to insist in thetrid of him on
that particular libel Because, periiaps, be has
discovered some flaw in it, or the exeentioii»
thereof; or on account of new and material
evidenoe whidi has latdy come to 4iii know-
ledge; and whidi requires an addition-to his
list of witaesses, or may occasion ai difeunca
in the laying of his charge. In dtuaiioaaof
this sort, whtdi, notwithstanding all due ^wm
on the prosectttor^s part,' must sometimes
happen>' it is necessary to»tbe advancement of
justice,tfaat he have the power of desertine hia
present libel, without prsjodiee to bis lignt cC
insisting anew, at the time, and in the foim^
which he shall find' advisable'. U indeed be
had the absolute and uncontrolled privilegn ef
throwing up h]s> process as often, and ft>r what
causes soever he ideased ; this would be dan-
gerous to the panel, who might thus, under fldae
or alfoeted pretences, be hanased #ith repeatsd
libds. Our custom does not therdbre trust
the piniecutor to*diat extent^ but ifflows hiak
only to move ih» court,, to desert the d»t pre
Isss €i Umfore; in which request thiif ifiny
refiisfr to gratify him, if diejf see cause to hi-
lievethat he* intends any thing' oppreisivu or
improper, or if thcrjr are not satisfied that there
aro good reasons fiMrsuch an indidgence. It is
true, the- stjple has crept into piMtioB, of M
pviseafor merUng the diet; because it' ee
often happens that his motion finr such a
purpose IS sueoessftil. But in tnlth this is a
tebse and inaccurate exprenion. For die aiet
of desertion is^not his act, but timt of the Court;
without whose permission and ddivesanoe'tlie
process cannot be withdrawn in'this tempomry
wm. And^ indiMd>'il he be ft private fafmh
9131
Jfer jiimMitJimg unlan^ld Oaiis*
A.D. 18)1
[S14
^tttoTirteiCftwl Iwfe 4rii«Bd7«i«tiQo ten him ^
to itMiAt •■ Uiat Ubd; and to this thej maj
hold him, and refuM to gire him new letten,
if ihey tee cbom. Aooordingljry in the debate
on the caee of Aftehihakl (Maich 1, 1768X the
pioaecnlin Ixai^fydiapwna all pretenmns to
9f^f such fibitrary. power. Hie mi|jes^f so-
lictor vqireacntSy that he obsenreB in the infor-
laatinnj on the part of the pand, Tery alanning
oonaecpMnoes are endeavoured to be grafted on
1^ doetaae |)led in behalf of the protecttior in
4ue amt a» if it gare to the pnblie proseealoff
a.fefy aMtraiy pofper^ f^preiiing 4he enb*
jeets in this oovmtiyy by deaerting 4lieli ai often
aahiateicyaiggested^ bntns aU the alarming
cpoaeyiencet pointed out are founded iq>on
the aiqppoaition of a doctrine which ike never
ilMnnft to plead, he thinks it now proper to
liavo this matter cka^y undemtood; as the
mtblie pfosecntor nerer pleaded, nor does he
desire it to be beUoTed by the suljeets in this
oooBtiy, thai he has anv arbitrary power of
deseitanf diets wilbout the anthonty, and in*
tervestioa of Court: which daeumstanoe to-
tal^ removes all those apprehensions which the
couBsd for the panel has grafted upon the sup-
poaitioo, that an arbitrary |>ower of deserting
3%Bla wan claimed in this, or in anj other cause.
by the public prosecator.*' And it is stated
in still stronger terms in his notes asto de-
rcthis were an open petntt I.«annot hesitate
for a toement to betiefe^ lh«t your lordships
wonld decide it in the manner which I now
suggest; 'for the hardships which would arise
foam imar other decision are plain and great.
Bnt I anbmit that it is not open; for diough it
waan^decided ta ienmnii in the case of colonel
<^nrleris, the objection, theroi maintained is
fmctlT die same in principle* Upon these
ffoanof I bnmbly submit to your lordships^
lliat the objection which I haie stated is well
I think I have already observed, that the
mistake cannot be rectified by the public pro-
seentor deserting the former prosecution at
this stagiB of the businem. The reason is, that
the panel has already jiufiered all the perplexity
and embaifamment which two co«exj8ting pro-
secutions for the same crime must necessarily
eecaaion ; and he has in consequence been de-
prived of the benefit of his mduda. Both in-
dietmeats h^ve been suspended over his head ;
and lihe desertion of the first now at the veiy
hoor of trial, will never authorize you to pro-
ceed vridi ihe second. To what hardship was
colmri Charteris exposed in going to trial upon
indictment, white others were hanging over
head, to whid> the prisoner is not exoosed
in the piesent case ? Uolon^l Charteris anew
well, tnat if he was once sent to a jury in one
indictment, thu rest were for ever at an end.
Bat the,Court'|hought,'that he was not bound
ssi^i tc-mkad with four indiotments hanging over
him; that Jie was apt bound to take his chai^ce of
tlm Ktetu^y b«ii^i|iyti«d tP^Qoe of these, pro-
aeentionsy and the verdict retuned in another.
You wonld not force him into the preUminatr
step of pleading and arguing the relevancy until
evwy indictment but one was withdmwn. Now,
I beg leave to ask the onestion where is the dif-
forence between pleading to one indictment,
and having other three afterwards served, or
having all the four served, and being compelled
to plead to one ? In the first case, j[ust as mudi
as m the second, the four prosecntions are co-
existent, and that is the hardship a>mplained
of* The prosecutor has placed my client
in the emysame predicament in which yon
found eokmel Charteris could not be plaosd.
I maintain, therefore, that the second in-
dictnient vras served enoneoudy, beoanse it
was served while the prisoner was under trial
for the crime charged in that indictment. For
it cannot be disputed, ttmt the prisoner u under
trial from the moment that he pleads, althougji,
according to our forms, the jiuy have not then
entemd ujpon their functions.
Now, if a prisoner can be brought again and
again to trial for the same crime, — and he may
be brought twenty times to trial for the same
crime, while the act 1701 is suspended, as it is
at present,— it is but fiur that he should have
fifteen free days between each of these trials ;
namely, the ordinary indMcim of the law.
If you once admit the princijde on which the
lord advocate proceeds, you might have these
twenty trials goin^ on for twenty consecutive
days, without respite either to the prisoner or
to vourselvea. I beg to ask. If this would not
only be to harass and perplex him, but to deprive
him altoaether of the oenefit of his inducia?
Could fifteen days so spent be called fifteen
days allowed for preparation F The prisoner
would be perfectly confounded, not knowing
upon what day, or under what indictmeiit, ha
was to be sent to the jury.
I humbly submit, therefore, that the poipt is
clear and established in principle, that the ta-
ducU of no one indictment can run, even after
the prisoner has jdeaded to another indictment
for the same crime, consequently, although
your lordships were to allow the lord advocate
to desert the first indictment, that the prisoner,
not havins had his tadacios under the second^ is
not bound to plead to it.
Mc HiMne Drummandi^l do not think that
it is necessary for me to say much in answer 1^
this objection, as the point has been settled in
practice long ago. , The whole question in dis-
cussion here seems to be, whether it is neces-
mry now for the prosecutor to pass expressly
from the other indictment, or whether it is
already virtually JMssed from? The learned
gentleman was quite incorrect in speaking of
ue prosecutor 'deserting the indictment,**
instead of '< passing" from it ; as it is not the
mdietmait which is said to be deserted, but the
dki and besides,, the desertion is not the act
of the prosecutor, but of the Court. If the
diet were to be deserted, there mi^t be a
doubt whether both indictments would not
th^r^jrb^ ^tfnguished, as the diet «f bolfl
happens to fall on the same day. Fuifber thta
fhis, the prosecutor can have no interest hi ob-
jecting to any mode of eztingnishrng the irst
lA>el. He could hare no other mothre in nbt
having recourse t6 the Ibrm of moring the
Court to desert the diet; and he conceived
that he was following a simpler course,
and one less calculated to create trouble and'
Aehy.
I happen to have loioied into the practice ef
late years as to the point in question, and I
naintainy that the proceeding in tMs case afe
agreeable to the practice which your lotdsUps
have sanctioned and shall mention iht cases
that have occurred. lindsay Crawford was in*
dieted to stand trial on the 9m of Januaiy ldl3.
The diet was continued, on the motion of his
own counsel, to the 3rd of February; before
which 3rd of February new criminal letters
#ere raised against the panel ; and the trial
proceeded on the criminal letters, without any
notice being taken of the first indictment,
though the trial on the criminal letters took
place on the same day^ the 8rd of February.
Mr. Mum^, — ^Had he pleaded ?
Mr. Drumntond. — He had not. He had come
into court, and the diet was continued upon
the motion of his own counsel. It is of no
consequence to the principle of tlie objection
whether the panel pleaded to the indictment or
not ; but, at all Events, there are cases enough
where this proceeding has taken place after
panels have pleaded.
The veiy next case, that of lliomas Somet^'
▼ille, was one of that description. He was in-
dicted to stand trial on the 25th of January
1813. On that day a long pleadiag took place
iipon the relevancy; conseqqetitly he did plead
to the indictment. There cojiifd iiot have been
d debate, If he had not pleaded not guilty.
Informations 'on the relevancy were ordered to
be given in on the 15th of February; and be-
fore that time, new criminal letters were raised
which fell upon the same day, the 15th of
February. I took a note at the time of a con-
versation on the bench as to the particular ob-
jection which has now been stated, and which
I beg leave to read, i see two gentlemen on
the other side of the bar, who can correct jne
if I am inaccurate, who I remember to have
f een counsel in that cause. *^ Lord Hermand
asked, if it was not proper in such a case to
desert former diet pro loco et tempore ?— Ob-
jected, That former indictment abandoned by
service of this. And Court said they would
adhere to the practice, and cate proceeded" I
had added this remark to the note ; ''Had not
the diet fallen upon the same day, it would
have dropped out of the record, by the passing
of. the day without its being called.'^ Now,
can the prosecutor be compelled to .appear or
insist in any hbel he does not choose to insist
in f and if not, must not the diet fall and be
dropt for want of aa instance ?
' VpCB d)« 13th of Jane 1814; Johntfom
TrM of fymm Edgar
C216
wtti brought fothebaronachHrga^ffohnQiy.
Pleadings at great length took place cia the
relevancy of the iadictisent, the pand bavivje
pleaded not guilty. Infonoatioiia were CfdereS
to be given in on the 8di of Jaly, and aiaiaar
proceedings took place. Before that day m
new indictment had been served, Ae diet
whereof fell upon an earlier day, aild wpom
that day informationB wer^ ofdered of iieia
upon the new iadictment.
Jhett was also the leeent eaaeof lbs TiMstle
Bank of Glasgow against Befli and DMgla*^
After the panel Dcwglas had pleaded g^fty,
informations were oideied^ aan a new indiot-
ment was, in the mean time, served upon ^m
panel, which was understood, as is the Ibi
cases, to have eattfaiguiahedthe first.
These are all the cases since 1811, iik
it was possible for this olje^etion t* eicoiir;-
and the same practice took place h^ a& of
them that has been followed here, whicb eoaki
not have happened if this objectioB had been'
wMl founded. The plea of its having pasMd
luff tUetUio cannot be maintained, as it is Iha^*
daiy of die Court to see that eve^ thing shidl*
So on according to the proper forms of hnr, a-
uty which the Court at all times disdiarge^
whetlier the panel's couiisel think it totMr
fnterest to state objectiona or not. A stroa|;ar
example of this cannot be' ^en 4ian &tt
very case of Douglaa, Where tibe Ceait etrdered
informations on the relevancy of an faidict-^
ment to which the panel had pEl^aded ndlty.
The embarrassment of the panel witn dilpei^
ent libels, and the other evils coMphoned e^'
are entirely imaginary. The service of ^ ttdr
indictment, or at least the eidlitig of the diet,-
extinguishes the old one ; ahd th^ is my^Ub^
sistincr indictment but ^ last obe' widdi i^
served on the panel. If any diet were to bef
deserted at all, it would be the diet of tto
last, as no notice could be taken of thefint*
If, however, your lordships dioold have am
dpubt upon the subject, the prosecutor wm
pass from the indictment, or will- move for a
desertion, or follow any coune that tho Cowt
ffiay think best calculated to put an end to Ae
first indictment, if its existence shotild still bo
thought possible. He has no wish to maintais
any argument on the subject ; only it is Ma opi<*
nion, that by the service of a second indiet*
ment he has abandoned and virtually pa»ed
ft-om and extinguished the first.
Lord Advocate. — ^After the statement wfadcli
has been giveii by Mr. Dmmmond, I do not
mean to detain you by entering into a qoe^
tion, which I understand to be shut hytiie
uniform practice of your lordships. Bat I
think it necessary to advert to one point hi
ttf r. Cranstoun's speech. He stated, that^ finr
some time past, the cotin^ i(k Ihe panel bad
ihought it incumbent on them to attend, not
only to this indictment, but also to Ihe last, in
which informations n^re ordered on the rke-
vancy. He ought to have stated-^-and aa I
know his ftdmess, I think it mast have boett
byaimssioil ttiat he did iiautate«**aurt alN
*
ivn
Jbr Mmiiith0Uig udm^ OaOu.
A, n, 1«(%
\m»
ita» & nondl befiie tlv paid iNte Mrred ^mdi
i^iA indietamty notioe was givoi to his ooantel
\ff liiwtf, tiitt it was BOt intended MrpiDMeate
lk« fittC iddietfliaat, but to sarfe mib with
aaMhetf. I tfaink it fleoettary, i« vindieatioi^
«f tlM pablio ptoaecntor^ to aiatn this to your
lonlsiups> u it ahawa there was no hitei^aD
in oppms th9 panel, av to give hiacouiael
«nf naediaw tronhla^
Ob the point iisal^ I sfHe la yon, lini net
onlf since 181S hit this point bean nndemot>d
toh^ahtit, but in «U the caaea before, this was
Aanniftmnpnotiae. lathecaaaof Mendhaniy
there waa » iMig avfoaaent whether tiie^iaBaing
af- notes in Eof^and oould be ataled in this
Govt, on the gionnd of the crfme in the one
ootmtiji being a ootttbstiation of the orime
<BuiBiitted in the dtiiCT. After the panel
niairifri upon that« i«lbtttationa taese drdefed^
It was dien thought the better tiode of pao-*
cneding to abandon that iadiettnent^ ana to
give n new one, whidi was detia while ialbf^
naadena weita in depend^nee; and in that
cnaei where it ia hnown to jtxM loxdidnp that
9iwtf attempt was made to safe the individnal
Aen at tho bar, this point was tmdecstood to
be shut.
• The Mittt jnst comes to this, that, where
Ae pnbOe proaecntor has ndsed an indicCment,
it is competent fo him, antecedent to pleading
Mbre a Jnty, to abandon the indictment and
las^ a second. It appears to me that the
dicnmstanoe of a pleading on the relevancy
httittg tdcen phboe, cannot prerent the public
pt^asecoior frmn abandoning the indictment
vriien be thinks fit, and bringing a new indict*
inent. liddng both the principle and invalria-
Me pthdtice into Tiew, there cannot be a donbt
111 the caaoi In sappcH of what was stated
hj^ Mr* DtttniflAond, the oise of colonel
Chhtteris is in p6iht. If It bad not been held
Aaft Ae kM ifldictmtot waa a Viiaaa^pahaing
fiom the Ibrmer oaesy all of them wontd ha^e
appeaared tm th^ recMk Bat he^e it oAly on#
tipon tlie r^rdi tlierfefbre the service of th#
aecoiid wai a virtnal abandemnent cf the first.
Upon thefee gkmnds, I hat^e no doabt of the
«eBipetency cf the proceeding in this aaae^
Mr. Gferit— If the objection stated by Mr.
GraAat^uh has any solidity ih it, I am sure no
^aod anawer has been givett-to it on the other
sid^ of the bar, and indeed no answer at all.
Ihe tewned gentlemen were pleased to talk
of a pfMtiee since lbl3, of which they have
shown yoor lordships no te06rd ; aind one of
fSueub talks of a case brought into Court a
nanber nf yeata ago, in whidi^ he sliyBi a fiMt
iadictmettt waa abandoned, and a tcoond
aefved oA the panel, upon wlikft sec(yhd In^
dicttncBt the trial proceeded. As t6 Ae-ch^
camstatwpes of tfiai case, we have Ih^ aofbority
of m learned firiend, which li, Kvo d<MiM,
feonaiderable; but it is not an authority upoti
which, in duty to my client, I am bound to
^kfi And to What dothesfeicaset amount after
^ak Jasl to ttit^ Ihtt the pabfH tUkMred hiai^
selfio bh Med npoit a
out makiag any obyectioik to it« It is very
eaay to aooaiiDi for all dMoe caaes. H vat^
freqiaentfy happem^, that it woald not avail
a panel to have his triat pat off— 4ia ia prapaaad
to meet it, and his oomtsd beina laadhr, ha
Would not wish to pot off the tnal, or ineur
any farther delay.
We, who are ooanael in this ease, consaHed
topether whether it waa worth while to ataia
thia ohjectton, aa it trauld menty lead to
dah^. Dating eae period of the coaaaltalieiB
I waa of cpiBion, that it waa not worth whila
to sute the c«f^ection, being all tha whOa
aatiafi^ it waa a good sAiieoitQn. What I hara
said is aaffidaat to aaeoaat far all tfaa'casaa
which have been cited, even auppeaing they
wane ataled accatately. In geneial, I may
observe this, that it eHea happena ia eaaca
tfemips^befoiatfars Coatt^ that tha gtntiemen
who attend for the panel tea better aanmiated
with civil, than with crimiaal trials. Sudi an
objection as wa now. maintain would very
possibly not have occurred to m«. But it
stands on the ground of authority and of
principle, and it tbast ba considered well
fbunded. Upon what is it founded f JWaf,
It is positively laid down bvMr. Hume, who
mentions his authorities, ana he himself is &
great authority, that the prosecutor, pubUo or
private, cannot abandon his indictment after
the relevancy is pleaded to. He has no right
to give it up. He has no more right than any
other litigant has to give up any case without
the leave of the Court I apprehend yoa
cannot reasonably have any doaot as to uiia
point, that no ^iroaecutor • can of his own au-
thority desert the diet, or abandon the libel, or
prevent the Court from discutting that libel.
The matter must be judged of by the Court.
This is expressly laid down by Mr. Hume,
and I am surprised my learned friend should
use his own authority against Mr. Hume's au-
thority, without offering any argument upoa
the sulriect. '^ It is also a Case which some-
times happens,'' says Mr. Hume,*^ ^that
though still resolved on bringing the panel to
Justice, the prosecntor sees eaase^ however,
not \^ insist on the trial of him on that parti*'^^
cular libels Because, peihaps, he has diseo-
vered some fiaw in it, or the executions thdrao^
or on account of new and mateiial' evidence
which has lately eome to his knowledge, and
which requires an addition t<^ his list of wit-
nesses, or may occasion a difference in the
laying of his charge. In situation« of thia
soFt, which, notwitlMtanding all due petns en
the prosecutor's pai^ must sometiaafts> happen.
It is necessary to- the advancement of JuMiee
that he have thefiower ^ofdesertinghia present
Ubel, Withoat f>i«|ttdlee to his right oC insisting
anew at the time, and la the form which k«
shall find advisaUa* if, indeed> he had the
absohrte and uncdnttfolled privilege of throw-
ing up his process aa often, and Ibr what
«M«*MMMfri|«i|**M»'^«l— i*^hM
* »«l>i^<i<*#<Mi
% S-Tr* :|» Gr.l8»
aifi] 57 0BO«3£ Ifl.
iMUi9efl.«o«f tt h% 'plwsedy tiii» wooid be d«ii-
gerous to the panel, who might thus, uider
nlio or afieeted prelenoesy be berawcd with
lepeeted libels. Our . iciutom does not, there-
m% trust the prosecaCor to that extent, but
atfows him onlj to more the Court to desert
the 4iet jptm hco. et tmfurt; in which request
they may refose to gratify him, if they see
cause to beUeve that he intends any thing
•pfureiaiTe or inqiroper, or if they are not
satisfied that there are good reasons lor such
an indulgence. It is true the style has .crept
iBle practice, of. the pmsecutor deserting the
4iet, because it so often happens that his mo*
lion for such a purpose is suocessf uL But in
truth this is a loose and inaocucMe expression:
Ibr the act of desertiop is not lus act, but that
^ the Court, without whose permission and
4eliferance the process cannot be withdrawn
in this, tempoiaiy form.'' There is a great
4eal moreto the same eflfoct.
Lord GUSm, — Mr. Drummond says this is
not a desertion of the diet, but an abandon-
ment of the indictment.
Mr. €Mk.— It is clear that the whole of tins
passage applies to the case now before the
Court. . I shall put this case to your lordships.
Suppose that a libel is served on a panel with
St list of .witnesses annexed, that the panel
ob|edts to the relevancy, that the Court takes
the libel into constdeiatioo, and that, in the
courM of the aigument, the prosecutor disco-
Ten he could strengthen his ceie by throwing
lup' that libel. Sumrase that he therefore
brings a new libel with a nfw list of witnesses :
May not the panel reasonably object, I have
disclosed my witnesses in pleading to the foi^
mer libel, and therdbre it is improper that the
prosecutor should have power to throw up the
former and bring a new libel accusing me for
Cha same crime?
What Mr. Hume says is, that the Court
may allow the prosecutor to throw up, or de-
sert his libel, but that he cannot dp so without
leave of the Court. Were the prosecutor to
be allowed of himself to desert his indictment
^d bring a new one, he might make such im
attack -on the prisoner, as the prisoner might
.find diiBcttlty to perry. That would be a
.hardship on the prisoner, and one produced
partly by the discussion on the first indict-
jnent. And if the first indictment were to
-bediscussed, and the panel to be tried on it,
the case mif^t be such, or the verjr evidence
such, as to entitle him to an absolvitor. That
is an important consideration. The authori|ies
.are clear with me. The proeeoator of himedf
•hes no right to throw up his lib^ after it has
been pleaded to. ^The act of desertion it
not htt act, but that of the Court, without,
wlupse permission and deliverance the process
cannot oe withdrawn in this temporary form.''
. A private prosecutor must give caution to
.insist in his VAifX ** Indeed if he be a private
prosecutor, the Court have already caution
trom him U> insif t on tba^ libel| and to this
TM^WiUUm S4g§f
\a»
they may h^ him and. lefae. to. oife m^
letters if they see cause. According^, , in the
debate in the case of Aichibald, the proeeoutor
innkly disown* all pretensions to any saidi
arbitrary power. His migesty's solicitor ^
presents, — that he observes, in the informatioB
on the part of the panel, very alarming coitse-
Snenoes are eadeavouied to be.grafled on the
octrine pled in behalf of the prooecator ia
this case, as if it gave to tkie public piosecutor
a very sirbitrary power of Mpressittg the sub-
jects in this country, by aesertiiig diets as
often as his (aney euggested. But as all tihe
alanning consequences pointed outare founded
upon the supposition of a doctrine vduch. he
never meant to plead, he thinks it now proper
to have this matter clearly understood^ as the
Sublic pROsecutor never pleaded, nor doee be
esire it to .be b^eved by the sul^ects in this
countij, that he has any arbitmry power, of
deserting diets without the au^rity and in^
tervention of the Court; wh^ circumstavpe
tota^y removes all those apprehensions yrhkfk
the counsel for the panel has grafted npoq the
supposition that anarbatrair power of deserW
ing diets was claimed in thi^ or in way otbee
case bv the public prosecutor.''
Beaily, my lord, after reading that Mssage^
and the whole of the passages in M^ Humei
I submit that it is quite idle to maintaiu that
the public prosecutor has it in his power in idl
cases to desert his libel, and throw up his pn^
cess. He mav do so before the panel bsa
pleaded ; but the moment the panel has joined
issue with him, thfen the pleasure of the Court
must be taken as to a new trial.
The assertion if manifestlv groundless tbae
the. public prosecutor may abudpn an indipt^
ment after it has been pleaded to, and briiOg a
new indictment Before such pleading lie
may execute a new indictment, which is undof-
stood as an abandonment of the dd. But it
is contrary to principle and authority to sim-
pose, that, after a panel has pleeded, the
prosecutor may throw up his UM, and haTe
lecourse to a new indictment. He slay be
compelled to discuss the libel to which die
panel has pleaded. If it be thrown out upon
the relevancy, the prosecutor may bring for-
ward a new indictment. But suppose (hat it
is not thrown out upon the relevancy, that the
case comes tp. trial, and that the pen^ obti^
an aktoMbor upon that trial, the prosecutor
caunot bring a new trial for the onence there
chaiged. Therefore, I say thai the public
prosecutor has up njgai^ without the au$liorihr
of the Court, to abandon this indictment; aiia
although he has taken upon himself to execute
a new indictment, he cannot abandon .the old
indictment vrithout the authority of tl^ Court.
If this proposition is true, the public pro-
secutor must do something more, or you n^ist
do something more for him,, before he is enti-
tled to proceed on the indictment before your
lordships.
As to the case of colonel Charteris, we are
Ipld ip answer, |bat for some tiniB pMl it l|ee
snl
Jw MmkuHeriKg unttimflit'Oatht,
A. a mr.'
Xft3S
be^a tile' pnbetite -tbr the public pfosecator to
wSbmoAim a fint iodktBicnt, without tadcin| any
notice of it to the Coitrt at all, but metetj by
execalini^ a new iadictiiient. The panel ma^
BO doabt be tried on this new indictment, if
he is 'more elrftid of the old than the new one.
But whenever the point of objection is stated,
JOG nnist go back to the principles and jndg-
lAentii of yoor loidAips in parallel cases ; and
upon these it is dear, that till the pdblic pro^
aecvtw gets thr first indictment oat of hk
w^y, which he has not yet done, he cannot
pvoceed on the second.
If he ihodd move to desert the diet n'syfi
cKer on the fint libel, which he may do, liie
«pieslion will be. Whether he is entitled to go
ion dis pkn» with the second ? We have tieen.
4ni^ pBvinr the way for this last question,
which is the troe snliject for yonr consider-
srtion* Tne cpiestion oomes to be. Whether
the public firbsecntor, npon now giving np the
ftnt libel, is entitled to proceed on the se-
^i^bnd r We' sabmh that he is not. For it ap-
pears from' the case of Charteris, that the
Conft' wbnld not allow the public prosecotor
fb bave in dependence several Ubeb at the
snie time.' lliey forced him to abandon
tbrte of his libels altogether, and then colonel
Chltfleris went to trial on the fourth. Sup-
posing it' had been dismissed upon the rele-
Wncy, and that the public prosecutor had
ifsen allowed to depart from tiiat'libel by the
Court, hie might have brought a new indict-
liieiiti But I ask this, upon wlndi the whoTe
point now depends; Would it have been
eompetent for the public prosecutor, after
Ittvl&g been fbreed by the Codrt to withdra.w
^bee of the libels, before diie panel was
obliged to plead to the fourth, to have on the
Mne day. ettciited these other three libels,
and foned the panel to ao on and plead to
thiemt This winild have been considered so
giest an evasion of the justice done by the
Cduft just befons, that H would not have been
«ndared« No public prosecutor could have
«et Us fooe to that Yet, ^bere is the differ-
ence betwcien diat proceeding' and the pro-
ceeding in the preseht iutande^ 'Fhe first
libd here is in dependence, and a new one
iMtt been executed upon the same grounds,
dMNigh not in the same form. The' posecutdr
eneentes a ne# indictment before tne old one
Ins been disposed of. Is there any difference
between this case and the case of colonel
Charteris, as it wotdd have existed, if the pub-
lic prasecotor, after abandoiung three indict-
ments, had proceeded in the manner vrhich I
liave just supposed ?
Your loidsMps have been t^d, that there is
lio intention to do any injustice to my client.
'Idojwt say Aete is. I say they havie gone
witmg in point of form— in point of power —
diSsy have no' right to' proceed as they are
dbmg. Tbouffh die puoKc prosecutor now
n^ not be disposed to do injustice, his suc-
msor may; and we mi^t as well set afloat
the vrhole forms of the Court at once, upon
sa^nf that the pubtie prosedlitor intends no
injustice.
It vras said, that the counsel for the panel
had notice that a new indictment ina t6 be
execnted, and that the former indictment was '
to be abandoned'. I am one of the- paneFs
counsel, and I did not ^et notice of this. But
vrhat signifies the notiee? It is binding on
nobody-^it is not binding on the prosecutor,
or on the panel. Sodi a thing could not bn
done wfthcmt the Court. Tt was very well in
my lord advocate to have such polite inteitf-
tions toward the' panel; but it ift not fbr hk
lordship to determine this matter. It is the
Court, vriiich are to do or "not do what' he
wishes, according to their opinien of Ihtt merits
of the case.
This land of specialty pleaded by the pro^
secntor signified nothing. l>own to the present
hour, my client and his counsel have been
forced to the consideration of bodi indicf-
ments; and no Uttle consideration has been
pven to both — and that is the hardship winch
It is the object of the law to prevent. Upon
the whole, therefore, I hope that I am not
obliged to answer this indictment before the
fint shall be disposed of— and then I am enti-
tled to the benefit of ftill tadiiekr, after the
first libel shall' be abandoned. I akn not
bound to answer to this indictment vrithout
any warning. If the prosecutor had no right
to execute that indictment, it must be consi-
dered as not executed at aU. Fifteta dayi^
at all events, must be allowed after the fin*-
indictment shall be legally abandoniid.
Mr. j€§r^. — ^There are only two pointSi— .
lardJdnocaU. — I olject to more thin two
counsel for the panel in reply.
Lord Earmamd, — As many of tht pvMi's
counsel as please may speak.
Irsrd Ado&oaU.'^KB many of them as vrirfied
might have spoken before the Crown vriaa
called upon to tfnsvrer, but they cannot now
all be allowed to speak. It is also' irregtilar
for ft juirior counsel to speak after a steieit
counsel.
Hr. Jf^ri^.^What have you to do With
that?
Lord fiiBrmand.-*In justice to myself, I must
here offer an explanation. One of the oldest
cases I remember is the trial of ProvOSst tdooi-
gomerie in 1759. Half a docen counsel theie
spoke wrMm. I have myself been in cases
in which this was done, having spdcen in the
middle of four or five counsel ; but it vras at
the beginning, in answer to a plea to the lel^
vancy, and not in r^ly.
LordJuttice Cfer^— I am of opinion vKth ford
Bermand. Here the' vrhole eight counsel f6r
the panel oiiffht hilve spoken in succession im-
mediately aner Mr. Cranstoun ; but I* know
no instance of two replies having been ad*
ntiitted for a panel.
My lords^ you hlive beard thia argument
SSB] ^7 GBOBGe MI.
what are your opinions on toe subject.
Lord JStrmmd, — Jn eve 17 eaie I abouM bfe
4esirou0 of gfttUng anjr infi^rmatimi to enable
w^ io sitftaiii ^li^ctioiis in ikvom of a pet-
•oaer.' But my opinion k, that the objection
,in tbe prelent case moat be Kepelled^ bectnae
.the piiaoner baa no inteveat to. ptead the ob-
jftofcion.
At tlie aame ttme^ I am dispoeed to do all
rMte to the argnment of Mr. Granatoon.
«tated» ihaK the panel had pleaded not
<giii>l|r tp the fimiier todietment-r^thait Inibrmar
'tioQS bad been ordarad upon objections which
mv» atHted lo the nleynney-T-lfaftt a new
indictment had been served while the fonner
indictaent had i»ot bean deaerted-^-and that
itbe f<ffinor indictment oannot be deserted
^vithout the authoritT of the Court. He
.atatfldy that fifteen days farther of Mhcmb
,iiii|^tba of material adtaaftaga to the panel;
Mid he figured ttroog cases of hardship which
.4ha Court would h»re to check ; for iottaace,
.4bere might be a series of indictmentfy upon
#Qfna one of which the king's adrocsata aught
Uk9 it ipto his h«ad to transfer suddenly tine
4rial to Iiiv^meM or Aberdeen. ' I hope no
imch thing will erer happen; bat should it
liappen, the Court has power to redress the
gnevance.
In ooosideiing jtfie oljsection which has bean
ibronght forvard^I wish to know vriiat interest
the panel has to. plead it. I could figure a
case whsie the panel might have a strong i»-
terest to plead sucH an objection; and then I
might think dlfierently from what I do on the
fires^iit occMtton.
The case would have been altogether diHev-
fnty if a different crime had beendi^rged in
the second indictment from what was diaiged
in the first, or if the crime had been differenUy
gtis^ nr if fqqiethipg had been added by the
,|N>bUc piosecator. Qat here the indictments
#fe tha 4fMna. Something is left, out in the
second, which aj^ared to me .objecti<^;iable
in toe fif)|t^tbe nfivative, that the paoal
hating ''at Glasgow,'' &c. ^'wickedlr, mali-
cipusl^ri and ^mtprooiily conspired and agreed
with ouer evil disposed persons, to break and
disturb the public peace, to change, subvert,
and overthrow the government, and to excite,
move, and nd^ insurrection and reb^Hon,
and especially to hold and attend secret meet-
ings, n>r the purpose of obtaining annual
parliaments and universal suffrage by yt^Iawftil
"means, did," 8ec. But are the pane's counsel
much the worse in their cogitations on the
second trial, from this passaee being struck
out of the indictment ? There is no increase
jia ^ second indictB}ient; a^d^ with tlie dimi-
nution wUcoI h^ve now mentioned) the twp
ic^ictnieata ai;e ip the same t9rm<«. The
pai^, itHerefore, i^aa nq M^r««t to plead the
.(^e^jtioa apon t¥<^ M appears to rely.
It is true that the 'pros^Utar, .in lavr, or in
¥^ «C *»W>;i«B»ot^4>f biP^s^^ 4^«.the
tridt/WiOkmU^
tMi
4iat fiat did tha judgas aTor #1^ 4t iatp
their minds <o ask tba prosecutor, upo»as^
ocoasioQ, why he deiwca 4^ diet to be da-
sarted 7 We preanme he has. gaod ;resaana
for doing 80» im we never fudc him to state
those jreaaone. The power of paaping liroai «r
desartii^ an iadiiitqient^ is sabstant»a4y in hb
m^eat/s adaocate or hni depaties<
J think the counsel for the panel woald hava
done belter to have withheld their otteetion*
Qps this paoal pleaded to the present indid-
maot? J believe not; for his counsel pjna-
vented him. The fir^t indictment had aat
gona ta a jaiy^ aad never will. jBefna ait
iadictment go to a jury, it has l>aaa Vy pata*
tice in the power of the pB0faca(cir ai wf
time to p»sa firam itbylvn^ginga.aaooadA»-
dictment; and it ware ;univise to pat -a lash
hand to a|i^ vanatian in the procadaraiiaaii-
minal iriM** Many in^tanoes mig^ be cited
of a ^TRt indicti^ant having b^n virMiaUf
passed ftom by a sacoad aamagy and taanr
casei ^ ithat efiact .were 'ditad by one of ihis
learaad g^tlemaui withont going fni^^er bnek
than^ail}. Thasa^yisasai^ifMailiar^ojiaj^)'
I wap pre9?qt at sei^eral of 4ha tiials« Tha
lord advocate want further baqk, apd he slatait
the o(#a of IVUndham. I taka the tme Tiaar
of ^e law to ;be .j^hi4*^at iba aemn^ <{f n
new indictment israaabsAaAtlal dereUctMpof
a fpraMt indiatmant. An a|i|>UcaftiQn to <he
Coi^?t an tfia iml^apt is a mare master of lam.
No good aaa arise iipm snsiaiiaagtheolQe^
tion in this case; and M<^ not tUidt tfentin
law and praatiea it can )>a anatainad.
Lord 6M/im,— I aia notaava. that i eaa ar-
rive at the same condition yri^h mgf bsoihar
who has now spolfLon^
I think it fiur to state in ihe outlet, thm
actual hardship is a plan whi<;^ cannot te
stated in the present inat^ce. I do nqjt^hiidE
that the panel can complain of hardship ;
na snob plaa» I belW^a* i^ aaaously ii
on, as thai of actual bardiMiip- IV
of trtte pcisonar's oonnsal is aa oUaotion. in
point of ibias, foondad ^i^pon prineipi^ and all
mims whidi ragnlate anamal proeednra are
of importance*
The case of Charteris was tha first nfenad
to; and what do I gather from thai aaaa.?
There were fonr indictmaats ; and thapiisaaar
was brought to the bar under the charge ooa-
tained in all these four indictments^ having
pleaded at that time to none :0f tbem. Bis
counsel excepted to thiSi and I thiidc widi
reason; and, in consec|uenca of whatpaaaed,
the prosecutor was obliged to abandon tbran
of iba indictBMuts, and the trial pmeeaded
npon tba fourth. I undemtood Idr.Clai^.'^la
ftay> that the trial djfd not pvoeefed mstaM»;
in which I think be is. mata&aik I think thsl
aD that lais done in that oaHi waa tofiad ilr
piasecutor aouH not praoeed on siky (ipe in-
4ictma^t without expressly abandoniag.alMa
rest; and I understand the ^al proeaadafi
ia^^iaAeiy. , TMs judgraeat, whethat r^
Jmr'AiminitierMg miikfmfiU Oaiht.
ttSSl
er wronif In ibe Mte of Chaiterit, and tlK>6gh
mvdk fomded on, seems to have been depart-
ed Irmb in the subsequent practice of the
Coorii it senm lo have become an establisb-
«d praetiee^ reooBcileaUe with prindjple, thai
« IMiblie . pvostecmor vaj raise indictments
■gainsc a prisoner in soecetoion for any peiiod,
«>m1 Msy bring fainiy when he chooses, touiai,
•nd that the ptisoner has now no gnumd for
ol^ectioo as in the case of Charteiis. I iM>ld
eOy for this reason, that it is now an established
fifinciple^ ^diat in eriminal prosecutions, a
public praaecutor^ by raising a fresh indict-
sncBi against a prisoner, so ^m> passes from all
teaser indictments. Suppose, therefore, that
dbe uaiMtttnate man at me bar had not plead*
«d to the old indictment, I should have consi-
dered the new indictment a nrtual abandon*-
ment of the former one. I conceive that the
practice which has followed the case of
CSiarteBS, b reconciieable to pnnciple,-and for
this reason, thai till a prisoner pleads to an in-
dictment, the public prosecutor has the dis-
posal of the indictment and be may brin^ it or
aot befine the Court — be may abandon it vir-
tual^, or expressly,' without the consent of the
Ceeort.
IJiai is what the practice goes to. But what
is the case here ? The difference between this
and cdbnel Charteris's case is, that here the
priscmer did plead to the indictment, ^d what
Was the consequence of bu doing so ? — that
the indictment wa^ no longer within the power
of the public prosecutor — ^he no longer could
desert the diet — that is all within the exclusive
power of the Court. If I am Asked whether,
when Utiscontettation has taken place, and the
pleading of the prisoner to the Indictment
may finrly Ito considered as an act of litiscon-
testation,, the public prosecutor is entitled, of
bis otm anthority, to desert the diet or aban-
don the charge r I answer in the negative.
He cannot do it without the interposition of
the autfaori^ of this Court.
* Tbet question is decisive to a certain degree
.on the pment point. If he cannot abandon
it ezpiessly, be cannot do it virtually-r^he
cannot do it by implication — he cannot do it
Without the authority of the Court. It is laid
down bjT ^^' HumSir-i^iid I conceive it to be
a moe^ important principle in our proceeding
— tfbt after a panel has pleaded to an indict-
ment^ |be. authority of the Court must be had
for the abandonment of that indictment. I do
not talk of tinis as a case of hardship ; but I
eoneeiTe hiiidilups might arise from the exer-
cise, by % public prosecutor, of such a right
as Ue maies^s advocate now contends for.
The pmUc proeecntor has many ptivilege».
Masf ^ jbilqrr end reasonnblj, aiul wisely,
end Ibr tb^ most proper puiposcs, given to
Ui^ isiicb an noLaihmed to a private prose*-
tetoe; AtiiiliieeBtfstalien goes through all
CM&. Afitar it^ neither party <^ go out of
fSeoil widsni the euthoritv of -the Court.
'Hesae ifiostsalce tbe nghsi, the aitaation, and
fwiWaanmit eC the piwttc preiecttler, 1^
you xxxm.
A. D. 1817.
[*«(»
ferring to the situation of the private prose-
cutor in similar cases* i can easily conceive
cases to exists thcjogh I have no apprehensions
of their existing, in which it might oe the duty
of your lordships, in point of justice and law,
and on important eonsiderations of every
description, to aay that you would not allow
the public prosecutor to abandon an indict
ment and take up a new one.
I apply this principle to the present ease.
The panel has pleaded not guilty to the first
indictment, and a new one ham been raised.
I do not say the new one is null — ^I am not
prepared to go that length. But this, much I
say, that this does not extinguish the old .one
-Ahat it is not a virtual diK^aige of it, ber
cause the public prosecutor cannot expresily
disdiarge or desert the first of himself. I
conceive that the first stiU subsists«4t has not
been dischaiged by any atuthority competent
to disdbarge it. tt still subsists; ana here
the prisoner has a fresh indictment served
against him. What is to be done with the
present indictment ? It is. not null— but whal
the prisoner says is, I must have full tadud^
granted me; and the whole questiou is,
whether the full tnduour shall be granted him,
YesorNo?
I think that, in point of form, you are bound
to dispose of the first indictment, and then the
question is, whether you will allow the panel
the fifteen days, Yes or No ?
It was said that the prisoner has no interest
to plead the objection. I cannot go into that.
This is a question of life and death, and he is
the best jodge of his own interest. I am not
lentitled to tell him that he has no interest not
•to be tried to-day. For any thing I know, he
has a great interest — a material interest, by
which his life may be preserved or prolonged'
To have his life proloaged even for fifleen or
sbcteto days, is perhaps a serious object to
him, as avoiding nim possibly a better chance
to save it from ue. present danger*
If tbe practice lounded on by tbe Crown
counsel were of long standing, inveterate, and
feconcileable to principle, I should hold it
sufficient to authorise the proceeding which i#
olijeeted to in thk case. But as to the prac-
tice cited here, where an indiotment has been
pleaded to by the prisoner, I have seen ne
eases stated prior to .1813. The ease of
SomervHle in I8ia, and that of Horn in 1814,
iwere mentioned. The case of Mendham I
hafve no distinct recollection of. I take it for
Uraated it.was coneetly stated. These three
cases are all we have been told of, which truly
epl^y to the present case. I cannot pay such
jegard to these cases, as to be of opinion that
they entitle me to overrule the objection ^
.Jlirs^ Becauie they are too recent in date, and
too few in nnmben for regulating our decision:
Saoondfy^ I thibk.they ought not to be M;tended
to, for thisTeaton^ - taacanse I da not -see that
the ol^)ection was stated; and vi!e all know
Imw apt the best men are to fall into errors
and shght irtegulaiities when not put cm their
0
4271
57 G£ORG£ III.
gtiard by the bar. Wewert told^ that it is
%e duty of the Coart to watch over the pto>
ceedingSy and see that they are regular and
consonant to established forms, whether any
thing be stated from the bar or not. In that
obsmation I agree; and I am sure that I
sneak the sentiments of the Court when I sav,
that we are sensible of the anxious and able
care displayed by your lordship on all occft-
sions of that kind. But it is impossible for
any man to attend- to every thing, I say,
therefore, I pay. much the less regard to these
cases, because they were not argued by the
bar. They are cases in which the objection
was not urged. If the objection had been
stated the Court would have given greater
consideration to the point. I nave a third
reason, viz. that I cannot reconcile these deci-
sions to strict principle. I think that after a
panel has pleaded to an indictment, the public
prosecutor cannot pass from that indictment
without the authority of the Court; and that
he cannot virtually abandon a first indictment
after such pleading, merely by serving a second
indictment upon the prisoner.
I therefore think this objection is well found-
ed, to the effect that it is our duty to insist that
the lord advocate shall proceed on the former
indictment, or shall now move the Court to de«
sert it. Whether any consequences may follow
from delay, I am not aware. The panel asks
fifteen days longer; and, if he is right in point
of form, I cannot refuse his demand, on the
ground that he has no interest in what he asks.
Lord PUmUfy — This is a point attended
with some difficulty ; and it would be singular
indeied, if,^ after attending to the learned plead-
ings at the bar, and y^nai we have heara from
the bench, I could say I fek it unattended
with difficulty. My impression however is,
that the objection is not well founded. In
questions of this description, the practice is
the safest guide to go oy. It here appean
strong. I do not speak particularly ot the
case of Mendham ; but the cases of Somer-
ville and Horn are distinctly in point«— are
identical to the point before us.
It is true that these are late cases, and that
na others have been mentioned. But let it
be remembered, that this objectioo cmbcs
upon us unprepared. Neither vbur lordships
nor counsel have had time to look to prece-
dents ; and I diink it would be ri|^t to have a
search made into former cases, to see whether
these are the only cases which are the same
with the present.
It ie certainly true that these eases were not
argued before your lordships ; but the Court
is bound to attend, and always does attend to
the relevancy of proceedings of this kind, and
particuiariy when it is important to the de-
fence of a panel at the bar. The Court will
in all such cases attend to the regularity of
procedure ; and in the case of Somerville this
point Was suted to the Court— it wae aot
argued, but it vras not overiooked.
Trial of fFiOiam Edgar [328
I do not see that any hardship could ariw
from holding that the serving of a new indict-
ment is a virtual abuidonment of the old.
It was upon that principle that the case of
Somerville was decided ; and if I did not uxf
derstand that to be the principle in the case of
Somerville, I should be of a oifierent opinion
as to the present case. I see no hardship to
the panel, nor any want of principle in the
rule. It is upon these grounds, though with
difficulty and hesitation, that I think the ob*
jection cannot be sustained. At the same
time, it may appear to be of importance, and
I have no objection to have the poini more
fully considered, and a search maae for pra^
cedents, because I am satisfied that when the
matter is investigated, it will be found that
the Court has proceeded upon these grounds
in other cases.
Lord Re$ton, — The first inquiry is, whether
this (question has been settled or not by prior
practice? If it is not so settled, I agree in
the opinion which Lord Gillies expressed.
If I understand the quotations that were
read from Mr. Hume, it is not in the power of
the public prosecutor, without the autnoritT of
the Court, to pass from an indictment to'whic&
a panel has pleaded ; and the panel may in*
sist that the case should now go on upon the
first indictment. The panel riiould not Be
exposed to the hardship) of not knowing upon
which indictment his trial is to proceed. It is
in the power of the Court to pass from the
first indictment or not, upon the motion of the
lord advocate; and the panel should not be
uncertain, upon coming into Court, upon
which of the two indictments he is to be tried.
It would be a hardship to put him in that
situation.
It was said that the indictments are ibm
same, or the one only a part of the other.
That certainly does appear to be the case;
but when they come to be minutely sifted^
other circumstances may be discovered, of
which the panel may avail himself.
I think ne ought to have fifteen days mdudm
on the second indictment, after the authority
of the Court is given to the abandonment of the
first indictment.
As to the practice which has been cited.
Lord Gillies stated very good reasons wi^ we
should not be bound by it. It is only or firar
years standing, and the objection was not
stated' in any of the cases which were cited.
The oractice cannot therefore be binding on
the Court I am for sustaining the objeCtioii,
or allowing a search for precedents. The
practice is periiaps of Icmger staindfiag.
Lord Jmtiee Cferle.— I certainly have ne
difficulty in etating.to your lordahipB, ^lal^
notwithstanding the veiy able manner in wUd^
this argument has been urged on the part of
the prisoner, and notwithstanding my deib-
Anee for the opinions of my brothen on tnj
left hand, I am not pfepoasd ^orcoaeur in ih«
oliectiQUwIiifikhis.WflD hreoght forward in
3SQJ
Jitr AimvKutmng unla»gfiil Oaiht.
A. D. 1817.
[39»
thk cast ; ^nd if driven to the neeeisity of
ming a decided opinion at present, I. most
differ from these learned lords, and find that
. the objection ought not to be sustained. Not-
withstanding the weight of these opinions, you
have the practice established in point of fact
— for, from the deliberate averment of the
Counsel for the Crown, you must assume that
there is a series of cases in which yon have
acted on a principle directly opposite to that
which is now contended for by the Counsel for
the prisoner. I apprehend that it is also a
weighty consideration in this question, that in
one of the cases which has been cited, as to
the procedure in cases like the present, the
prisoner was visited by most exemplary pu-
nishment. I allude particularly to the case of
Lindsay Cranford, who was sentenced to trans-
|M>rtation for fourteen vears. Somerville too
was unfortunate indeed, if there was a valid
objection which might have been stated
against his trial, as the sentence upon him
was imprisonment, aeoampaaied witn an ex-
lubition on the piUory. These are precedents
which have net been hitherto doubted by the
Court; and yet our attention is now called
to this ({uestion, and we are desired to austain
the obfection of the panel's counsel. I hold
it to be mj sacred duty, sitting here as a Judge
in a question as to aform of procedure, before
I pat my rash haAd to alter what has been
the practice, to be convinced by argument,
reason, and authority, beyond doubt, that that
practice so uniformly adopted, and followed
by SQcb consequences, is oontrarv to law. If
I did not so act, I should consider myself as
in foet accessory to a fundamental subversion
4^" oor criminal procedure.
But although my opinion is different from
that of my learned brothers, I am disposed to
ge into the proposition made by Lord Pitmilly
of inquiring into the fact, Whether or not
these recent eases are bottomed upon an
-Meat piactiee; which, if established, would
go greatly to do away, or would much diminish
&e Impression of the opposite opinions which
tere been delivered.
I -dunk it no more dun justice to the lord
advocate to say of the statement of his lord-
ship, that he had no other view than to bring
beme the Court the practice prior to that
staled 1^ Mr. Dnimmond. The case of
Meodham occurred in 1804, not so recent as
the practice ^uded to in 1812. Mr. Burnet,
where speaking of forgery, page 190, says,
^ The question again occurred m the trial of the
same person (Mendham) in October 1804, for
ottering and vending' forged notes. The Court
esdared informatioBS on the point, hut the
^[Kosecotor aftervrardspaned/rim the charge, and
teoB^t llendham to trial on a different indict-
ment in December following, for forging and
uttering Bank of England notes, with an
Intent to defiand the Bsuok of EngbLnd." Your
lordships see, that Mr. Burnet, vrho was
fintoiltar with the forms of the Court, and
was indottrioos to make himself acquainted
with every thing relating to the criminal law
and procedure, states, in the very language
which is objected to in this case, that the pro-
secutor afterwards .passed ftom the charge.
This is another case to-be added to that traia
of precedents which have been cited.
This then being the case ; there being evi-
dence before you of a practice since 1804,
and in one of the cases, the attention of the
Court having been particularly directed to the
point in question, — a circumstance which I
now positively remember, — the question is.
Whether the panel is now entitled to state to
your lordships, that there is such a formidable
objection to this practice, in point of principle^
that you ought to lay it aside, and establish a
new practice in this Court. That is the ex-
tent of the argument pressed upon you. Cases
formerly were not so fully reported as they
now are ; but you are bound to hold, that in
those in which the practice now objected to
was followed, it had the consideration of the
Court. If the practice had .appeared to the
Judges to be objectionable, they would have
interfered, .though no objections were stated
by the panel's counsel.
I cannot agree vrith my learned brothers as
to the possibilitjr of hardship arising io a party
from toe practice which has been followed
in this case. I do not .think that the
Sublic prosecutor, in virtually passing from a
rst indictment by serviog a second, leaves
the panel m dubio upon which indictment he is
to be tried. If it could be made out to my sa-
tisfaction that such was the case, I should in-
deed see something like hardship. But the
moment it is held to be clear law, that even
after the debate on the relevancy of an indict*
ment, and after informations ordered on tlie
subject of the objections stated, the public
prosecutor, by serving a second indictment^
passes from the first, no injury can ^possibly
arise to a panel ; he cannot be ignorant upon
which of the indictments he is to he tned.
The Counsel must know .the law; and when
eonsiilted by him, they can inform him, that
though five indictments have been served
against him, it is only the last to which he has
occasion to direct his attention. It is the duty
of counsel for an accused, in reference to
what I hold to be the clear rule of practice, to
give the panel this information, and then ncf
panel can be held in doubt as to the indict-
ment upon which his jtrial is to proceed. It
is upon a settled conviction that.no prejudice
can arise to a panel tn such a situation that I
think the objection is not well-founded.
Indictments, where there has been no plead-
ing, are every day passed from, with or with-
out any reason appearing on the face of the
indictment. I say, the same principle applies
to a case like the present. The cases are the
same as to the safety of the prisoner. There
cannot remain in his mind a shadow of doubt
as to the indictment upon which his trial is to
proceed ; the rule of practice is a sufficient
guide for him.
3di]
57 GEORGE III.
Trial of ]Vilimm Btlgar
[OSS
Upon th«M yroQlidt, I my 9 I ikovld be for
lepelUiig the objettioD ; but I oonenr in tba
piropoBiliOD wbieb bum boon vomA% to yom: loid^
ships, that in a point of pactioe, which is of
nnfifiite consequence to the aocased--4he lew
of the country-^-and the guidance of faturity-^
and where it is stated that a recent practice
only had crept in which was unknown in
former cases, an inquiry should be made to
ascertain clearly how the matter stands.
A small indulgence in point of time may be
granted. The parties may be allowed to give
in short Miovtes of the state of the practice,
to be delivered on or before Saturday next ;
and the case may be resumed tlus day
se'enoight.
Lord Advocate. — ^There is another trial, that
of Douglas,* fixed for Monday. I never have
felt au^ desire to press a prisoner in point of
time, if any object whatever w%8 stated to me
for his wishing delay. If the panel's counsel
wish for time, I can have no objection to grant
il them. On the present occasion, I only think
it necessary that I should be permitted to
state upon your lordships* record, vrhat I now
state vtvd voce, that I aid understand that by
the service of ihe second indictment there was
a virtual abandonment of the first.
I have no objection to this point being settled,
even previous to Monday. The Minutes
should be ordered to be given in immediately,
that there may be no delay in bringing on the
trial afterwards, as we may be told, perhaps,
that no indttcut had been running upon a se-
cond indictment. I do not wish to press the
business ; but a short day should be assigned
for the inquiry proposed, which may be com-
{»leted without delay.
Mr. Clerk, — It is impossible to search a re-
cord which has no index, in two days.
Lotd ChUiet, — There may be a debate upon
the relevancy; and, by possibility, what the
lorjl-edvooate tayt may tslte place.
Lord Advocate. — ^I passed from the first in-
dictment by executing the second, and the ti»-
ducUe on the second began to run from that
time. I owe too much to the law and the
decisions of your lordships, not to oppose
the objection which has been brought fi)rward
to day.
LordJuttiee Clerk, — ^Therais to be no argu-
ment in the minutes. They are to be seen imd
interchanged.
c
Lord Advocate, — ^With regard to the terms of
your interlocutor, a diet cannot be continued
rto an indictment which has been passed from,
passed from the first indictment, and a ma-
jority of the Court agree that the first does not
now subsist.
Lord Ot/lMt.F*The authority of the Court
roust be obtained to the passing from that in^
dictment.
. Iprd Jmtim CMk.--Wt ke^ evaij thing
entire.
Lord Advocate. — ^The question for your con-
sideration has not arisen under the first, but
uDder the second indictment. Your lordshipi
called the second indictment ; you called tb^
panel to plead to it ; and in bar of his doing
so, a motion was made that the trial should not
take place upon that indictment ; and the ques-
tion IS, whether the trial can proceed ou it or
not ? Therefore you cannot proceed on anj
other, or continue any other than the second
indictment. A majority of your lordships are
of opinion that the first indictment was, yir^
tiially passed from, and I called the diet of no
other indictment than the second.
■V*.
• VideFott.
i%efoUowkig wmutei of the debate were them
entered ttpon fAe record.
CraneUMB, for the paa^ objatiedg —
That il was incompetent to serve od«^ libel
against « panel, while another^ upon whid^
he hfkd siready joined issue by ple^tding^
was still current against him ; That the
first libel, having been pleaded to in fiic^
of the Court, was no longer eub potettate
of the public prosecutor, and could notb*
deserted, or otherwise disposed of, hot bv
iudgment of the Court : That tlus Ube^
being still in fiDrce against the panel, mm
the only one against which he could nofw
be called to defend himself; and that iit
vras not till after it had been disposed of
by sentence of their lordships^ thai there
was room lor the semoe of a second*
against which tbe panel was entitled to hav^
the full mdMcim of fifteen days to prepare
for his defence.
Home DniBUBond, for his mijesty'aad-
vocaike, aatwered^ — That the proceeding
4ipon this oocasion ia sanctioned bv the
established practice of the Court; and thai
the very same oourae has been invariablf
followed in every caae wh^o the same
drcumstanoes have occurred. So, for ex-
ample» in the case of Lindsay Cranford,
indicted to stand trial on the 9th Jannaiy
1812, when the diet being continued tifl
3rd February, new criminal letters were
in the meahtime raised, the diet whereof
fell on the same day, and the trial pro-
ceeded. Thomas Somerville was indicted
to stand trial on the 25th Janoary 1818.
He pleaded not guilty ; and after a debate
on tne relevancy of the libel, informatioii^
were ordered to be lodged on the 15th
. Febniaiy ; but new criminal letten were
raised, the diet whereof fell on die aaaie
day, ttid the trial proceeded* A question
was asked in this case by one of the jodgee»
if it would not be proper to desert the diet
of the first libel r but it waft amwerfO^
tha^ a desertioa might be aigued to affect
the second also; and thai the former wa*
held to be abandooed 1^ the aenrioe of m
883]
Jot AHAkimhkg ««te|^ Oa<b.
A. D. mi
(B8«
bere to the pndSoe ; avid the case pro-
ceeded. In tlie caset of Joha Hom» JoDe
13th and July 6.tb 1814, and of Joha Bell,
who pleaded giiilty on the first oaUing of
the diet, January 9th and Fieibraary 3id
and loth, 1817, similar proceedings look
eace; aa also in the preyious case of
endham in 1804.
2do, His majesty's adrocate possesses
an uncontrolled power orer his iKAanct in
all stages of a criminal process. He is not
bound^as a private prosecutpr is, by statute,
to insist at the appointed diet, but may at
all times abandon or pass from any indict-
ment he has raised, or any part thereof;
and he does so in daily practice, according
to his pleasure* And if he exercise this
power at any time before an assize is set
to try the case, he is still at liberty to
insist of new against the panel in another
indictment for the same offence.
3tio, The remedy for the possible abuses
that may follow from this power, is to be
found, not in attempting to compel the
prosecutor to maintain an instancy whidi
ne has dropped, orer whldi the Court have
BO control, and for which the panel has no
interest to^ insist, as he is out of Court by
the abandonment of the charge but in
opposing its oppresxiTe renewal or con-
tinuation, when the Court may, on suf-
ficient cause being shewn, desert the diet
4to, No objection is ot can be made to
the numberless examples of an instance
dropped where the panel has never pleaded
to the charge. Now this case is in nowise
different in principle ; for the parties can
ui no sense be said to have '^ joined issue"
befoiia an assise is set ; no «plea or state-
ment of tacts beine i&nal Inal is enteied
More the judges of the fact are named ;
nor can a panel have a jim quantum in his
own plea. The doctrine of jmmng time
or Uiucontettaiionf has no existence in this
court, being foanded in a presumed ju-
dicial contract between the parties; a
thing inconsistent with the first principles
of criminal law.
Lastly. — Service of a second libel has,
in the recent practice of the Court, been
held to imply the virtual abandonment of
the first ; and, consequently, there is no
ground for the complaint of two indict-
ments subsisting at once against the panel,
and of his ancertainty to which he may be
called upon to answer. Accordingly, his
najeaty's advocate dedares, that hebAs
abandoned the first libel ; and he has no
objectioQ to aath^nticate this statement on
the leeoid in ^y form the Court may thmk
fit; and this he appieiiends 18 aU the panel
Ims any ri^t to requite.
As to the taAiCtif of fifteen days, tiiere
is nothing In the aoi of paiHameat to pre-
mitlht service of a second libiel
the OEisleBoa of « 16m» oner; aaS it is
contrary Co no prindple, and sanctioned
liy the inveterate pnK»^ of the Court.
The Lord Justice dei^ and Lords' com*
missioners of Justiciary having oonsfdered
the foregoing objection, wifli the answer
thereto, and heard parties' procuraton
tliereupon at neat length, before afiswer,
ordain parties^ procurators to pi^pare and
give in minutes, stating the practice re-
^tiv^ to the said olpectipn; to see and
interchange these minutes ; and to print
and lodge the same in tiie hands of tiie
clerk of court between and Saturday next,
in order to be recorded. Continue the
diet against the panel, and whole other
diets m court, tiU Monday next, at tea
o'clock forenoon, in this place : And or-
dain parties^ witness^, assizers, and sJI
concerned, then to attend, each under the
pains of law; and the panel in the
meantime to be carried back to the Castle
of j^inburgh.
(Signed) D, Botlk, J. P. D.
BUNl/TES or Search ov tbb Books ov
AnjouBKAL, From lif January 1777.
Alexander Penrose Citming, £s<|uire,
against John Lawson. Perjury, 1785.
The dietwas deserted pfo/aoo«/ tombre on
1st Februaiy 1785, the panel not Tuiving
pleaded. After the interiocator deserting
the diet, ^ Mr. Erskine then represented
that new criminal letters had been raisea
and executed, at the instance of Mr*
Cuming of Altyre, against the said John
Lawson, the diet thereof stood ooatinued
to thiA day,'' The Court continued the
diet upon these last criminal letters to the
14th of February; on which day the
panel pleaded not guilty, and informations
were ordered. He was afterwaids'' tried,
and found not guilty.
John Burns and Alrxanbrr Bailur
VRitcH. Atumli, 17B0» *
The diet was called on 21st I>ecember
1789, when Veitch was outlawed; and
the diet continued against Bums to 18th
January 1790, before he had pleaded to
the charge. In the mean time, Veiteh
applied to the Court tobe reponed against
the sentence of fugitatioh.
On i6ih December 1789, Burns and
Veitch were served with a new indictment
for' trial on the said 18th of January.
Upon that day the Court ad^oatned to the
25th ; from which it was a^ouned to the
26th, and iirom -the 26th .to the let
February. The trial proceeded on 1st
February, when the pnels<«rere tried and
convicted. . ' I ,
S36]
57 GEORGB IIL
^WHUam Edgar
[336
BEftBYi RoBBKXSONy Alld CaLLAWDBB,^
Se^aUm^ 1793.
Upon 28tk JanuBiy, diet was called ;
Callander was outlawed; and the diet
was continued against the other prisoners
(who had not pleaded tO' the indictment),
till 11th Febmaiy, when the instance was
allowed to fsXX,
On 18th February they were tried and
connoted on an indictment which had
been served previous to the said 11th of
February.
Alexavdeb ScoTT.f SedUian. 1794.
Upon 20th January the diet was called
and deserted pro loco et tempore; but,
upon the ISth, anew indictment had been
served against the prisoner, chargiAg him
to compear upon 3a February.
On 3d February the diet of the second
indictment was called, and Scott was
fuiitated.
RrpHABO Mbvoham, Forgety. 1804.
Ricjianl Mendham was cited to com-
pear on 10th October 1804, when he
pleaded not guilty.
Informations ordered to be given in on
or before 30th October : diet continued
to 1st November ; further continuation to
13th November, when whole diets of
court continued to 14th; on which day,
instance aRainst Mendham dropt.
New indictment served on 3rd Novem-
ber, charging him to appear the 19th
November. On that day, a continuation
to 26th November; then continued to
lZ9th, and from Uiatto 3rd December;
long pleading on the relevancy ; and, after
debate, his majesty's advocate passed
from the libel, so far as laid on the com-
mon law; and diet continued till next day.
4th December, continued till 7th De-
cember; continued till next day. 8th,
further continued till 10th ; on which
day, interlocutor on relevancy; not rele-
vant ; dismissed from the bar.
Alexanoeb Campbell. T^eft and
Robbery. 1809.
After pleading not guiltr, the lord ad-
Tocs(te representod, that, for the present,
he passed from the third charge in the in-
dictment, viz. the theft committed at the
inn at Dunfermline ; but reserving to the
public prosecutor to proceed against the
panel on that charge in a new indictment,
if he shall deem it proper so to do ; and
therefore restricts tne indictment to the
two charges of robbery.
John Likdsay Cbaufobd and James
Bbaoley. Forgery ofwritmgt, January
8, 1812.
Diet continued on motion of panels
• rt<fe.2.How.Mod.St.Tr.79. '
i Vide 2 How. Utod. St. Tr. 383.
tiH ad February ; did not plead ; in the
mean time, sen^ with a new libel to
stand trial on the - 3rd of February. Trial
proceeded accordingly.
Napieb and Grotto: Murder and
BMery, March 31, 1812.
- After pleading to the indictment, the
prosecutor passes from the charge of
murder, and all the charges of robbery,
except the robbery alleged to have been
committed on Peter Bruce and J. Buchan
Brodie.*
The Court find the indictment, as
limited by the foregoing minute, relevant
to infer toe pains of law.
Thomas Sommbbville. Petjury.
January 25, 1813.
Pleaded not guilty. Debate on rele-
vancy; and informations ordered to be
fiven in; and diet condnued till 15.th
February. In the mean time, a new in-
dictment served on the panel, calling him
to stand trial on said 15th February.
IVial proceeded accordingly ; and Som-
merville convicted. Imprisoned, fined,
and put on the pillory.
John Hobn. SelUng Forged Notes.
June 13, 1813.
Pleaded not guilty. Informations order-
ed, and diet continued till 12th July, Iq
the mean time new libel raised, and served
for trial on 6th July ; when panel again
pleaded not guilty, and the order fpr in-
formations renewed ; on advising which,
libel was found relevant, on 15tb July,
when panel pleaded guilty, and was
sentenced to transportation.
Bell and Do vo las. Uttering Forged
Notee, January 9, 1817.
Diet against Douglas desertedpro loco ei
tanpore. Bell pleaded guilty. The Court
ordered informations on the relevancy of
the indictment, and continued the diet
against the panel John Bell, till 3Td Fe*
bruary. In the mean time, a new libel
served for 10th February, when trial pro-
ceeded, and Bell pleaded guilty again,
and had sentence of transportation, the
libel being restricted.f
* Many cases of abandoning or passing from
a part of the charge might be produced ; but
it must be admitted to be a common practice,
as, for example, in cases of child-murder,
where the charge at common law is frequently
passed fh>tn, upon confession of the statutory
offence. H. H. D. .
t Nble.— -There are in this period various
examples of diets deserted, on the motion of
|he prosecutor, pro loco et tempore f after plead*
in([ to the char^ and af^r interlocutor ^f re-
levancy, which it IS thought unnecessary to
produce, as the coinpetency of that proceeding
18 settled law. H. H« D.
2371
Jht AdmimiUnttg. unkmfid Oaihit
ADDITIONAL MINUTES or csh«|
TAIN Cases bisyovd the. Psbiod op
Sbarck.
IsoBEL NicoLsoK. Fire Raiting.
June 25, 1711.
Indicted and accased, &c.
Hbe Lord Justice Clerk and commis-
sionen of justiciary^ at desire and with
consent of her majesty's adTocate, desert
the diet of the first indictment raised at
the instance of her majesty's advocate
against the said Isobel NicoJson, panel;
but prqndioe to him to insist in his other
indictment already raised and execute
against the peael) as accords.
Patrick Haxiltoh of Green. Murder.
July 30, 1714.
Mr. Dnncan Forbes, his majesty's ad-
Yooate, consents to the deserting of the
diet against PatiidL Hamilton, younger,
of Green, upon*, this libel, without pre-
judice to him to insist in the new inaict-
ment raised at the instance of his ma-
jesty's advocate against him. (SieSub.)
Dun. Forbes.
Tbe Lord Justice Clerk and commis-
stoners of justiciary, in respect of the
above consent, desert the diet against the
above Patrick Hamilton, younger, of
Green, upon this indictment, wiUiout
prejudice to the pursuer to insist upon
the new indictment, as accords.
(Signed) Ad; Cockbubk, J. P. D.
This after informations given in and
recorded, and several adjournments of
tlie diets.
AvDRsw Feknie, and Others. Indicted
for Sedition, Debate ; and Infbrma*
tions ordered. May 24. 1720.
July 28. — ^Mr. Walter Stewart, his ma-
jestv's solicitor and advocate^epule, for
his highness' interest, judicially consents
to the deserting of the diet against the with*
in named and designed iUidrew'Femie,
ice. wit)iont prejudice to his majesty's
advocate of insisting a^nst such against
lAom new libels are raised, as aocoras.
The Lord Justice Clerk and commis-
nonerj of justiciary, in respect of the
sJMve consent, desert the diet agaidst the
said Andrew Femie and others, above-
named, wi^out prejudice to his majesty's
advocate of insisting against such of them
against ivhom new libels are raised, as
aooordsl
(Signed) An. Cocxbvbv, J. P. D*
.' » »
The second libd beiny called,
JiiilrM Andrew Fenve, kc. Indicted
«ldaecnsed,-fcc. Debate; and informaf>
tions ordered. The informations , after-
waidB|ivenin, found relevant, and trial
ptooeeos.
A. D. 1817; 1ji39
JiJins IiiGLia^ ladwelter in Leitii. In*
dieted and, accused as ^Ity of
Thefts B4Mery, aid Friecm-irmJMig,
4«. August 24, 1720.
m
Diet continued till 26th September, and
afterwards to 17th October. On which
day,
hdirm James Inglis. Indicted and
cused, id in dkprecedefUL
Mr. Robert Dundas, lus majeat/s ad-
vocate, for his highness' interest, jnakially
consents'to the deserting of the diet of
the within indictment against James
Inglis, panel, without pr^iMlice of insist-
ing in the new indictment^ as aecpfds.
(Signed) Ro. DuwnAS.
•
The lords commissioners of justiciary,
in respect of the abo?e consent, desert
the diet upon this libel against the said
Jfumes Inglis, without prejudice of in-
sisting on the new libd, as accords.
Inlran James Inglis,* panel.
Indicted and accused on the new in*
dictment. Informations ordered*
MM.
MoNCBiBFF Stated* That in oompUanesr
with the order of the Court, a search had
been made in the Books of Adjournal for
precedents applicable to the question now
before the Court. That a search from
the year 1777 downwards, had tot been
made, and the result had been communi-
c^ed to the panel's counsel some, daya
ago; but that alter this a forther search
had, it seems, been made,iwhich' appear*
to go back to the beginning of the last
centttty : and the statement of thecases
so found was only communicated late on
this day. (May 23.)
That on the part of the panel i^ may
now be assumed, that the (Jburt l^ts b^
fore it every one example which his ma-
jesty's advocate has been able to discover,
in the course of more than a eentwy, of
any proceeding which he thinks- cafcu-
lated to. suTOort th^ measure which has
been adopted in this case, or to meiet tha
objection foundect on th^ deari^t princi-
ples of law.
That on the resiilt of this seanh the
following remaiks are humbly sijibmit-
ted: —
Ittf That there }b not oiU :e3^mple in
.the whole practice of the Court, in vrhich
. the same 0Djectipi\ which is h^re insisted
on was stated to the Cour^ and rspeUid
. hy a judgment '
24 That the lord, advocate haa pointed
the. statement with recard to .tiiose caaei
on which it is pr^uined he means 19 rely;
ai}d that, as- for as the panel's couni^ cuk
discover, the only cases in the long period
which hate the smallcet tendency to shew
any pmctioe la f aT^ni of the proeeonin^
0893 ^ GfiORGB UL
• et ii}AditnxLrtfAtm^^ htting such
a tendent^y are hoo cases m 1714 and
VMf onei^ase in 1804, two hi 1813, and
0n0ial817. Beiweentlieyear 1790, and
the jtar 1804, tbe pilisecator 4ias not
beeii aUe to find cfie single case in the
vecoid,.in wUcn, after a panel had plead-
ed to an indictment, a libel Was served
tuftd susbuned without a prewhm desertion
of the diet on Ihe-flrst indietoent. ^
8r«^ TlAl to sliew this, lie iAiooldshortly
taka notice of eacli of the oaies pHnted
• by iM majisty^i adrocate*
On the first seaicb, the folkMriog state-
ment is sabmitted :-«
Mm Jjmmm^ 1785.~]|i this case the
pancA'had not fUaded,
Burm and Veitck, 1789.— Paneb had
mot pleaded.
&ry^ RoberUon^ and CaUaukr,^ 1793.
—Panels bad not nhadtd,
Akxanda-^Scoif.firU^TvieXhfdnoi
plfadffl,
Rkkatd Jfendkam, 1804.— Tn Uiis case
lie panel bad pleaded nbt ffuilty. Infor-
mafiotts wereordisred; and several con*
tinuations of the diet took place, the last
^ the t4th, November. On that day, it
IS said, the instance vras dropped: And
in the mean time a new indictment had
l>een.n^ed on the 3rd November. This,
. IhmfiMPe. IS one case, in which, after a
parly bad pleaded, a new indictment was
simred before the diet oh die otiier had
bten dtertUd ^ the aiitfioiity of the
Court, 'and 'witiiout anT Jradi desertion.
Biit.the-CbQrt win 1)e pleased M observe,
X|iat In that cale the pftnerdetiiy bad no ,
ititef^t to make tlie objeolkfn, but quite
'iBe reverse. For the iMotid iliditftment
was eqtulty in^evaint with the first ; and
foooidingly the^ Court, after full dbbate,
onleM iuorm^tions; attd after various
•4jdomnient8,the libel wasybiaii ntfT rek-
0«il, and the iMihel was diaNtfMBd,/$ipm ^
bar. Vost ciearlt, therefore, it w4s not
bis jn^rftt to make any e/bjection to the
^irvite of the iec6nd indittmeht.
Alexander Cannbeli, 18Q9.^this is not
a cte kpptitebie to the. poiM sk ail.
' 'There was no qaeMMmslbottt any new itt-
,dictmep|; and the ciroittMtailce ^f tiie
jWbHcpibsaiieufor fiairingfrote particular
diaigir IB tfd indidlfiie&t^ Jntelidinff or
. leservinff the power afterwards %o Aose a
isew iilditetmeiifti ts whoify' tmMteiial to
.ihe^^fl|^. Bututaayir^yltis^fauii^
lAy apprehended, thkt . even lUs takes
■ k^a^ orily with (ho c^ieiit of the Court,
whicl^ is expressed By the forms, of the;
Mttifedifororibevattcy. ^^
; 1w if ^e of Ae eaM wliicli WliA Quoted
/Ui tfe ieb4fe. But the patieb Md not
rriai'tfUmmSt^
tfi40
■•*•
^ !f H6W. If od. St TV. 7^.
t'Sa9W.Mid.St.1V;
pUtded; and therefore it is altogether in-
applicable.
Jfapkr md GroUo, 1813.— This case is
of the same nature with that of Alexan-
der Campbell. There was no second in-
dictment, and no question about a second
indictment
Ilomos SomenUU, 1813.— This case is
so far applicable, that the panel had
pleaded to the first indictment ; that the
second indictment was servad without
any previous desertion of the first'; and
^at the panel was tried and convicted.
But even with regard to this case, it is to
be observed, that ikie crime of which the
panel was accused was that of peijory^
the |>unishment of which could not ex-
ceed imprisonment and piUory ; and that
the panel was at a very serious expence
ill defending himself at every diet of the
Court. It was therefore obviously better
for him that the trid should go on, what-
Irver night be the events than that it
fhould bi flierely out off for fifteeu days.
Accordingly, the objection was not staled
by his counsel, and oouid not l^e jodged
of by the Court
/o^ Euii^ 1813.— This person was in-
dicted for uttering and selling forged
n^es; the first of which is a camtal
offence* He pleaded not guilty, and in-
formations were ordered. Then a new
indictment was served without a^y deser-
tion; and a pleading on the relevancy
apaih took J^ace. But the Ccort will ob-
serve whar followed. When the new
indictment was ftmnd f<elevaiii,^Patt^
fkmkd gifUtyT* to the secoMl dnm, and
was sentenced to trantportaiiim. lA such
uoase^ though the panel had an interasi
to ob^i to the relevancy of the charge
itself in both indictments, it is evident
that it would have been very mudi against
his Interest to b^^t to the powers exer.
dsfd' by bis majesQr's advocate, or to tha
regularity of his proceedings.
Bell emi BaufiUy 1817.— Noihiag can
be drawn ftom this case. Bell fietded
malty h bath Macfinsitfs; and as to
I>oiis^ the diet was dettrted. It is
submitted, that ithas no analogy to tha
present questipii*
These are all ' the cases. selected \ij his
majesty's advocate, frd&i (he first uote of
{earch, fr^m 1.777 downwards. And it
IS 'obvious, that none of ^hein bave any
unalogv to the case, except those of ilfmtf-
hqa^aomeivilkf and^ Bim^ and, even at
"to uiese^ the explanations appearing on
the ho^ of them are quite su%ient to
' aeeduni for ^(ke o^edion hot heh^ ttateds
whieh, ifter, all,-is the utmost thft can be
'drkwuditeifthenK '
The additional obtes mentioir fitar
liQtel Nieokmi, 1711^Ptttel ifi this
c^e had notpkmkdn
d4lJ
J^ AdmhAdmng unlawful Oaths,
A. D. 1817.
[242
Pafndb BamltoH, 1714.— Hie fact it
not diattnctly stated, nor does it at all
appear what beetme of tbe caie. Tbouffh.
the minute and interiocutor fpeak of the
^ new mdictment raised/* this may, in
truth, refer meniy to the notice of the
lord advocate of an intention to raise a
new indictment immediately thereafter.
Withoat seeing the dates, it is impossible
to draw an J correct inference. Besides,
though it is mentioned in a note that in-
formaiions had been given in, it does not
follow that the panel had pieaded. The
iafcTOiations might be on the form of
citation, or on other points not necessarily
implying that there nad been a plea to the
inoictment.
In one view, however, this case is, with
many others, a fiOal precedent against the
doctrine maintained oy his majesty's ad-
vocate. For it will be observed, that Mr,
Demean Torbet never thought of maintain-
log, that, after pleading, the service of a
new indictment ipio facto put an end to
tfie ftrs^ or that it conld be abandoned
otherwise than by an express interlocutor
of the Court. .
Jbaktm Femk and others, 1720. — This
ease is nearly on a footing with the pre*
ceding. It does nol appear when the new ^
indictments were raised. But it does dis-
tinctly appear that his majesty's solicitor
and adTocale<depute of that time did not
inu^ne, that he had any power to abandon
the first indictment otherwise than by a
motion to the Court; and an express ii^
terlocotor was accordingly pronounced.
Jama IfigUs, 1720.*-ranel had not
piaaded.
This is an analysis of the whole cases
founded on by his majesty's advoeate.
And the Court will now see, that there
' are none bearing even the appearance of
analogy, etcept only, li^, Hamilton in
1714; 2nd, Eecnie, kc in 1720, the- cir-
cumstances of both of which are impeiv
fectW known ; drd, Mendham in 1804, in
whiSi boA indictments were found irre-
levant; 4th, Somerville in 1818; and,
5th, Horn in 1813^ who at lut pleaded
guilty, and sot the libel rastrfcted to the
charge vHudi only subjected him to an
arMtrary punishment.
That it would be for the Court to judge,
whether there is any thing in theib caaes^
picked out of the pra^e of more than a
etmary^ to oyertttsn the established prin-
ciple of law^ which was explained .In iht
debate, and is laid down bj the fiist
authority on the subject, that after a psiael
has pleaided^ the lord advocate h^ no
Eto abandon tiie indictment, except
toess motioii to the Court ; and that
annot doit expnakf^ stilMesscftn
' he doit mrtaal^, or bytsip^iarfm. '.
>4My.That, annexed hereto, there is the
whole, s^aisk of ibe recorda from the 1st
VOL. XXXIU.* ..
January 1 777, downwards ; and that ftom
that Hst, the Court will perceive a much
atronger practice, by which the lord ad-
vocate finds it necessary to move the
Court expresdy to desert the diet, inti-
aoatiagai the same time, tliat he intends
instantly to raise anottier indictment.
And more particularlv, there are many
cases in which this is done after the panel
had pleaded.
Cummkif against LessUe, 1785.— Deser-
tion after interlocutor of relevancy, y
WaUer Ro$s, 1786.— Had pleaded not
guilty.' .Diet deserted fro loco et tempore.
Brown and MNab, .1793. — Desertion
after interlocutor of relevancy, expressly
for the purpose of serving a new libel.
Charki Sinclair,* 1794.— Diet deserted
after relevancy found.'
Qamn &tnpton, 1811.-7Diet deserted
after interlocutor of relevancy.
. These are cases in which the panel had
pleaded. There are many others in which
the recdrd bears a desertion pro loco et
tempore, for the purpose of immediaUly
serving a new libd.
David Dalgleish, kc. 1780.
John Grant, 1783.
William Tenant, 1789.
Thomas Wilson, 1790.
' Jacob Tait, 1795.
O'Neils, 1796.
UrquharU, 1797.
Kirby, 1799.
Richard Mendham, 1800.—" Diet de-
serted before pleading, as the advocate
stated he meant to serve a new libel this
qfternoonJ*
Clark and Brown, 1802.
Monro and M'Farlane, 1809.
■ ■
That from this evidence of practice, to
which may be added all the cases in the
additional notes, it is humbly submitted,
the inference is irresistible, that no such
principle ever was recognised as that
maintained by his majesty's advocate, that
by executing a new indigtm^nt, a previous
indictment to which the panel had pleaded
J's ^pso facto extinguished. The law has
leknowledged no such power in the lord
advoeate^ and it is as little sanctioned by
any. practice. On the contrary, the uni-
Ibcm practice, with the exception of a
few. straf^liog instances, all since the
year 1904, and all but one since the year
1812, is directly the i-everse, the lord
yd^ocate having always thought it ne«
i6cluary expre^ly to move the Court to
idesert the diet.
• That on the whole, it was humbly sub-
taitted, that this search into the practice
instead, of supporting the plea of his
majesty's advocate, founded on a mere
allegation of practice, in opposition to
♦ 3 How. Mod . St. Tr. 777.
243] 57 GEORGE III.
the principle of law, tends very strongly
to support the plea of the panel, and to
shew trie incompetency of the proceeding
here objected to: That if there were
nothing more to be stated, it wonld be
enough, that between the year 1720 and
the year 1804, there is not one example of
a second indictment raised after a panel
had pleaded to the first, and before a de-
sertion of the diet by aathoritjr of the
Court. The case in 1804 has be«n ex-
plained ; and it will be for the Court to
judge, whether a practice, which -really
rests on one, or at the utmost itoo cases in
1813, can make law, in opposition to
principles otherwise clearly esublished.
Trial of WUUam Edgar
L344
COURT OF JUSTICIARY.
May 26, 1817.
FreKnt.
Rt. Hon. DaM Boylty Lord Justice Cleik.
Lord Hermand.
lord GUlies.
Lord PUmiUy.
hord Re$ton.
Cowuelforthe Crown.
Rt. Hon. Alexander Maeonockie, Lord Advo-
cate [afterwards a lord of Session and Justi-
ciary, with the title of Lord Meadowbank.]
James Wedderbum, Esq. Solicitol^eneral.
H, Home Dnmmondy £sq.
H, Warrender^ W. S. Agent.
Coumelfor WiUiamEtigar.
John Clerky Esq.
Geo, Cramtotm, Esq. '
Thot. Thomtoni Esq.
James Moncrieff", Esq.
Francis Jeffrey, Esq.
J. P. Grant, Esq.
Henry Coekbum, Esq.
J. A, Murray, Esq.
G. W, Boyd, W, S. Agent.
William Edgar was placed at the bar.
Lord Justice Clerk. — ^Your lordships re*
member die obieaion that was stated in this
case. You ordered minutes to be giTen in fot
the parties, stating the practice relative to the
objection. These are now upon the table ;
and you are to say how they are to be dis-
posed of.
[Here Mr. Cranstoun* was beard at , consi*
derable length in support of the objections
to the competency of the indictment.]
Lord Gillies. — Before the prosecutor begins,.
I want an explanation of a point. The case of
Ilaniiltoh has been mentioned, in which Dun-
can Forbes was prosecutor. That name must
* No report of this speech has been pro-
cured.
excite in vs xiU peculiar attention. On page
5, of the. joint minute of the parties, it is.stated
by the public prosecutor, -^'Mr. Duncan
Forbes, his majesty's advocate, consents 'to the
deserting of the diet against Patrick Haaulton,
younger, of Green, upon this libel'' (I under-
stand informationa had been ordered, which
raises a presumption that that libel had been
pleaded to), ** without prejudice to him to
insist in the new indictment raised at the in-
stance of his majesty's advocate against him.*'
What I want to know is, whether this new in-
dictment raised was served i In looidng at
the preceding case, ** but prejudice to him to
insist in his other indictment already raised
and executed,'' the insertion of ^ exeaUed/* in
one case, and the omission of it in the other,
excites suspicion that it was not executed in
the other. It is mentioned in the one, and not
in the other.
Mr. Drummond. — My Lord Justice Clerk ;
It appears to me, that there are two points for
consideration in this case. The first is one of
considerable importance, the other is of no im-
portance at all as ofiecting the paneL The
first to which I allude, is, whether it be com-
petent, during the dependence of one indicts
ment to serve another. The consequence
would be that, if this be incompetent, the
service of the last indictment in the present
case would be a nullity ; and the panel would
thus obtain a ftirther delay, to allow time for
serving it over a^n. The other point ia,
whether, after au indictment has been pleaded
to (to use an expession which has been more
dwelt upon in ttie present case than in all the
former practice of the Court), it can be aban-
doned by the prosecutor, without an act of the
Court, or whether it can only be got rid of
with the authority of your lordships, lliia
second point is of no importance on this occa-
sion, and is, in truth, a mere question of form ;
for, whatever your finding should be, the retnlt
will be the same to the panel at the bar.
Hie first point, however, fortunatdy appears
to be attended with no : difficulty ; for it is
settled by constant and inveterate practice.
I shall not detain the Court by repeating what
is stated in tKe printed minutes, where your
lordships have before you not. merely theftve
cases to which only the learned gentheman has
thought proper to allude, but a series of other
cases of which nothing has been aaid. There
are, besides, the cases from 1711 to 1T20, in
the additional part ojf the minutes, which are
completely in point upon this part of the sub-
ject, proving tnat any given number of. indict
ments may subsist against a pand at one and
the same time. Even the case of -colonel
Chayteris, of which so much has been sidd on
the bther side of the bar, may be reforr^ to in
support of this doctrine. As quoted ^by Mr.
Hume, it establishes a c(nn|riete precedent,
that it is competent to raise at oacci and con-
sequently to execute, a number of libels against
an individual accusing him either of the same,
or of fifty different crimes.
345]
Jm AAmnitUring utilat^iil Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
[246
The only tvUe of law as to the defence of a
panel, in sndi circomstancea, to wbich onr
practice seems to pa j any regaid, and it is
snfiSeient for ereiynseiu] purpose, is this, that
the proeecator must make bis choice, before
flQing to trial, as to the indictment* upon which
le is to proceed against the panel. Bat, in
the present, of all cases, I do not know to
what usefel pnrpose it can tend to enter into
this discQSsion at all ; for if, as happens here,
there is one and the same crime charged, and
the same particnlars are mentioned, the de-
fence also will be the same under the different
libels.
Besides, it will always be remembered, that,
l>y the Tiew of the law which I maintain, the
first indictment is already extinguished. For
either the prosecutor does virtually abandon all
prerious indictments, by executing a subse-
quent one, or the Court will, as a matter of
coarse, desert all diets but that in which he
desires to appear. And here it is upon the
record of the Court, that he has abandoned the
first libd; and it remains for the learned
gentleman to show by what proceeding it is
possible to keep the prosecutor in Court longer
thao he chooser to remain. What I state is
the settled practice in a multitude • of cases,
which are ot that description that they cannot
appear in the books of adjournal, or form any
entry on the record. When a panel forces on
his trial by means of the act 1701, and the
prosecutor does not bring on the trial on the
first indictment, but new criminal letters are
raised against the panel, these letters must be
serred before the expiration of the first indict-
ment, otherwise the panel could not be de-
tained in prison. Now, in all the numerous
eases of this descriptiou, it is plain that two
libels are in existence against the panel at
once, without the diet ever being called, or
the panel even brought into the presence of
the Court, and no objection has ever been
made to such a proceeding.*
* I was not aware at this time, that on one
occasion it had been thought worth while to
state an objection to this form of proceeding.
The circumstance is detailed in the following
note to Mr. Burnet's work, page 367 : '' But
is it necessanr, in point of form, that the diet
he called and simpUcUer deserted, as the act
ordains, in order to entitle the prosecutor to
the benefit of new erimmal letters r In practice
it is not held sO ; and justly, for though not
calling the diet be a virtual desertion of it by
the prosecutor, the prisoner can sustain no
pitjudice by this form not being gone through.
It being still competent to recommit him on
new criminal letters being served. Accord-
ingly in the case of Welsh, who had run his
letters, and on that ground petitioned for libe-
ration on the lape of the first forty days, but
who had by this time been served with new
criminal letters. Lord Justice Clerk (Hope),
' on advising his petition^ pronounced this inter-
locutor: ^28th October 1806| having con-
In the case of colonel Charteris, quoted by
the learned geddeman who precedea roe, the
discussion was not as to the running of the
tmfticur, and the subsbtence of several indict-
ments at once, as he seemed to suppose, for
that was taken for granted to be lawful ;
neither .was it imagined, that on having pro-
ceeded to the trial of one indictmeat, all the
others were not thereby extinguished. like
question was, whether the panel should not be
informed, before being called on for his de*
fence, to which of several indictments he was
to answer. There was no doubt as to the
competency of raising and executing them all.
No person ever entertained a doubt upon that
subject. The demand made was, that before
the trial the panel should be informed on
which indictment the trial was to proceed ; it
not being admitted, or so well understood as
now, that the last service extinguishes a pre-
vious libel. It is unnecessary to say more
upon this first point; for it is settled by the
established practice of die Court, that there •
may be fifty indictments subsisting at one
time, if, before the panel be made to answer
or take his trial, they be all reduced to one.
The next question is as to this doctrine of
pleading to an indictment, about which the
learned gentleman did not choose to speak by
itself, but only in conjunction with the other
point, and about which I should have been
glad to have beard what he could say ; for I
have not yet obtained the remotest glimpse of
what the idea of ** joining issue,'' as applicable
to the case before the Court can rest upon.
The form of interrogating the panel, as to his
guilt or innocence, before naming the jury, is
one of the most immaterial, I might almost
venture to say, useless steps of the whole pro*
ces&. In England, a panel confessing may be
sidered the foregoing petition, with the
letters of ihtimation and execution herewith
produced, in respect that new criminal letters
have been raised and executed against the pe-
titioner, and have been laid before hb lord-
ship, along with the petition for his majesty's
advocate, for a warrant to detain the petitioner
in prison ; refoses the desire of this petition,
in so far as it prays to set the petitioner at
liberty ; reserving to the petitioner the benefit
of any argument he may oe advised to found
on against being subjected to a new trial, in
consequence of the diet not having been de-
serted timpUcUer on the 27th current, as he
alleges it ought to have been, under the
act 1701.'
^* Accordingly wlien the trial came on, on
21st November following, the prisoner founded
tn/er alia upon the circumstance of the diet not
having been deserted simpUciter when the diet
of the former libel fell ; but the Court held
there was no necessity for an interlocutor to
that effect, the non-appearance of the prose-
cutor being a vtrtual desertion of the diet, and
entitling him to serve new criminal letteiS| in
terms of th$ 5tatute."-^H. H. D.
247]
57 GEORGE Ul.
Trial of U^illiam Edgar
{fi48
convicted and punished by the Court without i
the intervention of a jury; and, if he remain
silent, he may, in certain cases, I believe, be
presumed guilty; and, in others, till very
lately might have been punished by a barbarous
sort 6f death.* Now, in all this, our praotiee
is essentially different. The Court are no more
judges of the fact, in a case of confession, than
where the proof rests npon an^ other species
of evidence ; and silence is, in all cases hor
inanely interpreted into a plea of not guilty,
the prosecutor being bound to prove his charge
unless expressly admitted by the accused in
presence of a sworn assize,
I have looked through our law books, and,
from the beginning to the end of all the au-
thorities of the law of Scotland, there is not a
word of the doctrine of litiscontestation to be
found in criminal proceedings. There is no
such word used Ij.''^ George M'Kenzie, nor
by Mr. Hume. There is nothing in Dractice,
or in principle^ to give it support, and the in-
troduction of It is contrary to the first princi-
Sles of our criminal law. Upon what does the
octrine of litiscontestation rest? Upon an
implied bargain or presumed judicial contract
between 'the liti^nts. But, is that a doctrine
which can be introduced here? Can a man
make a lawful paction oonceming his life or
his liberty? Litiscontestation has no sense or
meaning in this place. I have not been able
to find the word, even in a pleading, except in
one case reported by M'Laurin ; and I wbb
the doctrine for ever expelled from the de»
liberations of this Court.
No party has at present 9.ju$guaUum in any
thing. To what could the panel here acquire
a right? To his own plea? certainly not.
Of what benefit could that be to him t If he
plead guilty, it may to the prosecutor; if not
guilty, is that of any use to himself? Is it to
any act of the Court he has acquired a right?
There is no act of Court in this instance.. If
there had been an inteiiooutor of relevancy, I
should at least have understood the aigument,
but we have not yet advanced so far. This is
the only ground on which I could conceive the
•argument of the panel to have any semblance
of reason. But, unfortunately for the panel,
in the case I have alluded to in M*Laurin*s re-
ports as being the only place in which mention
IS made of litiscontestation, there was an in-
terlocutor of relevancy, and yet no regard was
paid to the argument by the Court. The case
IS that of James Archibald, in February 1768.
The petition in support of which the ide^ of
litiscontestation among other arguments was
there advanced, was, that the Court could not
desert a diet, pro loco ei tempore idlber an inter-
locutor of relevancy ; but the Court deserted
the diet in terms of tlie prosecutor's motion,
and granted vrarrant for recommitting the
panel.
I have to submit that the same consequence
must follow to the panel, whether you are of
* i Stark. Crim. Plead. 340.
opinion that the libel is abandoned, or whether .
you to tlirough the form of declaring it de-
serted. The Court cannot acquit the panel of
thechar^ against him. Your lordships are
not the judges of the fact AU you can do is
to declare the diet deserted ; and the conse^
Suence to the pauel is the same, for he may be
etained in prison and indicted again next day
for the same offence. To constitute the Court
judges in a previous question as to the pro-
priety of the prosecutor's conduct in insistins
m, or abandoning the libel, would be attendea
with the most extraordinary consequences, for
whidi it cannot be supposed that the panel's
counsel are prepared to argue. It would in--
troduce a course of procedure hitherto un-
known, which, if it bad been introduced in
other tiroes, might have led to the superseding
of the jury altogether, and which must in any
times invest the Court with the office of the
prosecutor.
It was said that the Court has a discretioa
to exercise in deserting the diet; that it may
do it simpliciier^ as well as pro loco et tempore^
if good grounds be shown ; and that the power
<^ abandoning the indictment contended for
takes this discretioa from the Court. Mr.
Bumet,* contrary to this statement, howwer,
savs that the prosecutor is not bound to show
why be moves for the desertion of a diet pro
loco et tempore^ and thai the Court must grant
any motion which he makes to that effect. But
I am quite willing to admit that Mr. Bnmet
has stated this doctrine somewhat too broadly^
and that he has quoted in too unqualified a
manner (as he not unfrequently does), the im-
port of a decision to which he refers in the
note in its sup^rt. I perfectly coincide with
Mr. Hume's view of the subject, that thou^^
the prosecutor cannot be compelled to discloae
his reasons for his motion to desert pro loco el
temporcy the Court have a discretion which, if
an extreme case be made out, they may exer*
cise by deserting the diet simpUciter ;\ thou^ n
more difficult question remains behind, to dis-
cover what benefit the panel can possibly de-
rive from that proceeding. All this, however,
relates to the case of the prosecutor moving
for a desertion pro kco et tempore^ whereas
here he has made no such motion.
I am not contending for a povrer inherent
in the public prosecutor, without a remedy for
any evil that may follow from it. All I say is,
that the panel is already out of Court as for
as the first libel is concerned, and that he has
nothing more to ask for by desertion of the diet
of that libel than what has happened by its
abandonment by the public prosecutor. Where
then, it may be askea, is the remedy in a case
. of oppression ? The answer Is, that by serving
a multiplicity of libels and successively aban-
doiung them all, the circamstances of oppres-
sion may be stated to the Court, if there be
any to complain o^ when, by insisting on a
new indictment the panel shall at length be
• Page 310,
t Supplemonli 237.
3491
Jbr AdminitUring untawfid Oaika
A. D. 18lt
BHMr
called opon to answer at llie bar ; or the panel
may have liis grieTances previously discussed
by presenting a petition* But it will always
be reaembrnd, that it is his own fitult, by
neglecting the remedies of the act 1701y if his
imprisonment shall in the meantime be pro-
longed a single day. And it is not easy^ there-
lore, to conceiTe m more harmless application
that can be made to a prisoner than tne service
of a series of indictments, whether relevant or
not, that are never insisted in, or to imagine
bow any evil or oppression can arise from such
a proceeding.
in the present instance, and in the present
BiMft of me business, there is clearly no case
before the Court from which the panel has to
ask rdiei^ or of which he can complain, or on
which be can be heard at alL The learned
counsel for the panel are entitled to come for-
vraid and state their hardships, if any shall
occur to their fertile fancy, and they will be in
order in doing so, when the panel shall be
broQght again to the bar, and the prosecutor
shall insist in a charge against him. It will
then be for the Court to consider, whether a
case is made out that calls upon Uiem to desert
the diet sinrpKciiter, rather than pro loco et tern-
C\ ; and, after all, if your lordships should
e recourse to this unusual proceeding, I am
yet to learn what be lefits it would confer upon
a prisoner more than the ordinary species of
desertion pro loco et tempore^ if obtained with-
out the consent of the prosecutor. On a point
on whidi Mr. Hume has spoken with so nrach
caution and reserve, it does not become me to
say any thing. For every evil there must be a
remedy; and, for all injustice there must be
redress in the common law powers of this su-
preme court; but the question is, whether the
provisions of the act 1701 are not intended to
meet every case that can occur, and whether a
case can possibly occur, in which the Court
would be justified in adding or attempting to
add, to the safeguards of that law.
^e have heard that Mr. Hume's authority is
against us in this part of the case, and that is
an authority to which we are all disposed to bow.
But I must confess, that I have not been able
to discover in any part of that learned author's
work, such a meaning as has been imputed to
bim. I admit the justice of all the remarks
that have been quoted. But your lordships will
observe how Mr. Hume was quoted. There was
nothing referred to as to his opinions of the
prosecutor's power of passing from, or aban-
doning his own instance; but passages were
quoted from diflerent parts of tne b<K>k as to
Ibe desertion of the diet. I must, however,
beg your attention to those passages in Mr,
Hume's woriL where he speaks of the prosec^
tor's power to abandon hu instance ; thus, he
^ys,* ^ at any period before remitting an in-
dictment to an assize, the prosecutor may
abandon a faulty libel, and raise another in a
more correct and better form." I am aware
• Vol. 3, p. 30C.
» « • .
that dkis is not an authority directly In point,
as the author is there only speaking inci*
dentally on this subject, and we have seen how
easv a matter it is to take detached passages
without reference to the context and general
bearing of the author's meaning, in order to
support a particular purpose. Let us then see
what Mr. faume says vrMu treating ezpresriy
of the prosecuto/s iiistance. ^' ^ the Lord
Advocate's instance is thus in one sense inde-
pendent of the party injured ; so it is also in'
this other sense, that it is entirely under hie
own management and disposal as to the sea^
sons and occasions when, or the mode wherein,
or the effect to which it shall be used. For in
none of these points can any individual, nor
even the supreme court, pretend to any con-
troul or superintendence of him; as indeed,'^
marie the conclusion, ^ as indeed to allow any
such interference on their part, would in sub-'
stance be to make the judges prosecutors^ who
ought to be kept free as &r as possible of all
previous impressions of the case."*
I submit, that if these passages be oomparecl
wiUi those quoted on the other side, whin last
rdate entirely lo the desertion of the diet, and
do not contain a word about the proseoitor's
power over his instance, there wiu be no dis-'
crepancy or contrariety found between them.
Deiertion of the diet is an act of the Court Y
but as to the instance, the prosecutor has that
entirely in his own hands. Your lordshipe
cannot keep the prosecutor in Court a minute
longer than he chooses ; and the panel cannot
prevent him from withdrawing, mr he has all
the bene6t from that proceeding which he can
derive from any desertion, and receives no
harm from it
As to the MiKie of 15 dajrsy if it be compe-
tent and proper to serve one indictment dunng
the currency of a previous one, that question
is at an end. The mimim of the second must
run from the date of the service^ else the power
to serve the second would have no meaning
whatever; and accordinglv this will be found,
on inquiry, to be agreeable to the praotioflKi
Your lordships will remember the ongin and.
nature of the iMftiM of citation, for an ettenp-
sion of which the panel is not attempting to
plead any equitable claim. The vJme aie
not founded upon statute but upon an equitii
able practice. No case is here made out in
equity for a delay; and it certainly will not
be said that there is any practice against the
running of the second tndMnc before the deses-
tion of the previous diets. If it be competent
to serve three or four indictments at once, it
must follow that the Mmm of the whole wmif
run at the same time. But at all tiiase,.befoie
a trial is brought on, the Court wR grant sooh
delay ka may appear proper in the drcum-
stances of ^ny particufaff case.
' A complaint has been made that the panil
has been embarrassed with diffarent hbelipin
preparing bis defence. To this it is a svflkient
4^
« Pag^ 215.
sftU
57 GEORGE HI.
Tri4d of fViUiam Edgar
i:362
answev, that he may establish this fact of em-
hamuBsmenty if he cany as the grounds of a
iBOtion for delay (which appears to be consi-
dered a great advantage to the panel, and is
in fact the real object of this discussion) sup^
poaiag him to succeed in persuading your
lordships ibaX the first libel is not abandoned.
But I nave already said that there is no room
here for any statement of hardship ; the se«
cood indictroept being the same as the first,
with the omission of two or three lines. This
<l^jection, if it existed at all, would apply with
tenfold force to the common case of au alter-
i^tive charge of two crimes in tlie same libel,
or to the ease of a panel served with several
Ub^s for as many different offences, when he
would have ten times more difficulty in the
preparation of his defence ; and yet it could
w>t be pleaded to be incompetent to make
such a cnaige, or to serve different libels at
once for different offences. This very year an
ipataiice occurred where the same individual,
John Campbell, was tried on two separate
Ubels on two consecutive days^ and convicted
OB both.
LordJtMice derk,-—! tried a man on two
different libels upon the same day last circuit.
Mr. Drtmimond. — ^It was observed, that in
ibe prooeedings of the Court of Justiciary in
points of form, many cases have occurred un-
worthy of being followed as precedents, and
namv examples of loose and irregular practice.
My lord, I cannot allow this to pass uncon-
iradicted. I have never had occasion to make
•fiieh a remark myself, or to hear it made by
oUiers : 'On the contrary, I have always looked
up to the practice of this Court, as a model of
aceuracy and correctness in points of form. If
the learned gentleman go back to bad times, he
nay find some things not to be imitated, but not
certainly in modem times when the practice
of the Court has become more mature and
perfect.
I cannot sit down without ofierins a few re-
anarks upon the cases stated in £e printed
minute for the panel. It is said, in the second
page, ^ Tliat a search from the year 1777
idownwaxda bad first been made, and the result
iiad been communicated to the panels some
4ays ago : But that after this a search had It
«eema been made, which appears to go back
to the beginning of. the last century ; and the
«Catement of the oases so found was only com-
aiuaicated kte oa this day. That on the part
"^if the panel itijaay now be assumed, that the
Court W before it every, one example which
liis majesty's. advocate has been able to dis-
•eorer,, ia the.course of more than a century ^ of
any. proceedings which be thinks calculated to
>a«pport the measure which has been adopted
in this case, or .to meet the objectioq founded
on the cleai^st principles of law.'' This is a
▼ery erroneoos statement of what has been
dene in point of fact. Our search began in
-t777f Hmd prior to that there Jvas lui aeaich
at all. The cases, stated before ao^ not the
result of a search ; and the panel's counsel
are not entitled to say that no other cases can
previously be found, for the only search made
was since 1777.
Upon the case of Mendham, it is observed,
that ** in that case the panel had cleariy no
interest to make the objection, but quite the
reverse.*' I do not think that the circumstance
of a panel having no interest to state an objec-
tion is at all a sufficient reason to exclude a
case from being quoted as a precedent, as
seems to be assumed. It is the duty and the
practice of the Court to look to the correct-
ness of the proceedings at trials, whether ob-
jections be made or not : A strong example of
which lately occurred in the case of Bell and
Douglas, where, though the guilt charged was
acknowledged, the indictment was not allowed
by the Court to go to an assize. Similar
examples of the discharge of this duty by the
Court must be familiar to us all.
It is said, however, that in this case of
Mendham, the panel had no interest to state
the objection. But, we must not look to the
result in judging of this interest, but to the
circumstances in which he stood at the time
for making the objection. How could he know
at that time the result of the obiection to the
relevancy ? and until the Court determined as
to that, It was impossible that he could know
whether it was his interest to make this ob-
jection.
If you turn the page, your lordships wilt
find a complete shifting of the argument of
interest, for, in the case of Somerville, it is
there maintained that the panel had no interest
to state the objection in question, although he
was found guilty and convicted. He had an
interest, it would appear, to state objections to
the relevancy of the libel ; for this was done
by some pf me learned gentlemen on the other
side of the bar who defended him ; and in
consequence of the objections so stated, the
indictment was abandoned, and a second in-
dictment was brought* He had, however, no
interest, according to the view of the case in
the minute for the panel, to object to the trial
and punishment, became the latter <' could not
exceed imprisoiimeni and pillory,^ Those re-
sults are not in general so coolly anticipated ;
but where did the learned gentleman who
wrote this minute find the law, that this is the
utmost extent of the punishment of perjury ?
and how did he lose sight of the fact ih that
particular case, that the panel was over and
above condemned to what was perhaps to him
a still severer fate, to pay ^150 of damages,
and the whole expenses of process? As to
the expense, he had only the ordinary allow-
ance bt two, or at most three, counsel. Here
there are a great many more. I do not pre-
tend to enter into tlie secrets of the giher side
of the bar, but appearances, at least, are
against the panel on this ground. The trial
again, it is said, could be merely put off for
1^ dayei4 Now, is not this all the panel asks
for in the preaeat case f and yet we are told
2531
Jor Adtrinistering unUn^ Oatht,
A. D. 1817.
I3ff4
that was the reason (he panel had no interest
to plead the objection in the case of Somer-
Tille ; and on that occasion it was said to be
as well to beconvicted now as 15 days hence
though in thik case the very idea of such a
doctrine is reprobated as quite untenable and
preposterous.
With regard to the case of Alexander Camp-
bell, it is saidy " This is not a case applicable
to the point at all. There was no question
about any new indictment, and the circum*
stance of the public prosecutor passing from
particular charges in an indictment, intending
or reserring the power afterwards to raise a
new indictment, is wholly immaterial to tbe
question." I conceiye nothing can be more
iu point than this. What is law as to one
charge in an indictment, must be law as to the
whole. My statement, I observe, excites ridi-
cule— ^but let it be answered. I repeat, that
whatever proceeding is competent for the pro-
secutor as to one charge in an indictment,
ninst be competent as to the whole charges ;
and that whatever he can do as to one of
several diarges, he can do as to one charge
standing alone. It will be observed, too, that
this proceeding took place in the case of
Campbell after the panel had pleaded not
guilty, though that certainly does not appear
to me a matter of so much importance, as it
cannot £ul to appear to the learned gentle-
men opposite from their views of this point
of form.
It is not disputed that the prosecntor may
afterwards bring another indictment on a
charge so abandoned.
It is next said, with the customary inaccu-
racy, ^ But at any rate it is humbly appre-
hended, that even this takes place only with
the consent of the Court, which is expressed
Sf the terms of the interlocutor of relevancy .*'
ow, there was no consent of the Court, and
there neither was nor could be any mention of
it in the interlocutor of relevancy. The inter-
locator finds the relevancy of the libel as
resiricUtL Tbe Court did not desert any diet,
and could do nothing but proceed to the con-
sideration of what remained after the prose-
cntor had withdrawn one of the charges.
Then comes the case of John Horn, who is
also said to have had no interest to make this
ol>|ection« He had an interest, however, to
ol]gect to the relevancy of both indicfments :
At least, a learned gentleman, Mr. Jeffrey,''
most have thought so, who was his counsel,
and made the ejection. Now I cannot see
how he had an interest in the one and not in
tbe otber^ delay being the object, and the only
consequence, of stating either the objection to
tbe service or the objection to the relevancy.
Id fkn. pase of Horn there were two charges,
uttering and selliog forged' notes; both of
which were ultimately £und relevant, Tbe
panel did not know till after the interlocutor
cfi relevancy that the prosecutor had a^y in-
tention not to insist on the first, which was a
capital charge.
liie case of Bell and Douglas we are tolA
has no analogy to the present question, because
^*BeU pleaded gidUy to both vuUctmenii ; and as
to Douglas, the diet was deserted.'* But that
cannot remove the case as a precedent, for 'the
panel certainly had an interest to state the ob^i
jection if he bad thought fit to do so ; nay, he
had a more than ordinary interest, having his
confession of the first indictment standing on
the record, whatever the prejudicial efllsct ctf
that circumstance may be to a panel. This
induciA of the two libels are proved in th&
case to have run at once.
With regard to the case of Hamilton, it is
said that there may have been only an intention
to raise a new indictment, notwithstanding
mention is made of the ''new indictment
rmteiJ' That will not do. It is impossiUe
to construe an indictment actually raised into
an intention to raise an indictment The re-
mark, that thd informations '' might have bean
on the form of citation, or on other points not
necessarily implying that there had been a
plea to the indictment,'' is quite unfounded in
tact. Before the Jurisdiction Act of George
II.*. informations were given in in eveiy c^e,
that being a form which could not be dis-
pensed with. Those informations contained
tbe statement of foots ux>on which the panel
chose to rest his plea of not guilty, as well as
the objections that occurred to him in point of
law to the relevancy. In place of this cum*
brous proceeding, which had become a grie-
vance and an obstruction to the course of
justice, that excellent law substituted the
written defences, which, by a slovenly practice,
are often neglected to be lodged, though they
are in fact one of the most important steps of
the whole process, and might, perhaps, super-
sede altogether the unmeaning and embarras-
ing ceremony of entering a plea before the
Court, which may be immediately afterwards
retracted when the Jury are sworn. The in-
formations were in fact at that period not
merely pleadings on the relevancy, but also
defences, or explailations of the plea of not
guilty ; and it is, therefore, most erroneous to
say, that though informations had been given
in, it does not follow that ''the panel Aocf
pleaded:^
As to the case of Feroie, the minute stated,
'' that it does not appear when the new indict-
ments were raised.'' But your lordships will
see in the prosecutor's minute, page 6,. that it
was the very same date upon which both libels
were called, consequently they must have been
both previously raised, and must^have sub-
sisted together; and the MuddB of the last
must have run notwithstanding the existence
of the first, which is all that is contended for.
The word " raised " in this place plainly in-
cludes and implies " executed, for tbe diet of
compearance could not have arrived unless
this had been the case. That the lord advo-
cate, therefore, has not power to proceed as he
■ — >__^ "
• • Stat; 20 G. 2, c. 48.
9561
ffl OEOROE Uh
TryUqfWUUamEdgQf
(356
liM doM on this occasioDy is % oonclntion
whioli cannot be diawn from this, any mote
Chan from the other oases that have been men-
tioned ; and tbeie is no authority whatever for
the statement, that ** it was not imasined at
that time that he had any power to abandon
an indictment otherwise than by motion to the
Court.''
The other cases in the minute for the panel
«ra not in point ; but they serre to shew the
practioSy that diets may be deserted pro loco et
iempote even after interlocutors of relevancy.
Lord'AAfocate, — ^It is unnecessaryi and it
would be doing little justice to the argument,
if 1 added one word to what has been stated.
Mr. DruimmmtU — ^I omitted to observe, that
the case of M^Renxie, which Mr. Cranstoun
tjnoted from Mr. Hume, vol. iiL page 10. seems
to have been quite misonderstOKod. It ob-
viously relates to a perfiMtly different question
from any thing now before the Court. There
the prosecutor moved the Court to desert the
diet in absence of the panel, contrary to the
great leading principle, that no oroceeding can
•take place ra absence except nigitation ; and
the Couft continued the diet (as fugitation
was not moved for), till the panel should have
tin opportunity of showing why he did not
tittend.
Mr. Ckrk. — ^I am sorry it has fallen to me
lo answer the other side, for Mr. Cranstoun
bad an opportunity of considering the case :
I had not. I have but a general recollection
of what passed last day. But I shall submit
a lew observations upon what has been stated
by Mr. Home Drummond.
If your lordships think that the practice is of
considerable importance on this point, I shall
begin with offering some remarks upon the
precedents which luive been cited. Your lord-
. ships have heard quoted a great many instances
in which the public prosecutor thought it in-
cumbent on him to get quit of one indictment
before he directed another to be served. You
have a great number of instances of this prac-
tice by the most learned persons who have
filled the situation of his majesty's advocate ;
and it seems to be the natural and necessary
consequence of th^e opinions which your
' lordidups have firom Mr. Hume in several
different passages of his woik. I shall refer
your lordships to that practice. It is one
which has been discovered in consequence of
a very anxious search into the records for more
than a century. We have been told by Mr. .
. Home Drummond that there has been no re«
gular search into the records of Justiciary. I
understood that these records had been very
' anxiously searched; and, whether so or not,
I am entitled to assume that neither party
can . suppose there are anjr other instances
in the records. than those whidi have been laid
. before your lordships. These are sufficient,
at least as specimens of the practice ; and I
must retain my private belief, that whether
he is or is not entitled to say there has not
been that sort of examination which may be
properly called a search, yet that there was
such a search as to satisfy your lordships of
the eeneral nature of the precedents to be
found in these records.
Assuming this, what is the result? Upon the
one hand, you have a great many instances
indeed of first indictments being abandoned —
the diet being deserted — ^where the libel had
been abandoned by the public prosecutor
before the panel had pleaded — which we never
disputed his title to do. We never hinted,
that he has not as good a title to abandon as
he has to raise and execute an indictment, if
the panel has not been brought into Court, and
parties have not joined issue. In a certain
number of these instances, you have evidence
of the opinions of the learned persons who
conducted the business, that this is a proper
and necessary mode of proceeding, because,
by proceeding in that way, they put themselves
to some more trouble tnan according to the
mode now recommended by my learned friends.
This is a practice as to whidi there could be
no contradiction, for it is admitted, that« what-
ever is right or wrong in the present debate,
the prosecutor may abandon the old, and raise
a new indictment. This is a practice which
can only show the opinion of the public prosecu-
tors — most learned men — and also their opinion
of the way in wliich the Court consideredT these
matters. It is impossible you could have the
judgment of the Court upon all of these points.
What are the proofs ? Except in one case, it
is not pretended that the point- was brought
before the Court at all, so that there is no
judgment upon it. And as to that case, all
that was said was, that there was some conver-
sation, but no record of it — a conversation
between the learned gentleman and one of
your lordships. And though I attended every
diet as counsel for the panel, I certainly do
not remember that conversation : and that is
all that is brought forward as a precedent. It
is a jest to say it is a precedent. It is incum«
bent upon you, and you perform the duty as
well as you can, to attend to the regularity of
your proceedings ; but where the two parties
are both keen, zealous, and anxious, all the
zeal of the public prosecutor on the one side
to obtain justice for the public — all the acute-
ness upon the other side to state every thing
for the defence of Uie panel, in so far as useftil
to him, it is natural for you to take for granted
that every thing is right, if nothing is menti-
oned as being wrong. Therefore, if an cAjec-
tion be not ^ted on either side, and do sot
appear from any innpeetion of ^e record, I
submit to your lordships, that to stale a practice
of this kiiid as being of any authority wnat^r,
is one of the most violent attadE^ upon n f«igu<*
lar system of law that I have ever beard of,
either in this Court or in any other. I was
counsel for Somerville. I dare say I attended
to his interest as weU as I could. He was
anxious enough, T dare say, to escape convic-
J
2571
Jqt Itdminutering unlawfiil Oaths*
A. D. 1817.
[238
Uon of tlie crime of whidi he was accused — the
crime of perjtiiy. Bat, noiwithstandiDg my
situation, I certaioly did not consider it of
tbBLt great eminence which the pablic prose-
cutor seems to think it was. I did not consider
myself as acting as a great legislator upon
the occasion. Nor did Mr. SomerviUe on
the piUoiy think he was dispensing new law
ftr me government of your lordshijps. What
was done was done with consent of SomerviUe,
and without objection.
Tour lordships watch orer the regularity of
proceedings — but if the panel consent to any
particular measure, and your lordships do not
observe that it is irregular, can that affect the
proceeding in law, and a most important prin-
ciple in law f What I apply to the case of
&)menrille may be applied to every one of the
cases. If they coula nave produced one pre-
cedent—one case in which the panel, consi-
dering it to be necessary for his defence, or of
any use to him, had opposed a proceeding of
this nature, and you had overruled the objec-
tion, I should have considered that precedent
iforth all the rest upon both sides of the
aoestion. No such precedent has been pro-
uced. And because perhaps a hundred pan-
els have been brought to the bar, and a few of
them have allowed this proceeding without
objecting to it, possibly without having an
interest to state an objection, 'and possibly
without being aware objections might be stated,
as junior counsel are often for the panels, they
cannot be considered as prec^cnts. It may
be for the interest of a panel that his trial should
not be delayed ; and mstead of putting off the
time of the Court with the objection, and re-
alining longer in prison,, a panel may often
wish his trial to proceed, where, had his counsel
oflTered the objection, and supported it before
tbe Coart by argument, the Court would have
siren it attention, and seen its propriety and
mce. But a panel, by delay, may also incur
fiirther expense, to which he will naturally be
mveise. This person, Mr. SomerviUe, was
not one of those mendicant clients, of which
ihexeare numbers in the Castle at this mo-
ment. He was ..not in the situation of the
panel at the bair, whose counsel, from a sense
of public duty, are putting him to no expense
what^rer. t, for one, am proud of my situa-
tMm/ and every one of my learned friends
entertains the same feeling. SomerviUe was
ppt.ta a great deal of expense in the manage-
nent of his case ; and how could it have served
Mm to delay his trial from day to day ? It
would not have availed biim. There were Mr.
ISiQertDn and myself, and perhaps another
counsel at the bar at his expense. There is
no doubt it was his wish to go to trial upon
that day.
Lord Jtutiee Clerk. -^I see from my notes
yea did move the Court to allow the expenses
of preparing for the defence of the panel.
Mr. Clerk, — I feel great obligation to. your
)x»rdahip, and' so mi&st my client the panel,
VOL. xxxm.
for your mentioning this circumstance. That
shews there was great expense attending that
trial, and as there was great expense, Mr.
SomerviUe would naturally be averse to any
unavailing delay, which must have been attend-
ed by additional expense.
At to the other cases, it has been remarked
by the prosecutor, that we say it was for the
interest of SomerviUe to go on with the trial,
although a conviction foUowed ; and then he
gave us a most facetious contrast, indeed, be-
tween this case and another, in which it was
not for the interest of the panel to state the
objection, because the libel was not well found-
ed, and the panel was acquitted. In this way,
says my learned friend, whether convicted or
acquitted, they find an interest not to state the
objection. I apprehend, such shifts as this
will never stand in your lordships' minds in
place of solid argument ; for, in the course of
a century, I think it is strange a panel should
not find it for his interest to wave such an
objection as this. Delay is generally incon-
venient, and an expense to him ; he has the
advantage of the tist of witnesses to be brought
against him being given in the indictment;
and he does not know what other witnesses
may be brought forward under a new indict-
ment ; and it is utterly impossible to account
for the desires and wishes of men in such cir-
cumstances. One thing is certain, that, in the
consideration and preparation in all cases past
and to come, it has oeen and frequently will
be the desire of the panel to go on without
stating a dilatory objection. I apprehend,
that in the present case you will not particu-
larly inquire into the motives of the panel for
stating the objection. He seems to be in a
dangerous state — ^whether you will find against
him or not, it is impossible to say ; but he is
in a dangerous situation, and I cannot be
called upon to explain the particular motives
for wishing for the delay ; and, therefore, I
submit to your lordships, without makina more
remarks upon the particular cases which have
been adverted to on both sides, that these
proofs which were pleaded on by the counsel
for the Crown are not such as should have the
least effect in regulating the law of the case,
more particularly as the proofs are against the
Crown. i
But, the principle of the law is still more
against them. Let us consider what is men-
tioned by Mr. Cranstonn, the proofs of single
judges refusing bills of suspension. A panel
was tried in an inferior Court, and subjected
to an ignominious punishment, of which he
wished to get quit altogether or have it miti-
gated. In numerous cases persons so accused
presented bills to this Court, and they were
refused by single judges, some of them the
first judges that ever appeared in this country.
Lord Braxfield was one of them, not to men-
tion other names. Is it possible to conceive a
case, where a man so convicted had not an
interest to dlqect to a single judge refusing his
bill ? It is impossible to dispute that the prac-
S
2591
57 GEORGE III.
Trial of WiUam Edgar
lam
ticewas a^inst the right principle, and the
interest was against the ptactke. Yet when
the point came to be tried, ^ou were of opin-
ion", that the pnttitice mtMtt yield to the princi-
ple of law, as it appeared to yoar lordships.
With regard to the prineiple of law, a few
observations — It occun to ne, m the first
{lAace, that no attempt can be more desperaie,
or more completely nnflronded, than the at-
tempt made by the Crown counsel to cohvince
yon that die public prosecutor has power to
abandon an Imlictment after a panel has pleads-
ed. It is directly in the teeth of thoie au*
thorities which we quoted to your lordships,
coming from that great master of the law to
whose dktayovLt lordships give great attention.
And how is that opposed ? They camiOt pre-
tend to say that we have misconstrued this
authority, which is positive and express, and
cannot be explained away. But they have
recourse to other dkia of Mr. Hume as b^g
inconsistent with this^ Upon lookiikg to these,
I have to express my astonishment Siey couM
have been stated as inconsistent. The princi-
pal of them, page 305, first vol. of Trtal Tot
UrimcF, and third vol. of the whole work, whete
Mr. Hume reasoning upon another pioitit al-
together, says, *^ But what shall be said when
the fact, which is related in the subsumption of
the libel, though short* of the crime charged in
the major propositioB, amounts, however, to a
lower crime of the same class; as in the case
of murder atid culpable homicide ; hamesucken
and assault; theft and swindling; notour and
simple adultery; ^and some others? In these
circumstances, and on finding that his stoTy
does not support him in his charge of thd higher
denomination of crime, may the prosecutor
nevertheless maintain his process, restricting
his charge to the lower species, and limiting
his conclusions as to punishment accordingly?
This is an important question ; and some di-
versity of opinion there has b^n among law-
yers about it. Some have thought diat there is
a violation of that decorum and propriety so
fit to be observed in all criminal proceedings,
if any ' one shall be tried on a libel (the
fundamental writ of the whole process) which
esfade, amd taken as it is laid before the Court,
is a disjointed, mis-shapen, and inconclusiTC
composition ; and tliat this consideration alone
is a good reason why no such accusation ought
to be sustained. But further, say they, to
shew the prosecutor any indulgence in this
article, is attended with a real hardship to the
panel, who prepares for his defence*again8t the
libel as laid ; and who knowing that he is secure
on the ground which is iaken there, will na*
tuially be less diligent or solicitous in providing
for his exculpation, in regard to any inferidr
degree of vguilt. One, for instance, who is
aecused of parricide, and who knows thbi the
person he killed 'vtas not Ills fiithev^ or who Is
accused of hamesucken, and knows thai die
aiaauH was not made on tbe comphnner at his
nome }• may naturally conchide thaltMsBlnnder
is «f itself aniikleBt to savf his lift; and will
put himself, therefore, to less trouble witth re-^
spect to those other pleas of self-defence, gross
provocation, and ^e like, which might serve
to exculpate him, or to alleviate his guilt. If
he were tried on an ordin^ charge of bieatihjg,
or of murder." Then he says, **'The prosecu-
tor, too, cannot well say that he suffers any
wrong in tfie enforcing of sucSi a rule ; sinee,
fbr o^inary, he has the means of being accu*
rately informed of the fact before raising his
libel; and if be have any doubt Of the pkoper
style of the crime, he may lay his chtog^ for it
under all the seversl denominations wh&cli may
eventually be found to suit the case. Nay,
there is still no hardship, though he discover
the weidcness of his case aft^t the execution
only of his indictment, siiiee at any period'
before remitting it to at) asance he may aban)loii
thi^ fkuUy libd, and raise another in more cor-
rect and better form.^ * Does Mr. Hume or not
cdnrecthis own errors, asf' they are suppoted
t6 be' in the other passage he had written, as
to the power of the prosecutor to abandon his
libel? lliere is not the l^t hint of it. Tlie
passage quoted by my client is that which must
be understood as limiting this general passa^as
to the power of the prosecutor.' That he may
abandon the libel there is no doubt, espedalqr
before the indictment is pleaded to; nay, a^et
it, in a particular manner, fhere can h4 no
doubt ; for he has only to move the Court, who
will do so, unless there be apparent injustice
in doing so. Mr. Hntne says, fit^t, he may
abandon, and, hi the second place, that he has
it not absolutely in his power— that if is thao-
curate in point of style to say that he does if
at ail — for that it is the Couri in cases whether
public or private. The Court couM keep him
to the libel if nropet; and ^ithc^forcb him to
desert linrplkUer, to the eflM of haying no
right to bnng a new trial, or hold him to the
libel already pleaded to. This is Mi'.'Hume^s
fair meaning. So much has been said' ujpon
this, that I niall not trouble you with any mdi^
remaiks upon the power of the prbs^utor iki
desert his libel. ' I may assume, be has 'no
power without the authority of th^ Coiirt '^He
nas just the same power as h man in other in-
stances to do what is lawfol, but only in sight
of the Court. Therefore any notice from hiin
that he was to do such a thing might be very
good notice that he was to move the Courts'
but could be nothing ftfrther. He bad powe^
to give notice of- that, and to do it ; but stiH
it- was only a notice of intention, and it i^ hot a
measure till the Court interpose for the pdi^.
pose. Ibis- is the sum and sul>stance 6f V^kt
can be extraifeted from Mr: Hume oik tike subj^^'
the authority to Ivhtch youbaVe been ' -
tomed to>efer in all cases. '
As to Mt. Bttriiret^ h^ either is n
perhaps corrects himself in another
and be would ^veadmitt^)umsejiC.4i^i
passase was to be understood tiihmpd^$9»A.
that the Court should consent.
Let us see where the rest of the aiEument
lies: AismiiiDg ihm thtfpablk
^•f f
^i^
Jot Adminisigring unlawful Oaths.
A. D, 1817.
[263
no power, without tbe act of the Court, to
•^•]|4jOQ the lihel to which the panel has
pjeaoed, U opous to me that a most ready way
<p this question is to consider the case of
Charteris; what was done in that case; and
what is to be infened from that case,
Jn the ease of Chaiteris four indictments
were raised; and my learned friends were
B^jiytf tp a^KTt (they are better acquainted
with these aocient tim^ than we)» that it was
il that time. a practice to raise matiy indict-
ments. Many of the practices of that period
*a9^ better honoured in Uie breach, thui tbe
obfienrancey and niany of Uiem are so by the
preeent Court. Notwithstanding this, it was
said to be the practice in those times to rais«
a whole .bunch of indictments at the same
ti^iie. This was done in the <»fa of colond
Charterisy who said he should not be obliged
to^ answer to the whole, fio, but answer to
t^/ope read in Cour(, and you may plead to
^kis lo^Mstment. You were told the question
was, whether the prosecutor could insist in
€nir. at the same time. I see no s«ch qaestioa.
t(i^. . On the oontraryi it is stated by Mr.
limmfi that some 9f these indictmenU were
^iQed for other diets. But, be this as it mayy
when Ghaneris wa^ told he had only to plead
to this ii»dictment, what did that force the
public jwQsecutor to do? Whether he was
altempting to carry on four at the same time,
or 'oDC» is of no consequence ; for the Court
ioioed the others to be abandoned. Why was
tbe pablic prosecutor obliged tQ give up these
indictments? upon what ground ? Way was.
ikot be allowed to go on with one^ suspending
mr the head of the panel all the others?
why did not he say, he wished this, and tiie
Covui allow itp—the Court saying, *• only an-
swer one. at a time, and no harm to suspend
the.ptheJs over your head : They are not called
Dpw, and may never be called : If you are
ai^qjvitted^.you cannot be tried again for the
same offence : They are for the same offence,
and therefore there is no^arm in having these
all againstyQu." The Court would not listen
to this. The proseihitor was obliged to give
up tbe indictn)ents,aiid thenCharteris pleaded-
iVtt is a ^ir state of the case. Now, rohy did
the Court ol£gp the prosecutor to give up the
indictments before tie pleading? Thai is a
h^ipa question ;; and no answer has been given
to it. The a^wer is given b^ Mr. Hume, and
a jomt aatisbctoiy answer it is, and he repeats
' itji^^ and again in different passages. The
r^lp^ was — oppressing the panel in the ma-
nagement i)f his defence. The Coprt ought
nj7 to allow that, and why? Because con-
tmry to the rules of justice, which are para-
mount to aH other rules in this CourL We
were told, that an act of parliament is of.
gi;ea|«r anthori^ than a law of practice of the
Cpurt. I apprehend a judgment of the
Court, proceeaing upon rules of justice, is
stranesr.thai^aoX other precedent. .1 am en-
title^ tp jassoaae, that tais was considered bv
the <Coart as tha jostica of any case m which
more than one libel would be hanging over a
man's head while pleading. Mr. Cransto^n
put a question, would it have be^ fcoi^peient
tor the prosecutor, after abandoning these, tq
have served them over again, or new p^es to
the same effect P If any public prosecutor had
dared to do such a thing, the Court would
have taught him his duty. If any public pro-
secutor had been daring enough so to tamper,
and attempt to evade the justice of the Courts
in a manner which would have been so grossly,
shameful (I am not intending to apply any
strong epithets to the proceeding before you :
I think It is a mistake, and a natural one, on
the part of my learned friends, to act as thepr
have done) : but in the case of Chaneri^, it
would have been considered a gross contempt
of the judgment of tbe Court. What has
been done in the present case ? It seems that
a public prosecutor cannot serve foqr libeU at
once, to the effect of bringing a, panel to, trial
upon one. Though he cannot do it, he can
do another thing. He has no occasion to serve
his libels for the same time ; but immediately
aiter tbe panel has pleaded to oney be may.
serve half a dozen for the same offence, beibre
that libel which has been pleaded to has been
^disppsed of by the Court.. It is ludicrous to
"maintain this. It is contrary to all reason
that could be applied to a thing of the kind.
If there is any legal principle in the case of
Charteris, this is impossible.
I apprehend the question lies here. If the
f>roaecotor was not entitle4 tp serve a new
ibel, then the new libel was not /lerved, .for
there is one great law of justice as of eqiiity.
** Id tantum pot$umiu quod dfi jure pofiuutrnJ*
If the public prosecutor had no right to serve
that libel, then you will consider that the libel
was not served) and that is my reason for. in*
sisting at your lordships' bar, thjat the. panel
cannot be obliged to plead to that libel. The
former libel has not been deserted to this mo-
ment; you have not yet consented to it. I
am not going to Hy anv thing so insincere as
that you will be called upon to refuse vour
consent, when proposed on the motion of the
public prosecutor. But the public prosecutor
has taken a high sution here. He refuses to
move your lordships to desert the diet ; and
therefore you have never had an opportunity
of considering the point, whether it should be
deserted or not. If the diet had been de-
serted this day, before we began to state this
point to your lordships, there is another ground
sufficient for us which would have arisen. I
shall not plead any thing without an interest.
I jam entitled to tell them, the libel would in
thiat case have been considered as served this
day, that I m^y have time to prepare my de-
fences. I shall not enlarge upon the hardship
which might arise to the panel, from being
obliged now to answer to this libel. It is
sufficient for me, that the practice which has
been followed here is contrary to the esta-
blished practice before your lordships, and the
best prosecutors have uniformly deserted libels
263]
£7 GEOUGE 111.
Trial of IViUiam Edgar
Ca64
before serving second iDdictments. There
may be hardship in this case, and thei% might
be greater in others. As to the case which
was stated by Mr. Cranstoun, of two libels
depending at the same time^ and one of them
where the panel was to be tried in Edinburgh,
and another at Aberdeen, that proceeding
would be so harsh and unjust, that even
leaving mattera to the discretion of your lord-
ships (which every sound rule of jurispru-
dence is against, for the Court should have no
discretion as to such matters), you would in-
terpose a remedy for the eviL But the rule
6f law is not more against such a proceeding
tlian against the present. I should have no
apprehension of the consequence in that case ;
for, till a total desertion of law and justice in
the country, such a thing could bot be admitted.
But, is it no hardship to be perplexed with
two libels at the same rime } The question of
relevancy is attended with the greatest nicety
and difiiciilty, and has given counsel a great
deal of trouble alteady— and is there no hard-
.ihip in having to give as much consideration
to a new libel? That former libel was at*
tended with so much difficulty, and occupied
so much of the attention of the panel's coun-
sel, that there is no saying what pleas might
have arisen to them under that libel, and pre-
^nted them fi^om paying attention to the new
libel. What if the connsel in the former case
Imd not thought it incumbent on them to
support the panel in the present ? What if
he had been deserted by his agents? I do
>tioi suppose there is any chance of that in this
case ; but this signifies nothing at all to a ge-
neral rule, to which your lordships should
adhere in all caaes. There have been cases in
which a man has beeti defended by counsel
and agent in one indictment, who did not
think it incumbent npon them to defend him
in another. It wIa said, that the panel had
notice a considerable time ago tliat the libel
was to be abandoned. That Hvas an accom-
modation. But what if the public prosecutor
had given no such notice ? It was not incum-
bent on him to give any notice. And as the
panel would have been brought to this bar,
with his counsel and agents ready to defend
him in the former case, after bestowing great
attention upon it, but not prepared to defend
him in this case ; is not that a situation which
your lordships would take into consideration,
if any thing depends npon the possible bard-
ship? The counsel and agents might hive
been brought to your lordships' bar, under the
impression that the trial was to go on on the
first indictment. When they come, ready to
defend him, they are told that that case is
not to be tried. The prosecutor prays the
Court to desert the diet pro loco el tempore^ and
then proceeds npon a new indictment, of whidi
the counsel and agents bad no notice what-
ever. Having held this out against him, he
finds the whole trouble, research, time, and
expense of previous preparation, thrown away,
and that he must be ready, upon the most
summary warning, to proceed to trial on ano-
ther indictment.
I may be told, such a case can hardly hap*
pen, in which the panel can be deprired (yf
the whole mdueUs ; but, if be may be deprived of
even a part of the indueia, he may therebv
lose the assistance of his agent ana counsel,
and what is more, may be deprived of the
most material witnesses.
We are told, that, in this indictment, there
is only an alteration in a few words of the
former. There is the very greatest difierence
between the two indictments; which is most,
difficult to defend, it is not for me to say.
The major proposition is the same in both;
but the minor is essentially different ; and the
two require different sorts of arguments.
Lord Hemumd. — ^This objection, not veiy
material at first, has now as to the panel's In-
terest dwindled into nothing. For as it is not
pleaded that the second indictment is null, so
as soon as fifteen days elapse from the aban-
donment by the prosecutor, he can be brolkg|ht
to trial. But it is argued there is a distinc-
tion where the panel has pleaded, t. e. uttered
the words '' not guilty,^ for that, it is said,con-
stitates litiscontestation. I doubt, if that be
a phrase in criminal law. It does not occur
in any one authority. But if it be, it mnst be
understood as in cwU^m$. • Litiscontestation,
however, is not constituted by defences nor
by pleading, it never takes effect till an aqt be
extracted ; not an act and commission of mo-
dem introduction, but an act far proof before
the Court, or before the Ordinaries on oath*
and witnesses.
On this analogy the powers of the prosecu*
tor continue till a jury be im);)anelled, and so
was found in the case of Archibald, 1708.
On this ground I cannot agree to strike out of
the list of cases, those in which ^^ not guilty "^
has not been pleaded. On the other hand, tM
panel's argument cannot be redargued on
what is called list of cases beyond the period
of search. Additional cases are given in for
the panel, in all of which the diet had been
expressly deserted; but precedents enough
remain to settle the law.
In 1st case, Lawson. — Diet deserted.
In 2nd case, fiums.~No desertion, and trial
proceeded on second indictment.
In 3rd case. Berry. — Same procedure.
5. Mendham. — Argument that panel had no
interest to object;— not understood.
7. Lindsay Crawfiird. — A serious case, yet
wi^ut desertion ; trial proceeded on second
indictment. It is argued, that in none of tbese
cases was the objection pleaded. Why ? be*
cause it was tiot thought relevant : The whole
bar has been in a dream, till the ingenuity of
the counsel here discovered what had been hid
from their predecessors, though with all de^
ference to them not their inferiors in ability i
and the same observation equally applies to
the Court.
Is not this fiufficicnt to establish a point of
fonn? In one case, hovrever, the objeoiion
2651
y&r AdmutitttritiguHittti^l Oalhi.
A. D. 1817.
(906
was broogbt into Yiew by myself, Ballantine
against Somenrille. My notes correspond with
Mr. Drammond's. An objection by a judge is
as strong as that by a counsel.
In 10th case, Horn.— No desertion, and trial
proceeded on second indictment. That second
indictment is competent, inveterate usage
proves.
Lord Giiiies, — This objection came unex-
pectedly, and we gave our opinions imme-
diately after it was stated. It happens that
the opinion which I then delivered is that which
I have formed Sifter all I have since heard of
the case. The opinion I gave was, that the
fiist indictment was not abandoned by the
service of the second. I understood the plea
stated on the part of the public prdsecutor to
be, that by serving a second indictment the
first vras abandoned, and that there was there-
fire no occasion for deserting the diet. I think
this doctrine erroneous. I think the first in-
dictment did not fall by the execution of the
second ; and the consequence is, that as there
are two indictments subsisting against the panel
at the same time, one of them must be dis-
posed of before the other is proceeded in. The
service of the second indictment does not ap-
pear to me to be null, but the prisoner must be
entitled to such delay as your lordships may
think reasonable, to prepare for his trial upon
it.
I conceive it to be certain that the Court
would think it a piece of great injustice, if the
public prosecutor, after serving a second indict-
ment, sbonld insist on proceeding with the first ;
but I know no principle or practice which en-
titles me to say he cannot do this. But whether
he would be entitled to go on with the first or
not, the prisoner may be entitled to insist that
he should go on with it. What is the answer
made to this? A broad assertion that the
pablic proseciifbr has entirely the control over
his own instance, — that he may abandon it
whenever be pleases, — and that we cannot in-
sist that it shall be prolonged a single moment
after he pleases. He has certainly a control
over his instance, — he may pass from his first
indictment, — but what is the consequence?
The Court pronounces an interlocutor deserting
the diet, and in such terms as they think proper.
If he passes firom it for no reason, or for bad
reasons, your lordships may desert the diet
un^pUciUTn You have the same power of
checking him as any private prosecutor.
The assertion, that ^ his majesty's advocate
possesses an uncontrolled power over his in-
stance in all stages of a criminal process,'' if it
is to be taken literally, is directly in opposition
to the doctrine laid down in the case of
Archibald in 1768 ; but if it merely means that
he possesses a power over his instance, subject
only to the control of the Court, then it means
nothing but what I have already said, that al-
tbough the public prosecutor may withdraw his
instance, yet the effect of his doins so is, that
tile Court is called upon to desert ue diet, but
in such terms as they think proper,— ^ro hoQ
et tempore^ with right to him to insist again ;
or if the prisoner ^ews that he acts impro-
perly, then your lordships can desert it sim-
plicUer.
I must say generally, that I am not in any
case for introducing novelty in points of prac-
tice, or doing any thing inconsistent wim es-
tablished law, by which a panel may be pre-
judiced, or which has a tendency to increase
the power of the public prosecutor. His poweit
in this country are far greater than in the neigh-
bouring kingdom — greater perhaps than in any
other country, I do not say that they am
greater than they ought to be. But as Uiey are
so great they should be watched by us. Viewing
the matter in this light, I think it proper to
state, that the prosecutor having raised a se-
cond indictment, the Court may, upoh his mo-
tion, desert the diet pro loco et tempore. It
remains for the prisoner to shew, if he can,
that the second indictment has been raised and
the first abandoned for unjustifiable purposes ;
and if he can make out this, your loniships will
desert the diet umpliaier,
I state these matters with reference to general
principle, and not to any tiling which has oo»
currea. For there is no plea here of actual
hardship, and the panel cannot be exposed
to any injury whatever from what has taken
place.
The only point upon which I gav^ no positive
opinion formerly is now one of the pleas of the^
panel, that the service of the second indictment
IS null in consequence of the first indictment
not having been deseited. I said formerly I
did not think so, and I remain of that opinion.
That opinion is formed upon considering the
precedents mentioned in the additional mi-,
nutes.
With reference to the practice, I need add
nothing to what has been said. As to the case
of Somerville, we are informed that the diffi-
culty was started ; and what was the conse-
quence ? The objection on being argued was
overruled. In that case, after an indictment
had been raised, executed and pleaded to, the
Court, without deserting, proceeded to the trial
on the second. I had the honour to sit as a
judge upon that trial, and I think we were
wrong. I think it was the duty of the Court
to have disposed of the first indictment by in-
terlocutor oefore proceeding to trial on the-
second ; and, in not doing so, our proceedings
appear to me to have been erroneous. The
proceeding in the case of Hamilton, in which
Duncan Forbes " consents to the deserting of
the diet without prejudice to him to insist in
the new indictment,** appears to be more correct
than that in Somerville's case. '^ The lord
justice clerk, &c. in respect of the above con-
sent, desert the diet upon this indictment,
witliout prejudice to the pursuer to insist upon
the new indictment as accords.*' That is the
principle upon which I proceed^ and that is the
precedent whiich ought to be followed. For I
cannot subscribe to the doctrine, that a libel,
1M9] 57 CllBORGB UL
diiMA ill' sn^y citetitnMkixces' iti ^di tcfruft ai
^M Md- addhroeate chooses to dietatISi
All-UiM refmaHis Us the qoesihm/'vvftkt'del^ir
shall be given to the prisoner ? At present 1
|M ttbt^nSbii on tihat!;
JkM PiMfl^-^I faaV^ nb reason tbtfaint;
«M«^ fiom th^ aniietf dbplayed by th6
jirtKmefer-coimscft in aiguing th^ point, that
Iftife cpi^stion* rt isftn^ is of anr importance t6
tb^pAltem^i but it is of importance to the la"*^
iM to tb« 'pnoctice of this Contt ; and I trust,
thity aft^r having heard and^read so miich on
tfi6 subject, we shall be able to pronounce an
itfttitocutor which' will' set this matter on a
|MMr fdoting^ in tiriie to come:
Tne atgumeeft so abty stated by Mr. Crans-
CMI is iMTW reduced int6 writings and stands
ufMn'thb record 'of the' Court ; smd it appears
16 vie. that in the radical point there is a ma-
tiriitliefMt on that "side of the bar. It is said
m Ae ininute for Ihe prisoner, that it is Incdm-
Kti6nt<t6 serve ofUiglibet'wfiile another, by
ving been pleaded to, is stiS current agdnst
•rpaneh Thn is the first und iadical question.
Wte utast first 'consider whether a second libeV
Cttkf fi^ served while a former is ii) dependence,
9Bad alleir this panel has pleaded guilty or not
grilty to fit. Now, upon this poit^t I maintain'
at there is no auUiority in the text-books, or
itt the'plrecedetifs of this Court, for the propo-
8itf6n'Udvaficed by Mr. Cranstoun.
A^diiltitlldtioii has iiid^ed been tdken between
di^cAseof aprisitynet'lulvxng pleaded to. the'
fifst'iildictmeut^ and his not bavng as yet been
oHUM U)^ to-ple^ ; and4t is* true that many '
of th^ decided cases which have been noticeo,
reftr only tb'the c^uie of the panel not having*
pleaded. T^e case of I^wson in 1785 — of
Bttms' aita'Veitch in it^— of Betiy and
Bbb^rtMi^'aiid CaUendar in 1793^-of iScott in
1794^-^ Lindsay Crawfurd and Bradley in
18ft ; tlie older c^ues of Nfcolson in 1711, and
In|^lisin'l7!20,iWtBre all of thenr cases in which
tUejMUt^l had not pleaded to the indictment;
aUdj in such cases-, it is admitted by the priso-
ners^ cotkisel in the Argument which we have
htofd. that a se^onld indictment may be
•A*vea.'
Bttt'ImUst-VentilTe to dt4te that there is in
pribcipleno room for the tltstinction between
the tase of- a prisoner having pleaded, and his
nbtlnlving plet^ded to th^ indictment, in so far
a^^oocehis the right of the public prosecutor -
Uf sertea eecond indictment upon him. If
tlkttf Was room for this distinction, the diet '
eiMildltever1>e deltert^ after the ))riAoner had
pleads to theindictm^tit, and' an tnteiiotutor
onr the rele vancnr had 1)een pronoubced ;' — the
prtMiler wdoM haVe a jur qudaxtmn in the pro-
ceeding8--^he Would be Entitled to say that the
CduH bas no ^wet to desert the diet. This
pdhit 'Was most aUy -argued in ' the case of '
AjChibfldd; in iTdV whibh is reported in
Irlitoirin^ 'caM; Th^rie wai mucH learning
4ii^^ititMiargQtt(eaft; aiid ^i&irepon of
TrM qfWUUtM Sctgaf
C3I68
tUcf cstke has ali^isted me iii forming my opinion
oil the question now before us. it was con-
tended in the case of Archibald, that the panel
having pleaded to thie indictment, and an in*
terlo^utof of relevancy having been pronounced,
the diet could not be deserted. But, in the
face of this plea, it was found by the Court
that the public prosecutor had a right to c^
upon the Court to desert the diet, and they did
desert aticordinglv.
llie truth is, tii^t it is incorrect to speak of
joining issue or' of litiscontestation in criminal
matters ; the reason is, that there is no room
for' the contract upo£ wbich, in civil causes,
litiscontestation proceeds. The diel may be
deserted at any stage of the procedure until the
assise is 9et, "We have now^'' (says Mr. Hume,
wben treating of this subject, vol.' ii. p. 86.)
" advanced to that period of a criminal process,
when it assumes a new shape, and is in several
respects lAaterially alteredjin its nature by the
naming and swearing, or, as we call it, tetting
of the a^ize of fifteen persons, who are to pass
on the trial of the prisokier. In particular, thai
step is attended with this change in the con-
dition of the process,' that, the prosecutor no
longer has it m his power for any reason to
obtain a desertion of the diet, but must let his
interest take its fkte with the libel. Until then,
and even afte^ interlocutor of relevancy, the
prosecutor, on good cause shewn for it, may
still be allowed to desert the instance pro loco
et tempore^ and save his right of insisting anew,
at a more convenient time and on another. in*
dictment," &c.
Accordingly, webave a number of authorities
for the proposition that the public prosecutor
may, before the assize is set, desert the diet,
and serve a second indictment on the panel.
We have thewbote cases of Hamilton in 1714,
of Femie in 1720; the case of Mendham iu
1804, of Somerville in 1813; of .Horn in 1813*
and of Bell and Douglas in 1817. There are
these six cases at different periods in the
practice of this Coort, in whi<:h a second
indictment has been served before the first was
disposed of. It has been suggested, that
the Court proceeded incautiously in allow-
ing the second trial to proceed before the first
indictment was disposed of. I shall speak to
that point afterwards. At present I am con-
sidering whether the second indictment was
regularly served ; and the cases now referred
to are invincible authorities to show that a se-
cond indictment may be served while a first is
undisposed of. If this were a nullity and in-
competent, is it possible to suppose that the
poutt would haVe allowed the trial on the se-
cond indictment to proceed? The cases now
menfioned leave my mind without a shadow of
doubt, that a second indjctmetit for the same
crime may be seHed while a former one is not
disposed' of and hsl^ been pleaded to.
There was an attempt made to raise an ar-
gument against this proposition, on the circum-
stance that the diet cannot be deserted without
tbe leave of thti C6un i and it was said the
3001
cfiiwd wnff Jervsed, he m» qiiil of ^e .^»
second indictmeiit oqght jDOt to .b9 xenredy
pending the first, l)ecuse the indudd are p,yen
to enable the panel to prepai;e l^s defences^
and be cannot prepai;e himself when bj^ ijp un-
ceriidn which of two charges be is .to meet.
This, howeTer, is merely an equitable plea
against going to trial on the pai^icular day, and
is just one of those pleas wbusb must be left to
the discretion of the Cour^ A panel comes
forward, au<) states that be fs harassed by the
depending of two indictments, and theriefgre he
moTes the Court that the trial should be de-
layed. This do^ i^ot prore tliat the service of
the second indictment was l^guUr^ and a
midlity ; but it may be a good jea^on for grants
ing delay.
Here, tbeo, I bottom my opipioo. My fun-
damental proposition js, that a secopd indict-
ment may be served labile the first is not dis-
posed of, apd has been pleaded to.
The second link in the argument is, that if
the service of the indictment vas r^gult^r, then
the mthKut of fifteen days must run from the
date of thf^ service. The i^ucU cannot ran
from the abandonment or desertiou of the first
libel. There is no period known to me from
which the iwbuia can run but from th^ period
of service.
The second indictment, then, was^ regularly
aerved. and the Mudarun fibm that data.
In the next proposition a)l are a^r^ ed, yiz.
Oat no person can be made to answer upon
more than one indictn^ent ipr the s^e o0enc^.
Tbe question then comes to turn upop this
single pointy Whether ii is i^ecessan^ in ooint
of form for (he Cour^ to desj^rt the diet ot the
first indictment? or whether it ^all be held
as virtually abandoned hy tb^ mere service of
a second indictment ? This is th,e only ques-
tion before the Courtly Whether iippu a p^nel
coming here uTith twp indictn^ents, both regu-
larly served , is it necessary, in point of fprm^ to
desert the first by an interlocutor of Court ; or
whether is it aljready virtually ajbandone^ ^y
the sctr^ice qf thp secvn^ • V»Q i^hole qiieir
tkm ^ines to.tl^« and th^ opinbi^ t givi^ up^
it, after looKii)g to the precedeutSi im that it la
more regular, to desert formally when, the pond
dwresii»
I am aware that the doctrine of virtual
ab^n^QQxpout ha^ be^ acted upon in mai^y
cs^.' But In none of these cases was it exr
plipUy brought; nndej^ the notice of the court,
except in the o^se of SomfrvjUey apd in that
c^ qp objection to it wa9 taken by' the panet
It ibest tberefqre, appear to met that when it
is, serio^s^y p^ecf«4 % a prisoneiv aaia the;
pr^ipt^i^js, ^t a ^t indictment is hanging^
over tusbi^iiDl, if» should desire a mimit^, rrom
tlMprV^Vtb^ p^^siug fioii^th^ first indiptm^t,
aaJTilhavi^ p(^^9jajqce a(gii)€f lo^itpr deserting,
Ajt.t^f same tippteU iff l4«W tbs^ ^ Mpel
cm^ nojl^ svfij^r any ivjurj;, from the vfrfm^
aban^oi^^'e^; l>eca.use,tbp proseciitor,by exe*
cttting a second, means to abandon Uie first.
Tbe panel, too, knew, that the moment a se-
Knowinff thi^, he was.ftee ipofi^ a^ Pdrplapi^
arising ttom « double -plfwi* TttAvetoiw 4m
is a great deal of ^q^y m i^e dflct^li^ tkii
the first indicUnent'nuls]^ jiirs, by the serving
of asecond for iha saaie £iioi/9» ^44 1 iwtA
not be for altering this piFtatios ^ban 4|it.
pan/el makes no plyection. ^i when the -paiMA
comes and states tha^ tl^ere is a fint indleu
ment hanging over him, and dMias i^ ^lOiM
be given up. ti)e Court should deela^e k f|a«>
serted, and taen the pigiel should go t* ttfM
on the seeopd indictment. The rospik isi tfipl
the trial proceeds upon the veiy day to whWi
the wducta ran. On Moodajr last me hfA W9tf
thin| to do in this case but to declpjw thai ^
first indictm^t was at an end ; aad iho aacvo^*
being regular, and the imfueU bavnig nm, im
miglu have proceeded to the trial, wr wgh*
have given a delay if asked for, and igpon oaait.
shewn for the indulgencs.
Lord BestoJt.-r-The judges who Iw^wm^
before me have anticipated the gvounds or ai|r
opinion. I am not ashamed to C9ilflM 4lil I
have altered mj opiaion.. There aaa |v^ qtaa^
tions to be decid»d. One iM, wh^lhiF utt «!•>
entitled to take into consideration Iha lacosid
indictment till the first is express](y abiMloQra4»
And the second is whether the samea of tte.
second is to be ooasideced a serviea. at mM^ aft.
the first vfaa not expressly abaadooed. I ott»f
fes^ ihat on tbe last day. I was of opinio* ilM
both thfese points should be decided iq fiavoo^.
of the paneV— that the authority of A^CowMt
^aa necessai^ — and that the fonnar aernM^
befon^ authority was obiatned to th» ab^iwhwr
ing the first indictment w^ uot a mod OM.
But, uppn considering thesulMect furthefv I
think I was wrong, in p^ m tAl|t opiuPB^ l
think the prosecutos h^ np right to ppsp- fiMpik
his libel, to the affect U making m 4oiind«r« a.
n^yr one, without the authoritjy of tiia Copat
Aft^r a firijt iqdktmei^ ha^ baan pltadiidi tp^
tha authf^nty of t)i% Couj^ 4uHi)d htthtA fo^it8L
abandonm^tf
Th^. more! ifipo^^t qu^atioi^ MMaiae^
whetherthq. ^arnce o^ thf. a^Mpd*. diwwgv
the pendancy of the firat» is a nnUUy on n
good serace. I aia quite cUari. ifom the.
precedepu; wbioh nm bean s|at^ h(jp mjp-
brethrep, thai th^ pr^^ ser^aa ia % g^odi
service. The papers. cppuMl ha(va^ adaaitted^
th%t il the pan^l had iHMl^pi^adady this saffi— ».,
wasa^goodsemcew Now,. I cimh)o( aaawbai^'
differaoce can tie mi^ bjf hif- ptDiHNlMiiiP'
the w^s '* Ndt Guilty.'' If litisqoalsatMtiAiii
were to gq ip^<^ accouj^ itwpal^ b^.tbft jnai*
pgp^Uing 4lf the. jury wfaafh^WMa to.cqnstllPllP:
lU" Before, the jury. is. swons aA4> altar ikm
pai\^ has plea4o4 not, guitty, aU.objaotiPMi
are op^nt^ him, i^it niuei^y.pi?UmPtX7.obi.
jectiops. tQcitati99»&p«: h^-mai^ state Qhjao*.
tiom, to thf releiran^, of the libel* 0« tb«>
other hand, the pros^jcntor is, npti precloded:
from getting the diet deserted fro^looo^ePHitht-
pqre, any moir^thamiC D04)lfadu«h«A>lriM'
971T ^ GEORGE lU.
place. The legal induda mu^it ruo /rom the
aervice of the second iDdictment. But the
Omrt will never refuse any equitable delay
which may be asked by the panel.
LordJvrtieeClerk, — I concur in opinion with all
of your lordships, that when objections are taken
imd answered in the anxious manner adopted
in the present case, with regard to a matter of
form and practice in our procedure, we ought
to take every means of information, and decide
with deliberation ; and so far from regretting
the time which has been spent in this discus-
sion, I have to express my satisfaction, that
on the former occasion we adopted the course
which was followed of ordering a search into
the practice of the Court. But, now that we
have the result of that search before us, we
sire called upon to say, whether the public
prosecutor, having, during the dependence of
an indictment which has been pleaded to, and
upon the releyancy. of which Informations
. w«re ordered, executed a new indictment, is
entitled to proceed upon it against the panel.
I concur with my learned brother on my right
hand, that this is the fundamental and preli-
minary question, and that' upon it it is neces-
sary to form our opinions m deciding this
' case. But after the very clear and luminous
statement from the learned judge to whom I
allude, I should be guilty of undue encroach-
ment upon your lordships* time if I were to
enter into a detail of the grounds of my opi-
nion as to that preliminary objection. I shall
only say in one word, therefore, that upon a
careful consideration of tlie argument upon the
finciple and train of practice now before us,
have formed a clear, and will venture to say,
ui unalterable opinion, that there is nothing
in the law or practice of this Court to prevent
. a public prosecutor from serving a second in-
dictment during the dependence of a prior
one ; and that when the legal period of inducia
granted by custom to a panel has expired, the
prosecutor may proceed upon that indictment.
As to what he is to do upon the second, that
is a different question. But as to Uie power
of serving a second indictment in such circum-
stances, I do not entertain a shadow of doubt.
It seems completely conceded by the learned
counsel for the prisoner, that such has been
the practice, and a practice to which no objec-
tion can be stated, where a panel has not
pleaded to an indictment. It appears, how-
ever to me, that the moment that concession
is granted, there is nothing to hinder a second
indictment being served in all cases. For we
are brought to very narrow ground indeed, if
the whole objection be, that the first indict-
ment has been read and pleaded to ; as, after
the most careful attention to the distinction
t^en, I can find no authority whatever for it
in law. I am of the opinion already delivered
to your' lordships; that there is no foundation
for assimilating what is called litiscontestation
in this case, to what occurs in civil cases.
That point', as far as it could apply, was ar-
Trial of WilHam Edgar
[272
gued, and in reality decided against the panel,,
in the case of Archibald. Your lordships see,
from the report in Maclaurin, that the Court
had every thing before them that could be
urged as to litiscontestation precluding the de-
sertion of diet, and the service of another in-
dictment ; but the decision there went in fact
on the ground that there was no litiscontesta-
tion in the sense in which it occurs in civil
cases ; and, at all events, that it could only
take place where an indictment has been re-
mitted to the knowledge of an assize. If, there-
fore, the public prosecutor may raise a second
indictment, and proceed upon it at the end of
the mducMf it removes the only difficulty
which occurs in this case, and the only solid '
argument stated in support of the objection.
For I am clear that no prejudice could arise
to the panel by the procedure objected to.
There is one view of this subject to which I
beg your lordships' attention. Suppose the
iniicis of a new indictment raised in this case
had run to the 20th of May, the diet of the
former having been continued till the 19th, it
is perfectly clear, that if there had been no
meeting of Court on the latter day, the instance
on the former indictment would have been ex-
tinguished, and no proceeding could have taken
place upon it, ana nothing would have been
required to be entered upon your lordships^
record. On the 20th of May, however, his
majesty's advocate would be entitled to move
the Court to take up the indictment, the in-
ducig of which had run, and the diet must of
course have been called. Now, could it have
been said there was any thing of the na»
ture of litiscontestation, or that the panel had
a jitt gtuesUum which could have required the
interference of your lordships ? There is no
authority fbr requiring it to be shown that the
instance has been extinguished, and therefore
to that extent the public prosecutor must be
held to have abandoned his charge without
the necessit)^ of applying to your lordships.
Your lordships neither have nor would have
given the slightest impediment to that pro-
ceeding, but must have taken up the second
indictment, and have held that with regard to
the former indictment there was an end of the
case.
Bat it was said, where the diets happen to
fall on the same day the case is altered, and
your lordships are called upon to adopt a pro-
ceeding which the panel says may be favour-
able to him. If any ground were to be made
out for supposing that a panel could be re«
p^arded as standing in the situation Charteris
IS said to have been placed ya^ then your lord-
ships by your authority would afford a remedy
for any such hardship. If you saw the public
prosecutor (which I cannot suppose possible)
attemptinj^ to. harass a . panel by raising
against him a number of indictments in sue*
cession, and leaving him doubtful upon which
he was to be tried, — or take the supposition of
several new ones being raised after nis plead-
ing to the first, you would exe'rcise that power
2731
Jin AditMUXermg untaK/kl Oatht,
A. D. J8t7.
1274
irith ^hich you are entriisted for Che good of
the coantry, and afford immediatci relief. But
ify on the other hand, yoor lordships hold, as I
doy that after service of a second indictment,
both being regular, the {mblic prosecator has
thereby declared, that it is upon the second, and
that alone, he means to proceed, and is not
entitled afterwards to turn round and say he
"Will go back to the first, there is not only no
iojoiy which can arise to. the accused, but he
has a greater advantage than he oonld have
vpon the rule of law he now contends for, of
both indictments being held to subsist, and
tiMft your lordships should interfere to hare the
•desertion of the nrst recorded.
The case of Charteris, I think, has not been
looked to with so narrow an eye as is proper.
It appears from Mr. Hume, that Charteris liad
lour indictments served upon him, and that he
put in a printed petition stating the hardship
of hSs case, before he was brought into Court
for trial, praying for the authority of the Court
to »ll upon the lord advocate to declare
what was the course he meant to follow, and
upon which indictment he meant to allege the
coilt of the prisoner. The answer was made
by the public prosecutor as to the one upon
which he meant to rest, and it was after that
tbat the trial proceeded,* and the Court de-
clared the others abandoned. The diet of
jBone of them appeals to have arrived. But if
any such proceeding as this was to be attempt-
edy your lordships would reauire no statute, no
recourse to books, but only the dictates of
your own consciences to know what you should
do, as I have not a shadow of doubt in my
mind, that a public prosecutor is not entitled
to vacillate between his different charges,
but tbat the service of a second must preclude
him from going back to his first.
With regard to the practice, I am bound to
say with your lordshipis, that when it is looked
narrowly into, it does not appear to me to rest
upon so clear and indisputable a basis as that
it would be right for your lordships to adopt
it at once as the rule of the Court. It was a
fair observation, that in some cases a panel
might wish to wave this or oiher objections ;
and in the case of Somerville I see an obvious
ground upon which he wished to go to trial ;
as the second* indictment being cleared of the
objection stated to the first, he had. no object
to ask for fifteen days more. He had no pal*
pable or tangible interest in vieyi^, his witnesses
being present, and he might have suffered pre-
judice if delay had taken place. Mr. Clerk
said he would have moved for delay on ac-
count of the absence of four witnesses at the
first trial, but they were present at the last.
He mowedf however, for what wis a siv>jftan-
tiat interest; namely, the expenses of the first
indictment, but did not notice the prcjprietjp
of doing away with it on the record i and
there was an opinion c^ven, that the question
of expenses should be delayed till the issue of
.the second trial. I am clear, therefore, there
'was no interest in that case to insist upon the
VOL. XXXIII.
objection, which would have merely led to a
fortnight's delay. This same consideration
may apply to other cases, and it is better to
follow the straight forward course, without
eu tangling ourselves with former doubtful cases
not precisely in point.
Having formed a clear opinion^ that there is
no principle, authority, or dictum, to induce
us to think that tlie inducus had not run . from
the period of service, merely from the circum-
stance of the two diets having occurred on the
same day ; I am for following that course as
to which we have so clear an example in the
conduct of a lawyer of tlie first eminence, I
mean Mr. Duncan Forbes, who expressly con-
sented that the diet should be deserted with-
out prejudice to his right to insist on the new
indictment which he had raised. -
Although I have a clear opinion that the
(nducUs here run from the date of service, in
this and in every other case, if a person accus-
ed should state to the Court reasonable grounds
for delay, I would attend to them. I am now
only giving my opinion upon the law.
The Court then paoMouvcEo the fol-
lowing INTERLOCUTOa : —
** The Lord Justice Clerk and Lords-
Commissioners of Justicary having resum*
ed consideration of the objection stated in
bar of trial at last sederunt, with the an-
swer thereto, minutes of search as to the
practice in similar cases given in in
obedience to the order of Court, and
heard parties procurators further: Find
that the service of the second indictment
during the currency of the first indictment
was competent ; but in respect that his
majesty's advocate has judicially declared
that he has abandoned the Hrst indictment,
desert the diet of that indictment without
prejudice to the Prosecutor insisting
against the panel on the second indict-
ment as accords : Find that the service of
the second indictment upon the panel on
the third day of May current, being fifteen
free days before the day of compearance,
gave him the benefit of the . legal inducia
and • therefore repel the objection on that
plea, and ordain the panel to plead to the
second indictment."
(Signed) **D. Boyle,! P. D.'»
Lard Justice Clerk. — William £dgar, are yea
guilty or not guilty ?
William Edgar, — Not guilty.
Mr. C2^.— I hope you will permit me to
say, that ^o much of our time and attention
having beei/ already occupied, it would be
extremely hard upon us to proceed now to
argue the relevancy, upon which we have a
great ,many consid[erations to offer. I need
not suggest a particular time for your lordships,
I do iiot think it would be proper to . attempt
any encroachment upon your lordships. I think
you cannot go on with the trial before Monday
next.
T
57 GEORGE UI.
C751
*<The Lord Jiiitice Qerk and Lords
Commissioners of Justiciary contmufs
the diet against William £affar> panel*
till Monday next at ten o*clodk forenoon
in this place, and ordain paities, witnesses,
and assizers, and all cgncemed^ then to
attend> each under the pains of law, and
frMffAndrmM^Onl^
(876
the panel in the vi^ tiig^ te be tul^
from the ba^ l)%c|(> tp the C9>4e of ** *'
hurgh."
[See tbf lifgfX €99^]
700. Proceedings in the High Court of Justici^y »t Edinburgh,
on two successive Indictments, raised by hi3 Mso^ty'a
Advocate, against Andrew M*Kinley, for administer-
ing unlawful Oaths, June 9nd — July 19th : 57 Geo. IIL
A.D. 1817.*
COURT OF JUSTICIARY.
JuHE 2y 1817.
Rt Hon. DaM Boyle, Lord Justice Cleric.
Lord Hermand,
Lord GUUa.
Lord Pi(m%.
Lord RuUm,
Omnfeljarikfi Crtmm.
Rt Hon. Alexander Maamockk of Meadow-
banky His Majesty*s Advoeate f afterwards a
lord of Session and Justiciaiyy with the title
of Lord MeadowVank.J
James Wedderhum^ Esq. Solicitor-General.
If . flome DnawNonrf, Esq. Advooate-Depute.
Comtelfor the Pwnd.
John Clerk, Esq.
Geo. Cnautotm^ Esq.
Tho, T^kNRKm, Esq.
Frandt Jefrev, Esq.
J. P. Grants Esq.
J. A, Murray^ Esq.
Jomef Momrieff', Esq.
Hemy CoMum^ Esq.
Lurd A4voaUe. — Before your lordsbips call
this diet, I have to state to the Court, that, upon
the 90th of March last, the panel was served
with an indictment to stand trial upon the 5th
9i April. To that indictment he was never
caUea upon to plead, and a new libel was
afterwaras raised against him, the diet of which
weas continued on different oc^^ions.
The first of these indictments I have aban-
doned ; and though, according to my own un-
derstanding of the import of the precedents
xrhich have been laid before the Court in the
case of Edgar, f there is no occasion ibr enter-
ing this on therecord/yeti^have no objec-
tions to this being done, if it be desired.
i«M«*
* See the preceding case.
t.See the preceding casb.
Lord JutHce Clerh^Y<mr lordships wi)l just
make a simiUr order here to that m^e in t|e
case of Edgair.
The (bUowtng entry was thai naade
npon the record : —
** The Lord Justioe Clerfc and Loidi
Commissioners of Jnstieiary, in respect of
ndiat is above represented, desert the diet
of the first ittdictment against the said
Andrew M^Kinky, reserving to his M»>
jest's Advocate to insist upon the saooad
indictment, as accords."
loftf Juitice Cferfc.^Andrew M^Klnlejr,
attend to the indictment against you wluch »
now to be read.
''Andrew M'Kinley, present prisoner
in the Castle of Edinbnrgh, yon are
indicted and accused, at the instance of
Alexander Maconochie of Meadowbank his
imesty*s advocate, for his miyesty's in-
. terest : That albeit, by an act passed in
the flfty-eecond year of his present ma-
jesty's reign, intituled, 'An act to render
more effectual an act passed in the
thirty-seventh year of his present majesty,
for preventing the administering or takiiy
unlawful oaths,' it is inter oIm enacted,
''That every person who shall, in any man-
ner or form whatsoever, administer, or
GSEUse to be administered, or be aiding or
assisting at the administering of an oath
or engagement, purporting or intoiding
to bind the person taking the saqie to
commit any treason or murder, or any
felony punishable by law with deatl^
shall, on conviction thereof by due course
of law, be adjudged guilty of felony, and
suffer death as a felon, withoot benefit of
clergy. And further, by section fonrth
of the said act, it is enacted, 'Tha)i persona
aiding and assisting at the administering of
any such oath or engagement, as aiforesaid,
or persons causing any such oath or evir
gagement to be admitilstered, though not
S resent at the adminiitering UiereoC MfjL
e deemed principal offmdto, and shall
«7TJ
fat Admhuimkg mUantfii Oathi.
A. D. 1817.
[aro
be tited Itttbch; ijo^, on oonviiSfioB there-
of hj due ctmrM of bw, sMt be adjudged
gailfJrtfffetony.aAd sball suffer death as
nrioos^ wii^otii btfoefit of deifr ; altlioagb
Ui# penond or person who actually admi-
nitteted snch oath or engagement, if any
sueh there shall be, shall not have been
triftd Of convicted." And further, by
AUkm afatth of the said act, it is enacted,
''That any engagement or obligation
^atsoever, in the nature of an oath,
prnpordng or intending to bind the per-
aoD tsA(iog the same to commit any
Unnaon or murder, or any fblony punish-
able by Unr with death, shall be ^med
an oath wilhia the intent and meaning of
thin acc^ in wbaterev fdrm or manner
the name shall be administered or taken^
and whether tie same shall be actually
administered by any person or per-
sons to any other person or persons, or
tsften by any other person or persons,
witbovt any adniiuistratlon thereof hj
any other person or penkms:" Yti trite tt
y/wd rf veriijfg that yon the said Andrew
mUalay are guilty of the said crimes,
^cr of one or more of thtth, abtof, ot art
Iftd pari : In so pae as l^f the said
Aniitw M'Kinley did, at sacret meetings,
and on other occasions^ at Gla9g6W, and
in ttw Tidni^ thereof in the course of
Ike momlis of November and December,
1816y mtid January and Pebtuaiy, 1817,
wkkedly, maliciously, and traitorously ad-
ttiilister, or cause to be administers, or
did aid or assiit at the administering, to a
peac mmiber of pet«ons> to the amount
of anwiftii' hmfdt«chl^ an daCh or engage-
or asi o^igatibn in the nature c^ an
r, binding, or purporting of intending
bJM, the persons taking the same to
it ttfeaMofty whieh oath, engagement,
or oblikatiofi, wa# in the flowing tetms,
or to ue following purport : — ** in awful
pieseoce of God, I^ A B^ do voluntarily
swear, that I will persevere in my en-
deavonring to form a brotherhood of
affection amongst Britons of every de-
•emtiom, who are' considered worthy of
oonftdence ; and that I will pelsevere in
niy endnavoms to obtalft Ibr all tfav peo^
pla in GMaft> Britain and Ireland^ not dis-
mmliflwl bjr citmes or ineanvty; tbede6>
live franchao^ at th^ age of twenty-one.
wf dr frew- nnd^ •e^fiad rspiesentalion^ and
annual parliaments ; and that I will sup-
port ifan sane to the utmost of my p6Wer,
eilfaer by moial or physical strength, as
^t» one BM^r^niret And I- do unrther
swear, that neither hopes, fears^ rewards,
or pnniriMDonts^ shall indnoe me to^ in^
aMU' on^ Of ' giw- evidenoa'' s^gatns^" anjp
member or neabers, colleotivdy or indi-
vtiadl^, §af any act or eapteision. done
m'Wtmf m ^er o«t^ in this' or simtiar so*
eiaiidis; ^Buim dv punishuiettt of deaths
to be iniicted^oviiNrby anymenberor
members of such sodeties. Slo help me
God, and keep me stedfast:" — ^Wbich
oath, or engagement, or obiication, to the
fcv^gning puroort, did bind, or did pnr-
piprt or intend to bind, the persons taaing
the same to commit treason, by effecting,
by pb^ical force, the subversion of the
estfliblisbed government, laws, and consti-
tution of this kingdom, and especially by
obtaining annual partiaments and univer-
sal suffrage by unlawful and violent means.
Aim, MoaE PAHTiGULABLT, (1 .) at a se-
cret meetins held at the hoase of Hugh
Dickson, then weaver in Abercromby
sti^eet, or CaHon of Glasgow, or elsewhere
at Glasgow, or in the immediate vicinity
thereof, you the said Andrew M'KJnley
did, upon die SOth di^ of December,
18t6, or upon one or other cf die days of
tlAt month, or of November immediately
nreceding, or of January imuMdiately
following, wickedly, maliciously, and trai-
torously administer, or Cadsif to ha admi-
nistered, or did aid or assist at the admi-
nistering an oalh, or engagemenfti of ob-
ligation, in the teims abo^ set AMi, or
to the same purport, to Petek* Oibton.
John M^Lanehlane, John Cam||ieU, and
Hugh Dickson, all present prisoners in
the Castle of Editfbnrgfa, or to one or
other of them, and to other persons,
whoee names are to the prosecutor un-
known, the said oath, or eng^^ement, or
obligation, to the said purport, binding
the persons taking the lame to commit
treason, as said is. Awn, FuaTRsa, (2.)
yon the said Andrew M^Kinley did^ Upon
the 1st day of Januarv, 1817, or on 'one
or other or the dajrs of that month, or of
November ov^DccemberinMiediaiely pre-
ceding, at a seeret meotingvMd in the
house of Williamr Leggat, <4umga4ceiper.
King street, Tradestown, in the* vicinity
of Glasgow, or elsewhere at Glasgow, or
in the vicinity thereof, wickedly,' ma-
licio^y, and traitorously admimMr^ or
oanle to be administerea,' or did aid or
assist at the administering^ an- oath or
engagement, or obligation, in the^ tdrms
above set ftnth, or to the same purport,
to the said Peter Gibeon^ John M'LaUch-
lane, John Campbell, and Hugh Dick-
son ; as also, to James* M*£wan^ n&m or
lately carding-master at* Humphrie's 'Mill,
Gorbals of Glasgow, and M'Dowall Bate,
or Peat, now or totely weaver ih Piccadilly
street, Anderstoa, in the vicinity of Glas-
gow, who, conscious of their guHt inr the
premises, have al»ooaded and fled from
justice; as also^ to John Conneltoh^ or
Congleton, now or lately cotton^inner
in Calton of Gtesgow, or to one or other
of them, and to other persons^ whose
nataes are to the prosecutor unknown, the
said oath, or engagement, or obligation,
to the said purport, binding the persons
taking the inme to commit tieasoni-as' ' '
a793
57 GEOROE III.
2'rial qfjijidrew M^KiviUy
[28a
ii. - And, fuathek, (3.) you. the said
Andrew M^Kialey did, upon the 4th day
of January y 1817, or on one or other of
the days of that month, or of November
or December immediately preceding, at a
secret meeting, held in the house of Neill
Munn, innkeeper and stabler, in Ingram
street, Glasgow, or elsewhere at Glasgow,
or in the vicinity thereof, wickedly, mali-
ciously^ and traitorously administer, or
cause to ,be administered, or did aid or
assist at the administering, an oath, or
engagement, or obligation, in the terms
above set forth, or to the same purport,
to the said Peter Gibson, John M'Lauch-
lane, John Campbell, Hugh Dickson,
M*Dowall Pate, or Peat, and James
M'Ewan ; as also, to James Hood and \
John Keith, both present prisoners in the '
Castle of Edinburgh, Andrew Soraerville, I
John Buchanan, and James Robertson, I
all now or lately prisoners in the tol- ;
booth of Glasgow, or to one or other of
them, and to other persons whose names
are to the prosecutor unknown, the said
oath, or engagement, or obligation, to the
said purport, bii^ding the persons so
taking the same to commit treason, as
said IS. And, fubtheii, you the said
Andrew M'Kinley did, upon the 5th day
of February, 1817, or on one or other of
the days of that month, or of January im-
mediately preceding, at a secret meeting,
held at the house of John Robertson,
innkeeper apd stabler ia Gallowgate of
Glasgow, or elsewhere at Glasgow, or in '•
the immediate vicinity thereof, wickedly, •
maliciously, and traitorously administer, |
or cause to be administered, or did aid ,
or asnst at the administering, an oath, or !
eagagementy or obligation, in the terms '
above set forth, or to the same purport, to '
the said James Hood, James Robertson, <
Andrew Sommerville, and John Buchanan,
as also to James Finlayson, present pri-
soDer in the Castle of Edinburgh, or to
one or other of tbem, and to other persons,
whose names are to the prosecutor un-
known, . the said oath, or engagement, or
obligation, to the same purport, binding
<he persons taking the same to commit
treason, as said is. ' And you the said
Andrew M'Kinley having been present
at a secret meeting, held for the purpose
of administering, or causing to be aa mi-
nistered, the said oath or engagement, or
other purposes to the prosecutor unknown,
at the house of Alexander Hunter, change-
keeper in the Old Wynd of.Glasgow, on
the 22nd day of February, .1817, and
having been there apprehended, conscious
of your guilt in the premises, did assume
the ialsename of John Brotherstone; and
httving been taken before Robert Hamil-
ton, Esquire, Sheriff-depute of Lanark*
shire, you did, in bis presence at Glas-
gow, oo the 28th day of February, 1817,
and on the 11th day of Maicb^ 1817,
emit and subscribe two several declara^
tions; and having been taken before
Daniel Hamilton, Esquire, one of the
Sheriffs^ubstitute of Lanarkshire, you
did, in his presence, at Glasgow, on the
4th day of March, 1817, emit and sub-
scribe a declaration ; and having been
taken before Hu^h Kerr, Esquire, one of
the Sherifis-substitute of Lanarkshire, you
did, in his presence, at Glasgow, on the
5th day of March, 1817, emit and sub-
scribe a declaration; and having been
taken before James Wilson, Esquire,
Sheriffs-substitute of the county of Edin-
burgh, you did, in his presence, at Edin-
burgh, on the 18th day of March, 1817,
emit and subscribe a declaration; — all
which declarations, being to be used in evi-
dence against you at your trial, will for that
Surpose, be lodged in due time in the
ands of the Clerk* of the High Court of
Justiciary, before which you are to be
tried, that you may have an opportunity
of seeinff the same. At least, times and
plapes K>resaid, the said oath or engage*
ment, or an oath or engagement to the
same purport, binding, or purporting to
bind, the person taking the same to com-
mit treason, as said is, was wickedly, ma^
liciously, and traitorously administered,
or caused to be administered, and some
person or persons did aid or assist at the
administenng thereof; and you the said
Andrew M'Kinley are guilty thereof,
actor, or art and part. AU whi<^ or
part thereof, being found proven by the
verdict of an assise, before the Loid Jus-
tice Genera], the Lord Justice Qerk, and
Lords Commissioners, of Justiciary, yon
the said Andrew M^Kinley ought to be
punished with the JMuos of law, to deter
others from cpmroitting the like crimes in
all time coming.
<<H. Home Drvmmokd, A. D."
LIST OF WITNESSES. *
1. Robert HamUton^ Esquire, sheriff-depute
of Lanarkshire*
2. Daniel Hamilton^ Esquire, one of the
sheriffs-substitute of Lajiarkshire.
3. Hugh Kerr, Esquire, one of the sberiffii-
substitute of Lanarkshire.
4. Jamei THomptonf clerk to John Drysdale,
sheriff-clerk of Lanarkshire.
5. .Matthew Btarm^ clerk to Geoiige Salmond,
procurator-fiscal of Lanarkshire.
6. Jvhn Letlky clerk to the said John Drya-
dale.
7* Joteph Body writen in Glasgow.
. 8. Qeargjt Salmondj procurator-fiscal of La-
narkshire.
9. Jamei WiUon^ Esquire, one of the sberiffiH
substitute 6f the county of Ediobnigb.
10. Archibald Scottf procurator-fiscal of tbe
county of Edinburgh.
Sfil]
>-
Oatht.
A. D. IJB17.
^99
OirrtB^ writer^ Sheriff-clerk's office,
Edmbofffh.
13. .AfeMDHier CaUpr, sheriffofficer in Glas*
gow.
13. Aluawler Hmter^ dnnge-keeper, Old
Wynd of Glasgow.
14. Mmiom I^Laren^ or iii^Laddan^ now or
lately serfant to the said Alexander
Hunter.
15. Ji^M Rohertton^ inn-keeper and stabler,GaU
lowgate Glasgow.
16. Ag'it$ Cam^Mly wife of Thomas Dow,
steam-boiler maker and smith at Gird-
wood and Company's found yy in Hu^cfa-
esontown, in the ?lcinity of Glasgow.
IT. Jimet MaUtmlf now or lately sertant to
Neill Munn, innkeeper and stabler in
Jngram-streety Glasgow.
18. AUton Wikon^ now or lately servant to the
said Neill Munn.
10. Matthew Fsfe, spirit-dealer in Wilson-
stieet, Glasgow.
20. Jem IBcjfd, wiie of the said Matthew Fyfe.
31, WiUiam jLc^jgof, change-keeper, in King-
street, comer of Centre-street, Trades*
ton, in the .vicinity of Glasgow.
S2. John MiteheUy weaver, residing in Wilkie*s
Land, Charles-street, Calton of Glasgow.
23. AwA Dichonf present prisoner in the
Castle of Edinburgh.
24. F^gter Qibwn^ present prisoner there.
25. John AVIjacklime, present prisoner there.
26. WUUam Sm^mnif present prisoner there.
27. John CamfMl^ present prisoner there.
28. Jmma Bioodf present prisoner there.
H. HoM£ Drvmmokd, a. D.
LIST OF ASSIZE.
ComUif nf Edmburgh,
Dmid Grmf of Snipe.
Jolm Thammm of Bumhonse.
Oturgi J^rty^ grocer in Dalkeith.
J^ictaiW Mmchti^ merchant there.
JflMS Mmit€r, farmer, Longside.
Jmmt VUiUe^ farmer, Easter Cowden.
DaM T/kwiatm, farmer^ Wester Cowden.
County of Haddington.
John Andanon of Whitheugh.
Tkoma$ Mitchell of Westburn Mains.
Charie$ Crawford^ farmer. East Fortune.
Mark TwmbuU, fanner. Upper Bolton.
Jmmee WUeon^ farmer, Bolton.
Qnmty of Lmlithgow,
WUUam Wiihe of Magdalens.
WiUiam ShUUngjUno of Boghead.
Andrew MUcheUy farmer at Kinneil Kene.
John ftats^ farmer at Borrowstown.
John Thornton^ farmer at Inveravon.
CUy of Edknbargh.
Bkhard Johmton^ banker in Edinburgh.
Jame$ M^Kenzie^ goldsmith there.
Behert Gfrean, watchmaker there.
JloUrt jS<^i<(pr,4ye^utter there.
William NeilioHi painter there.
I Jomsf Ynle^ baker there.
Andreio Grtenon, tailor there.
Patrick Mainy painter there.
John Laudery merchant there.
Samuel HopperUmy grocer there.
John Brcwriy merchant there.
Robert Mitchell^ merchant there.
William Lodchart, tinsmith there.
John Sinclair^ seed-merchant there.
William Scott, pewterer there.
Alexander Johntton^ ironmonger there.
George Gray, baker there.
ThomoM Edmonttoney ironmonger there.
WUUam Mttrray, baker there«
John Smith, spirit-dealer there.
Thomas Hunter, merchant there.
ToumqfLeith.
John Sharp, wine-merchant in Leith.
Archibald ipDowaU, merchant there.
Jamei Ojfihie, wine-merchant there.
Robert Strachan, merchant there.
I Robert Sandermm, cooper there,
i Robert Brunton, mercnant there.
John Colder, grocer there.
D. BOTLB.
An. GiLLiss. '
_ ' • «
Gbo. FBEOtJSMiir^
Lord Juitice Clerk. -- Andrew M'Kinlef,;
What do you say to this indictment ? Are yotf
guilty or not guilty.
Andrew 3iPKinley. — Not guilty.
Lord Justice Clerk. — Have counsel any ob-
jections to state to the relevancy of this indict-'
meot ?
Mr CrMSloim. — ^My lords, it will be in the
recollection of vour lordships, that a person of
the name of William Edgar* ^am lately in»*
dieted at your bar, upon a charge pf having ad-
ministered oaths binding the takers lo« commit
treason, against the statute of the 52^ of. the
king. He pleaded not guilty, and various ob-
jections were stated to the relevancy of ^he
indictment. Your lordships heard a debate
upon the subject, and you appointed informal
tions to be given in. But the public prosecutor
deserted the diet of that indictment, and served
him with a new one.
The prisoner, Andrew M*Kinley,now at your
bar,^ had been indicted in terms precisely the
same vrith Edgar. That indictment has also
been withdrawn, and a new one served, which
you have now before you.
Your lordships will recollect, that among the
objections stated to the relevancy of Edgar*s
indictment, it was pleaded, that it involved a
charge of treason, and therefore was not cog-
nizable in this form ;-^first, became the .charge
of treason was not'Uud.in the major proposition
•f the indi<;tment ; and,v again, because your
lordships, proceeding according to the Spotnh
form of trial> could not try that offence- without
the intervention of a grand juiy, and without
1
* Sea the preof^ding case.
J
t8»j
17
III.
tntd ^Andrim M*iaU^.
Dm*
aUowing the priMoer a pmlnplorjr diidll»Ei|^
of the arrayyand odl«r privileges cempe^etit by
the law of England to persons vwler trial ft>r
hidb treason.
The indictment iR^idh your lordships have
just heard read is tfi terms somewhat different
from that in Edgar's case which has been with-
drawn ; and, it is for your lordships now to
consider, whether there are any objections that
can be competently stated to the relevancy of
the present indictment ; or rather, I should say,
whether any one objection that could be com-
petently Ststed to the lest indictment, may not
also be stated here.
Before I proceed to tftate what I conceive fo
be various objections to the relevancy of this
indictment, I must take the liberty to make
one preliminary observation. It is this — ^tbat,
in all criminal cases, where there is room for
construction, every thing must be strictly inter-
preted in fkvour of the acciisedi and against
the prosecutor. I cannot make this observation
without at once con^manding the assent of every
body, for this has always been recognised as a
sacred principle of law; but if we look at many
trials at fcnner periods, both in our own and
in the neighbouriag country, we shall find, that
viMte tids maxim was admitted in words, it was
denied in substaii<;et and fiiuered away by dis-
^nctioBs and refinements that rendered it ni>-
gatory, and at other times while admitted in
Ukeory in its full extent, it was overiooked and
forgotten in practice. It resembles those
truths, in morels, which we repeat till they
ceaae to have any influence on our conduct.
Ibe uncertainty of human life, for instance, is
always in our mouths, and we act as if we had
a grant of K!b for a century. Thus there are
maxims in law which become so fomiliar, that
they, lose all their effect
Permit me, therefore, not onlv to recal the
maxim to your recoUeotion, but forgive me, if,
in a few words, I enforce it. Because it ap-
pears trivial, therefore I wish to insist upon it.
The foundation of this maxim is obvious.
X^en in the dispensation of commutative jus-
tice, where there is a conflict between the patri-
monial interests of individuals, you know, that,
in commoil law, some cases receive a libeml,
and others a strict interpretation. In some
cases you control the words of a writing by
equity ; and in others you take it according to
flk^ strict' letter, though contra^ to the pre-
sumed intention of parties. Why are these
different rules of mterpretation adopted?
Merely because one plea is fovourable and
another the reverse ; because one, for example,
hifors an inconvenient restriction on commerce,
or the use of property, or one party is Imra
eapianeb^ while the other is^tn min» vUumtb:
On such slight grounds, 3F0tt hotd'youvsclve*
entitled' to apply the one mode of eonstrudiotf
or tiie other.
If that be the eaee in civil matters, muoh moie
must it be in those uibntalv whope jostloe^is
called upon not to wield the balance but the
swofd. Tiieiv, there' is^^ w> cottflict or oppo"
sitlott between the inlMit oi iltt pM«Ees U
the bar. If it is for the advantage of the
prhwaer that there should be a striet fcrterpi^*.
tationin all cases, it is ten times mora for the
itaterest of the puUic proeieutor, ev valier of
the community which he ftpresemts. The ob-
ject of punishment is losi^t becomes ^hl;^
pemielous if inflicted when a mend poasibility
of innocence remains, either because the charge
is ambiguously expressed, or Ae efvideine hi
support of it is inconclusive. It is a sacred
rale, that every one avenue shoidd be left opitf
to which innocence may have oceasien to re-
sort, thoujrti by it guilt may bu enabled to
escape. &emmdmii0ti9hi§jufttAioketefttam
per tii^urmn comiemmare ett imieim ; mmmUU
error, m kocjbcmm.
Accordingly, from the first dawn of juris-
prudence, it will be found in every eriBsinal
code. It forms part of the 15>5ih lam of the
title de EeguHi JuriM. Inpoentdihm imm &e^
nignka mterpreUmdum — a treatise Whidi, I will
venture to say, is the greaeest body oil oott^
eentrated wisdom on the sal^edt of jarispm*
denee to be found in any uninspisei work.
This role extends to the l»w or statute on
which an accusatioa is laid—- to the iodietueiit
on which the triid proceed»*-to the evidence
led against the prisoaer-^lO' the veedict rt^
turned— and, above all, if tbo corpaf ddkH
consists in the u^ring of words, it extends to
the construction of those words.
This principle of constnictiotft has been ao-
Icnowleoged ^;ain and agaiuby tbelegiriaturei
more particulariv in the law of treason, whid^
you are now called upon to administer; or, at
least, which bears directljr upon the indict^
ment, the relevancy of wmcb you are now to
try. You know mere was an act passed in
England in the reign of EttabeUi against
clipping or defacing Uie coin. It is the 5th ol
Elizabeth, cap. 11, which prohibita die opo*
rations of clipping, 4vashm^, rounding^ or
filing. But that sutute was found not to.
apply to any other mode of lessening the valnn.
of the coin, though precisely the same ii|
effect; and, acco^in^y, the statute of the
18th of Elizabeth, cap. 1, waa made against
impairing, diminishing, fal8iiVin|, scaling^
ano lightening, and it was made on this re^
markable preamble .w<» Because the said law,'*
(5th Elisabeth) *^^ing penal, ought to bo-
taken and expounded strictly according: to Uio
words thereof and the like offences, not by
an^ equity to receive the like punishment or
pains.'' Here then is a declaration of the
legislature itself, in a statute relative to high
treasQtt^ enplaaiing the manner in iddth soeh^
statutes oughe to be^ construed.
I mav likewise call your attention to wMe^
the author, fros^whom I.have borrowed this
remark, has said upon the construction of
penal 8lMMcs« Sir Wiffllam Blnchstanoobl
serves, ^ Penal stamtes- senst to conslined-
strictly. Thus the statute^ 1^ £di«sad> VE e^
13. having enacted tfan* tbosu "^Ato- k» oofr>
victed of stealing ibr«is*'8lit(iUl^n9r bnee^tiia
f»T AiftKMtUfing unhnefiil Ooiht.
28|Sl
benefit of clergy, tl^e jttdfes conceived that
Ihia did not extend to him that diould ^eai bnt
one kone, and the.rMof ft piocttred a new act
fipjr thai parpofl# in tfce following yeac. And,
to come nearer onr own times, by tbe statale
14 Geo. II. c. 6., stealing sheep, or other caUie,
was m«de felony vriilioQt benefit of clergy.
Bat theso general words, " or other caule,"
heii^ looked npon as much too loose to create
^ capital offence, the act was held to extend
to nothing bnt mere sheep. And, therefore,
in the next sessions, it was found necessary to
O^ake another statute 15 Geo. 11. c. 84., ex-
tending the former to halls, cows, oxen, steers,
buUocks, heifers, calves, and lambs, by nane/^
Thos, yonr lordships will observe, that even
idpeie words wMBeiently impropriate in th^r
oidiiiaiy sense were e^^>loyed, yet if it was
poMible to take the offender out of the opersr
tm of the sftataHi by any com^rnction however
rigorous, that construction, though not con*
spstent with the probable, I may say the mani-
C^t intention of the legislature, vfu allowed.
(cannot five a more striking instance of the
application of the rule which I am endeaTOur-
ng to enforce^ than, this which is borrowed
from tl^ law of England. I shall afterwards
caU yoor attention to some detecminations in
OBI own law to the same eflSset.
In the present inMnce it if obvious, that
the application of the principle of strict con*
atniction is imperatively reqwed« JFrs/, be-
cm« this is a p^oal case ; Searndfy^ because
It is a case where the highest penalty of the
lav may be inflicted; TMfy, becmie the
«vime charged consists in th« use of words,
npm the constmctioa of which the prisoner's
fittedepends; an4, i4^%, heeauie thoM words
are staled to have been used not by a peiaoti
veil educated, and critically acijuainted with
IsogoagSb but by one who is m the kmest
mtmt^m of lifie, anc| who must be nres«med
to oe totally ignorant of the force ana delkacy
jQf tenni.
Having n^e these obeervalionii, let m<) caU
jfour attcp^on to the m^or pioposition of thiy
ipdictn^en^ It set« forth, that, ''by an act
passed m t|ie fiflj-second year of his present
pagjesty^ leig^ entithid, ' Aa act to render
a^ore e»BeUiai an act passed in the thistyr
sev^th year of his prep^t majesty, lor pv«*
venting the administering or takina unlawful
.qmhs,' it is inter alia, eaffctedy * 'bat eveqr
person whp shall, in any manner or form whalp
aoever^ administer, or caupe to be adminialered^
OKbeai^ng or.asiH%tiag at ^ administeiiQg
Of ano^.or engag^iDenty purporting or i»*
lepcljipg to bi^ the pcffson tfiOng tha san^e to
coiDBAi^ miy tmao|) oj mn^ei) o^ any feloagr
pvt^ble by Utw witli dtsJh^ sha)l^ o» cqu^
^o(m thereof by d»e o^mse of Uw,, be.adr
jirfged guilty o|^^,^ aiM jwflSk deiAj m a
fdp^i, vttW benffh And then
*T7. ^^ ^^ HPti<w pf tha. ernes mk
vhtch U.ia unnep^asa^ for me |o rMl.
A. D. 1917.
tm
•l Cqm^9»i
rwtm
With regard to this proposition, I am ready
to admit, that, in point or form, it is correct,)
by founding on and quoting the words of the
statute on which the accusation is laid. It
does not appear to me, that there is much
room for interpretation here. If there be xooMt
for any, it i« as to the meaning of the words
« purporting and intending,'* that is, whether
the legislature means the intention of the party
administering or taking the oath, or the in-
tendment of the oath itself. I apprehend it
must be clear to you, without my saying any
thinff upon the subject, that the import of the
word ** intending, is, that it must be an oath,
the intendment of which is to bind to the com»
mission of the crime, and that it is of no con-
sequence whether the person who administeia
had criminal intentions or not, provided tlm
intendment of the oath is not criminaL If
there be an ambiguity in the use of the term*
the prisoner must have his choice in which
sense it ^aU be taken. But there is no api*
biguity. It could not have been the meaning;
of the legislature to punish the secret inteun
turns of a person administering such an oath;
for unless that intention had been communi-
cated, the offence in contemplation, i^amdy,
the imposition of the unlawful ohiigfitioqy
could not have been committed. If the wocda
of the oath do not express the unlawful ohli-*
gatioa, no person could conceive that it. wai^
undertaken; and if it was not undertakeiH. i^
capital punishment could not be meatnt to be
inflicted on the penon who intended to ad?T
minister, but who did not administer, .an eat|^
of that import.
On this subject^ I may coutentmysel41^
recalling to your reooUection Mr. Cleik.'a obh
aervations upon the tenn in question. In tbft
act of thf^ arthof the kin& it waa the ob^
jegt. of the. leapislaitare to puniiii a ]9M«4«v
m(tanovir„ and therefore the words esppleorelA
are different from those of the staitote on whi«k
the present indictment-is leitnded. The^vAid%
in the 37tb of the king» aie^ purportiu^oa
inUndefl to Viod, the pessivey instead. oTth*
actiye, participle being uaed* Observe.. iImi
differeni^e of the phcaseotganr. The term. ei»«
ploy^hewi is *' intfRndinft^not ii«tflmdt4ji" it
r^^B. to.ao oalh. having the inteodment \m
bind tq the commission of the cnmiu Aid^
ae I have akeady remarhed, it is plain thffi
unless. t)M4 intsfpratalioii was meant by thu
legislature, the punishment which I hafe:.migN
tinned wpuld not have, been inflictqd,^"faa
Wibire would have been the offence* if the adn
ministrator did not by words.) firmminjealg
viltk^jthe pas|y taking the oath, in such aiman-
ner the^ the; takm phonld. hayi a s«aaettheC
si|(ph an obligation vnas imposed? Itia neediest
f<^ m^.to insist moxe.uponxthisr.sttbjea^; ioK
i^ l^dgar's case> lib. SoUciter4ieom?i;^adiMl^
Ma.i^ vq^iitte.. purport or ^D^sai0nvof ihg
^mds whMiAba legislaiMye had.in^?ieiKs ai^
accordingly, the oaUi is reett(e4iiwTMiw in thie
Midi^lV^; a^ Ihe enhmmpltai^ ie^ thatithe
^87J
57
OGOUQB III.
Trial ofAudrem M'Kinhy
r^ds
' . I ha?e bat a single obserration more to offer
OD this inajor proposition. The- oath describ-
ed is otie ^ ptirporttng or intending to bind the
person taking* the same to commit any treason.'*
It is not treason in general, but any treason ;
tiie ivord being disjunctive, and referring to
ainy one of the different treasons known in law'
I shall recur to this afterwards.
Let us see next what is the minor proposi-
tioti of this indictment: — "Yet true it is and
of verity, that you the said Andrew M^Kinley
are guilty bfthe said crimes, or of one or more
of tbeto, actor, or art and part : In so far as
you, the said Andrew M'Kinley did, at secret
meetings, and on other occasions, at Glasgow^
and in the vicitiity thereof, in the course of the
months of November and December, 1816,
aifd January and February, 1817, wickedly
maliciouslyy^ and traitorously administer, or
cause to be administered, or did aid or assist
at' the administering, to a great number of
persons, to the amount of several hundreds,
an oath or engagement, or an obligation in the
nature of an oath, binding, or purporting or
intending to bind, the persons taxing the same
to oomipit treason."
Your lordships will recollect the objection
whieh we Statea to the former indictment, and
which you thought deserving of consideration.
It wiis, that the indictment involved a charge
of treason. Now, I ask, does not this indict-
ment involve the very same charge, when it
sets forth, that the oath was wickedly, felon-
iously, and irailorousltf administered ? If it
were set forth, that a person had been guilty
of. carrying off an article feloniously, and a
terdict was found accordingly, it would un-
Suestionably be a conviction of felony. For
le same reason a verdict of gnifty, in this
cas4i would bo a conviction of treason. The
very same objection, therefore, which occurred
to the former indictment, on this ground, oc-
mirs here also. It is true, that the narrative of
the foiwer indictment was fuller; it detailed
a number, of cirenmstances respecting the
treason alleged • to have been committed ; but
it' was not on the narrative that our objection
rested, for if tbat had been the case, the pro>-
secutor might have given up the nerrative as
matter of explaifatioB only, which he was not
bound to prove, and the defect of his libel
would hate- been «cuved. The objection there,
as'in this case, rested upon the circumstance,
that treason was a suostantive part of the
Charge in the minor proposition, which could
not be separated from it^ and must therefore
rietessarily go to proof.
' If the prisoner was convicted under this M-
M^'h% would be oonvicted necessarily of trea-
soDy^without the presentment of a grand
jnryy — ^without the benefit of a peremptory
ekallett^ey-^without anyone privilege whieh
Uie law of Engkmd, as oontradistinguished
£roni oar comnion la^^ in criaiaal matters;
•eoforsontheaiciisecl. •
t.It will be^ fortef attended In^ that this is
not one of those opes in whidi the lord adro-
cate can alter his charge after the pnsoner has
pleaded. If a person be accused of mnider
his lordship may restrict the libel to culpable
homicide, and the jury may convict for that
offence, though culpable homicide is not men-
tioned in the indictment. But that proceeds
upon the ground that the one crime is of the
same species and denomination as the other.
Where the crimes are generically different, it
is impossible to substitute the one for the other.
Thus, in 1663, in the case of Graham, on a
charge of theft, the jury brought in a verdict
of reset of theft ; but it was found that no
sentence could pass on that verdict, because
reset of theft is a crime radically different
from theft. The same thing happened in the
case of Charles Stewart, in 1800. Here the
public prosecutor has charged the prisoner
with treason, and therefore he cannot alter his
libel into a charge of felony : for, if that were
the case, the prisoner, as Sir George Macken^
zie observes, might come to the bar as unpre-
pared to defend himself, as if he' had never
been served with an indictment at all. In like
manner, Peddie was tried at the circuit at
Perth alternately for a rape, and an assauk
with intent to ravish; the jury found him
guilty of assault only ; and the Court of Justi-
ciary here, to whom the case was remitted,
decided that no punishment could pass upon
that verdict.*
If your lordships were of opinion that this
point required to be argued upon informations
m Edgar's case, there is the same necessity for
informations here. For what reason the pol>-
lic prosecutor has thought fit to desert the
former indictments, - and to serve new ones»
containing the very same defect, I cannot
divine. Of one thing I am certain, that the
same defect does exist, and that the merb
omission of the narrative or preamble, cannot
in the smallest degree change the substance
of the charge.
We come now to the consideration of the
words of this oath, which we are told purports
or intends to bind the persons taking it to
commit felony. There are four clauses in
this oath, upon each of which, separately, I
shidl beg to make' a few observations. But,
before doing so, let me again, entreat you to
keep in mind, and to apply the principles with
which I set out. You have seen how statutes
were interpreted, though composed by all the
wisdom of Parlioment, and when it must be
presumable that the legislature knew the force
of the words which they employed. But here
you have men in the lowest situation of lifo^
using words, of the force of which they might
not be aware ; i Jbrtiari, therefore, must you
construe these words wi^ the utmost latitude
in favour of the pritoner, and the utmost
strictness agunst the prosecutor.
• I'fomierly gave some' illustrations upon this
Sttlljectftonf the law of Sngland; permit me
now to- add one or two mm our own law'.
* 4 Hume, 308.
989]
for Adm^uidering unUxvifui Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
[290.
There is a case mentioned by Mr. Hume, io
which a pefaon of the name of Janet Ramsay,
when precognosced, emitted a declaration
confessing the crime laid to her charge. When
brought to tna>y she pleaded Not Guilty; but,
besides other satis&ctory evidence her de-
claration was laid before the jury, who return-
ed a verdict finding her guilty "in terms of
her confession," meaning undoubtedly the
declaration which she emitted when precog-
Dosced. Yet you found that no sentence could
pass apon thai verdict, because the prisoner
had not confessed the crime at the bar ; and
an extrajudicial declaration of guilt, is not,
technically speaking, a confession.
But take a case more nearly resembling the
present. When a person is accused of per-
jury, the prosecutor must establish that the
oalL sworn is contrary to the truth ; and it is
the province of the Court, in judging of the
relerancy of the indictment, to determine
whether the oath is reconcileable to the truth
or not. Kow, I entreat your lordships to ob-
serve how strictly the Court has been in use
to construe the words of an oath in favour of
m. prisoner, attempting, by eyery possible
means, to remove the inconsbtency ; and, if
it can be removed, the libel is held not to be
relevant, and the prisoner cannot go to trial
upon it. In support of this observation, I
most refer to Uie learned author, so 6ften
quoted. "The substance of the crime, and
that which all the other particulars in the de-
scription of it only modify and limit is, that a
plain falsehood be explicitly and wilfully
affirmed. For, if either there is any doubt
about the true state of the fact, or about the
sense in which the panel's words are to be
understood; or if they can in any reasonable
way be reconciled with the truth, or with an
innocent intention ; or, in general, if it is not
manifest and obvious, but matter of likelihood
only, and of inference and comparison of
many particulars, that he had a false and cor-
rupt meaning, this shall save him from the
accusation of perjury. Indeed, it would be
▼ery dangerous to convict any one upon such
constructive grounds ; considering the imper-
fection of language, and the still more imper-
lect use which so many persons have of it, and
how unequal their degrees of intelligence in
the affairs of life, and even their degrees of
capacity for the observation of facts."*
There is not one of these observations that
would not apply in this case, where you have
the words of an oath to construe, just as in a
case of peijury. Now, observe the precedent
to which Mr. Hume refers : — " This scrupu-
lous and equitable caution was in particular
observed in deciding on the relevancy of the
libel against Archibald M'Killop. This man
bad been a witness in the trial of certain per-
sons for a violent deforcement of the revenue
officers, and )iad given a testimony which, in
many points, was very favourable to the panels.
VOL, XXXIII.
1 Hume, 12r.
Among other things, he had sworn that they
addressed the revenue officers in a moderate
and inoffensive manner, ^ desiring them to walk
soberly, and to make no disturbance.' Now,
in this article, besides others,* he was charged
with peijury; inasmuch (said the libeD as it
will be proved, that the persons accused went
violently up to the officers, demanded their
arras, and threatened to blow them up if they
resisted. . It was pleaded for the panel, that
the two assertions were not absolutely incon-
sistent, for that in swearing to the one sort of
address and course of behaviour, he did not
absolutely exclude the other, which might be
used at a different period of the fray, and
without his attending to it at the time." And
the Court held ** the allegation in the second
article of the said indictment charged, in these
words ;— * That the panel swore, that at the
time there mentioned, the said James M'Kenzie
desired the said Alexander Cook and Alexander
Thomson, to walk soberly and make no dis*
turbance,' not relevant and refme to admit the
same to probation,*' I do not ask of your lord-
ships to construe the oath in this indictment
more strictly — the mere possibility of innocence
induced the Court to hold, that peijury was not
relevantly charged.
Let me intreat you, then, to apply the same
principles to this oath, if it be necessary to
apply them. I say, if necessary ; for, I state,
that if you were to construe it with the utmost
latitude against the prisoner, with the same
latitude as you would construe a last will, a
marriage contract, or any other document the
most favoured in law, it will not yield the sens*
ascribed to it by the prosecutor.
It consists of four clauses. Let us consider
each of them.
The first is : "I will persevere in my en-
deavours to form a brotherhood of affection
among Britons of every description, who are
considered worthy of confidence.'' Is there
any thing in the smallest degree blameable, not
to say treasonable, in tliis 7 May not a brother-
hood be formed of any set of persons, vrithout
.a criminal, without a treasonable purpose?
It was to be formed of persons worthy of con«
fidence ; it was to be a brother})ood of affection^
It may have been i ntcnd ed to have been criminal,
or it may have been intended to have been inno^
cent ; but there is nothing in the purport of
these words which can be interpreted as ex-
pressing a design of forming a brotherhood for
improper purposes. Upon that clause I think
it unnecessary to say a word more.
Then, what is the second clause? " That I
will persevere in my endeavours to obtain f(5r
all the people in Great Britain and Ireland,
not disqualified by crimes or insanity, tHo
elective franchise, at the age of twenty one>
with free and equal representation, and annual
parliaments.'' As the law stands at present,
there are neither annual parliaments noi uni-
versal suffrage ; but is there any impropriety
in those who think it would be for the ad-
vantage of the constitution to endeavour to ob-
V
3911
£7 GEOKGE III.
Trial of Andrea M* Kinky
(SSP2
tain theiD, provided they do so aocordiDg to
law } It is impossible for a xnomeDt to doubt
that it 1:1 lawful so to do. There are those who
think that an alteration of this kind — I mean
the adoption of annual parliaments, and uni-
▼etsal suffrage — would be a fundamental alte-
ration of the constitution of Great Britian ; but
you know that it is laid down by the best au>
thoritiesy that there is no law so fundamental
that it may not be innovated — no principle so
fixed that it may not be changed. Parliament
iD%y new-model the succession to the Crown —
it may alter the religion of the country — ^il may
alter its own constitution. Parliaments, for
instance, were not always septennial. There
ie no doubt that annual parliaments and univer-
sal sufoige may be obtained in a legal mode,
in the same manner as any other change, by a
parliamentary act ; and those who hold these
alterations to be in their nature injurious to the
constitution, never doubted, notwithstanding,
that they may be competently and legally in-
troduced. In what respect is this country dis-
tinguished from every country upon the face
of the earth, but that every subject of the land
nay approach parliament, the fountain of ab-
solute jMower — ^may suggest alterations in the
laws or the country— and may press, by solici-
tation and argument, the adoption of measures
which he supposes to be advantageous? It is
a libel upon the constitution to say there is any
crime in this clause of the oath, provided the
endeavours it alludes to are lawful.
We come to the third clause, to which I call
your attention more particularly, as it was a
subject of much argument in the former dis-
cussion : ** I will support the same to the utmost
of my power, either by moral or physical
strength, as the case may require.'' In this
clause, you are, for the first time, as I conceive,
called upon to exercise the power of interpre-
tation. It is ambiguous in two respects ; and
surely it is not surprising that persons in the
situation of those who formed this brotherhood
should have fallen into ambiguous and incorrect
modes of expression.
The first ambiguity is in the use of a relative,
without any means of discovering the antece-
dent. '^I will support Me same:** What is
the same? There are three previous things
mentioned, all, or any of which, may be the
antecedent. How are you to choose which of
these is the antecedent ? If it be of importance
to the prisoner, which it is not, he is entitled
to choose the antecedent; and, if any one of
them rendered the oath innocent, while the
others inferred guilt, he would be entitled to
choose that for his antecedent, and you must
adopt the innocent interpretation. Fortunately,
however, in the present instance, it is indif-
ferent which of them you select, for they are
all equally harmless. Let us try them one by
one. The leading member of the sentence is,
** ir will persevere in my endeavours to form a
brotherhood.'' That brotherhood may be the
antecedent. It is the leading object in the
sentence ; after which follows an obligatiou to.
do certain things ; and then comes the engage-
ment to support ike tame, signifying, according
to that construction an engxigement to support
the brotherhood. That will not infer any thing
criminal ; and, at all events, will never infer
the crime chai^;ed against the prisoner, llie
brotherhood might be supportea in many ways.
When illegally attacked, it might with pro-
priety be defended ; and when legally attacked
ny the magistrates, the defence of it, though it
might be criminal and a felony, is not treason ;
and, therefore, even if the oath were to support
that brotherhood by illegal means, that would
not be an obligation of the nature charged in
the minor proposition ; for there is no hstna in
supporting a nrotherhood of affection among
Bntons of every description ; at alf events iti»
not the crime of treason.
Take another view. — ^He says, he will en-
deavour ** to obtain the elective franchbe, at
the age of twenty-one, vtrith free and equal
representation, and annual parilaments." If
you do not take the leading antecedent in the
sentence, according to ordinary construction,
you should take that immediately preceding
the relative, namely, annual parliaments and
universal suffrage. Is there any thing im-
proper or criminal in supporting those ? Yoa
can support nothing not in existence; they
must be obtained before they can be supported.
If, therefore, you take the first, or if you take
the last members of the sentence for the ante-
cedent, nothing like a criminal obligation can
be extracted.
Take the only other supposeable antecedent,
*^ I will persevere in my endeavourt to obtain
for all the people in Great Britain and Ireland,
not disqualified by crimes or insanity, the
elective franchise, at the age of twenty-one,
with free and equal representation, and annual
parliaments.'^ Is there any thing criminal in
supporting one's endeavours to obtain ? It in-
fers a solecism, and is contrary to the ordinary
forms of speech. To support endeavours, is
just to endeavour ; and, therefore, if there be
any choice as to these antecedents, tiiis is the
one that ought to be rejected. But, suppose
these ignorant people liieant, '' to support their
endeavours to obtain these objects," where is
the illegality in that f If they supported their
endeavours in a lawful manner, it is what every
good subject, holding these opinions, should be
inclined to do.
But, the prosecutor observes, that the oath
does not stop at supporting the endeavours, but
engages to *' support tlie same io ike tUmoii rf
my power, either by moral orphyskal strength^ m
the case m^reguireJ* Here, it seems to he
thought, that the sting of the case lies.— I ask
your lordships, when a person comes under ati
engagement to exert all his endeaTOors, or to
act to the utmost of his power upon any one
occasion, how that en^gement should, in fair-
ness, be construed. The construction adopted
in every case is this, that he will exert his
lawful endeavours. It is the maxim of Uw, as
Mr. Clerk observed, when we were lasthere^
1
Jiir Adminisitrukg uniawful Oaths.
A. D. iai7.
[204
id Umtmm facert yoimiiiiii, quod de jun facere
ptmiamtt. There is no obligatioo ivhich a man
undertakes to do, in this or any vell-gOTemed
couDtrfy that does not imply, if it be not ex-
pressed} that irhat he engages to do is lawful.
VoQ mayezdade that presumption by declaring
you will do it unlawnilly ; but, if not so ex-
cluded, it is always understood.
The observations which I have made on
these three antecedents separately, apply to
them all when taken together ; and if none of
them singly infers ciiminality, they will not infer
it when combined.
But, it is the phrase vhfnoal ttrenfth which
seems to have laid hola of the imagination of
the public prosecutor ; and he seems to think
that the mere use of diat term necessarily im-
plies, that a rising in arms was in contem-
plation, and that the persons engaging to use
their endeavours to obtain these things, were
to rise in rebellion to obtain them. The lord
advocate imagiues all this, merely because the
term ^' physiod strength" is introduced.— But
I would observe, that this obligation was im-
posed on an individual, not upon a body ; and
there vras no such thing as binding him to
exert his endeavours in conjunction with the
endeavours of others. It was upon each, in
his individual capacity, that an ooligation was
imposed.
But that is, comparatively speaking, of little
consequence : let it be granted that it was a
collective obligation, what did it import? Is
it that they shall exert their physical strength
in an unlawful way ? No ; for, according to
the maxim I stated, the presumption is, that
the mode vras to be a lawful one. Physical
strength may be exerted in twenty ways which
are lawful ; and therefore you are to infer it
was to be lawfully exerted to obtain the objects
in view.
To show the fallacy of any other construc-
tion, let us look a little into the nature of the
alternative obligation to exert mortd UrtnM.
In the last axgument on this head, it was fairly
admitted, that an obligation to endeavour to
obtain these objects by moral strength would
not have been in the smallest degree criminal,
and never could have been construed to in*
fer treason. But, you must observe, that
treason may be committed in the exercise of
moral, just as well as in the exercise of physi-
cal strength. For instance, an individual, in
order to obtain these objects of annual parlia-
ments and universal suffrage, so mach desired
by the brotherhood, might speak or write ad-
visedly, that the present family has no right to
the crown — or that parliament, without con-
sent of the crown, is not entitled to alter the
succession ; which is high treason under the
6th of queen Anne. But, because a man binds
himself to endeavour to procure annual parlia-
ments and universal suffrage by moral strength,
is be bound to commit 'these or any other trea-
sons? That would be a construction so forced,
that, even on the other side of the bar, it
would not be listened to for a moment. Why,
then, construe the obligation to exercise phy«
sical stren^, so as to infer that it was to be
exercised m an unlawful manner? The one
interpretation is as much strained as the other.
And if physical strength may be lawfttlly
exerted, tne presumption ought to be, that the
lawful exertion of it was in the view of the
parties. Or, supposing even that they con-
templated an unlawful act, it does not neces-
sarily follow that they contemplated an act of
treason.
Physical strength might be exerted lawfully
to obtain these objects, by forming this bro-
therhood— by collecting its members together
— by defending them against unjust attacks,
by going by their orders over the country, can-
vassing members of parliament for their votes,
and in a thousand other ways which may be
easily figured. And It might be unlawfully
exerted in as many ways — in resisting the
magistrates coming to disperse a meeting — in
rescuing members apprehended by law— in
putting members of parliament under durance
or restraint, and so forth. All these acts, how-
ever criminal, and amounting even to murder
and felony, would not amount to treason.
Now, because physical strength might possibly
be exerted in a way to infer treason, are you
therefore to conclude that that mode of its ex-
ertion was necessarily in the view of the parties?
Just reverse the case, and see how you
would construe an engagement to prevent in-
novation. Suppose a set of gentlemen inihe
country — whose politics are the reverse of
those of the prisoner — were to enter into an
association, and bind themselves by an oath,
to support septennial parliaments and the
elective franchise, as now established, by mo-
ral and physical strength. It would be a bold
construction to call that treason. Yet it is
precisely the construction employed by the
pul^ic prosecutor in this case ; for a man may
compass the king's death or levy war against
him in supporting septennial parliaments, as
well as in endeavouring to obtain annual par-
liaments.
I shall call your attention to one or two In-
stances of oaths administered every day, and
see how the principle of construction con-
tended for by the lord advocate would apply
to them. You know, that, when a soldier is
inlisted, he is attested by a magistrate, and an
oath is administered, which is prescribed by
the Mutiny. act. It is in these terms: '^1
swear that I will bear true allegiance to our
sovereign Lord King George, and that I will
as in my duty bound, defend him in his person,
crown, and dignity, against all his enemies ;
and that so long as I shall remain in his ma-
jesty^s service, I vrill duly observe and obey
his majestjr's orders, and the orders qfthegene*
rals and officers set over me by his majesty**
Is that %n obligation to obey an unlawful
order of an officer? I apprehend it is not.
You will not go nicely to work in discriminating
between right and wrong where the duty of a
common soldier is concerned ; but where an
295]
57 GEORGE III.
Trial of AttdrOB M'Kinleif
[396
order he receives is plainly illegal, as to assas-
sinate or murder a man, or resist a civil ma-
gistrate, is he bound to obey that order ? No.
The terms of his oath extend to all orders,
but you will apply the maxim, id tantumfacere
potsumus quod dejurejacer^possumus. In swear-
ing to obey all orders, the oath intends lawful
orders alone. You will recollect, there was a
trial before the Court of Justiciary, in a case
where a soldier had, by orders from his officer,
resisted a magistrate. I speak of the case of
Ferguson, in 1764. He was condemned by
the Court, and it would not have availed him
to plead, that the oath administered to him
when enlisted, bound him to obey every order,
whether lawful or unlawful.
I formerly mentioned to your lordships bow
the oath of abjuration imposed by govern-
ment required to be construed. It binds the
parties to exert all their endeavours to support
the king's government and the protestant reli-
gion. What endeavours ? why lawful endea-
vours surely, not by committing murder or
felony. Construe this oath as you construe
those oaths ; let the general terms receive the
same qualifications in both, and it is impossi-
ble to extract a treasonable obligation.
I have said perhaps too much on this point.
Let me conclude with a few observations on
the last clause : ** I farther swear, that neither
hopes, fears, rewards^ or punishments, shall
induce me to inform on, or give evidence
against, any membef or members, collectively
or individually, for any act or expression done
or made, in or out, in this or similar societies,
under the punishment of death, to be inflicted
on me by any member or members of such
societies. So help me God.''
Nobody can doqbt that it was a misdemea-
nor to impose, or to undertake this obligation ;
but this is not the question at present. Your
lordships have to judge, whether this is neces-
sarily an obligation to commit treason. This
SQciety was composed chiefly of individuals in
the lowest stations of life, ignorant and unin-
formed persons, who, in the course of their
discussions, might have fallen into improper
or seditious expressions. It was natural that
the members ot the society should impose an
obligation not to reveal what was said, lest
any of their number should be convicted of
libel or sedition. But an obligation to con-
ceal such imprudent expressions, or even not
to disclose improper acts committed in the
presence of a person, is not an obligation im-
posed on that person to be guilty of libel, or
sedition, or any similar crime, far less is it an
obfigation upon him to be guilty of treason.
Itrnay be a misdemeanor, but it is not that
crime which your lordships are now called
upon, by the major proposition of this indict-
ment, to try ; and if that be the case, it is
dear that the libel it not relevantly laid.
Take the oath in all its parts — apply to it
the ordinary rules of interpretation — take the
words >\iih the greatest rigour, or the greatest
kiitude, and you will never extract that sense.
which it is necessary to extract from them,
before you can have a relevant charge under
the statute.
The prosecutor is not satisfied with reci-
ting the oath in his minor proposition, he gives
a commentary upon it, and it remains to
be considered, whether the (tommentaryis a
fair expression of the import of the oath ; and,
supposing that it is, whether the oath so con-
strued amounts to a treasonable obligatioii.
Af^er reciting the oath, the libel proceeds
thus : ^ Which oath did bind, ordid purportor
intend to bind, the persons taking the same to
commit treason by effecting, by physical force,
the subversion of the established government,
laws, and constitution of this kingdom, and
especially by obtaining annual parliaments
and universal suffrage by unlawful and violent
means,'* Is that a fair gloss upon the words
of the oath ? Do they signify what the prose-
cutor says ? Or are they radically and essen-
tially of a different signification? There is not
one word in the oath of an obligation to efiect
any thing, or to subvert any thing, if by sub-
version you mean ought else than a lawlbl
endeavour to alter an existing law. The oath
binds the taker, ''to persevere in his endea-
vours to obtain for all the people in Great
Britain and Ireland, not disqualined by crimes
or insanity, the elective franchise, at the age of
twenty-one, with free and equal representation^
and annual parliaments." Nothing is said
here of the government, laws, and consti-
tution of the kingdom; or of any laws, ex-
cept those which relate to the duration of
parliament, and the elective franchise. It
Dinds the taker to subvert nothing by physical
strength, not even the laws against universal
suffrage and annual parliaments, and far less
the established government, law^, and consti-
tution in general. It contains no obligatfon
to obtain annual parliaments and universal
suffrage, or any thing else, by unlawful and
violent means.
It binds the taker to support one of three
things,— or, if you will, all the three^ — by
moral and physical strength ; but this obliga-
tion must be qualified, as every such obliga-
tion b qualified, in ordinary speech ; otherwise
all human affairs would be thrown into confu-
sion, and language would become the instru-
ment of deception and error. If it be so qua-
lified, the obligation is ' confessedly innocent.
It is not a gloss to substitute words of one
import for words of a totally different import,
and to change the meaning of a sentence -by
the interpolation of whole clauses which tliey
do not contain. The subjects of this country
would be in a dreadful situation indeed, if
they were exposed to a capital conviction for
the use of words ; in construing which words
the prosecutor might substitute and interpo-
late as he thought fit, until he found a meaning
which suited his purpose, though totally
different from the meaning which the words,
as he himself recited them, naturally and pro-
perly bore.
397]
Jiff Adnamttarimg untanfiU Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
Cade
I am afraid I fiiUgne your locdshipsy in goiDg
over grounds which were stated, if not much
commented on, before. Bat I dow come to
another grounc^ to which I must particularly
call your attention, being sensible, that the
first time I had the honour of bringing it
before you, it was imperfectly a^ed. After
having given it more mature consideration,
and weighed the authorities touching it, there
is no one objeclion to this indictment on which
the counsel on this side of the bar rest with
more security and confidence. It is this, —
that, esio the words of this oath import what
the public prosecutor says they import, it will
not make a relevant charge ; for granting that
the oath binds the taker to do all that the
prosecutor alleges, I maintain it is not an
obligation to commit treason.
fiehre entering on this objection, I suppose
it will be conceded to me, without any argu-
ment, that, in an indictment under this statute,
the prosecutor is bound to specify the treason
to which he refers, — ^that he is bound to state
it precisely, formally, and technically. If
this were not the case, there is not a more
ensnaring or detestable law in the criminal
eode, bemuse almost any oath might be twisted
into an unlawful obligation, and the prisoner
wouM come to the bar ignorant of what he
was accused, and unprepued to defend him-
self.
To illustrate this, suppose an indictment
for administering an oath, binding the
laker to commit felony ; and, in that case, I
beg leave to ask, whether the prosecutor would
he required to specify the felony he had in
view. There is a vast variety of felonies,
some of them existing at common law, and
others introduced by statute. Many of these
are complicated, obscure, and undefined, de-
pending on the construction of revenue laws,
commercial regulations, and the mysteries of
trades and professions ; now, if the panel was
not made aware of the felony alluded to in
the indictment, it would often be impossible
for him to conjecture in what tlie crime con-
sisted which was laid to his charge. Thus,
svqppose a prisoner was indicted for adminis-
tering an oath binding the taker to commit
felony, because it bound him to carry away a
certain quantity of com from the place where
it was deposited, and give it to a shipmaster.
Here the felony in view might be theft ; or it
night be fraudulent bankruptcy ; or it might
be taking com from a storehouse, where it was
deposited for exportation, contrary to the
statute ;* or it might be holding correspond-
ence with a person who had resided in France,
contrary to the non-intercouse statutes .f It
will not be contended, that the prosecutor
might conceal into which of those felonies he
meant to construe the oadi, and, consequently,
deprive the prisoner of all means of defending
himself.
* it Geo: II, c. 92.
t 33 Geo: UI, c. 27; 34 Geo: III, c 9.
Thecaseef treason is perfectly aaaloffotts. It
is true, there are not so many treasons as felonies,
but there are, in the law, at least ten different
treasons, and the prisoner is left altogether
in the dark to which of these the lord advocate
alluded.
The statute bears, ''That every person who
shall, in any manner or form whatsoever, ad-
minister, or cause to be administered, or be
aiding or assisting at the administering, of any
oath or engagement, purporting or intending
to bind the person ts^mg the sane to commit
any treason,'^ &c. The legislature here pnls
the term disjunctively. It does not say tseer
son in general, but any trtamm; clearly intend-
ing, therefore, that the prosecutor should
specify the particular treason which he asserts
the oath bound the taker to commit. Henoe
I infer, that nothing but a tedinioal descrip-
tion of the treason referred to, will suffice lo
make a libel under the statute relevant. It is
a maxim tn crmtndEtftus mm Ikei ^fogari, and
there never was a case in which the maxim was
more applicable than the present.
Let us consider the treasons actually exist-
ing in the law, and try to discover to which of
them it is that the prosecutor alludes, in the
minor proposition of this indictment. I be-
lieve you will find the attempt akogether
fraitless.
The first, mentioned by Foster, Blackstnne,
and other writers, is compassing the king'a
death. It is not laid, that this oath bound to
compass the king's death, nor even to commit
any of the conunon and usual overt acts whieh
are considered as evidence of compassing the
king's death — for example, to murder the
king, or to put him in durance. I shall have
occasion, by and by, to direct your attention
to the case, that an overt act had been charged,
that you may consider whether that would
have rendered the indictment relevant. At
present I am asking, whether the proseeutor
asserts that the oath bound the taker to commit
that species of treason ? — Unquestionably he
does not.
The second treason is, to violate the queen,
or the king's eldest daughter. It wiU not be
pretended that this treason was in view.
The third is to levy war against the king in
his realm. The prosecutor does not assert
that that obligation was imposed, as will be
evident from the following consideratione.
To constitute this treason two things are ne-
cessary: 1st, That war shall be levied: llnd.
That it shall be levied against the king ; or,
what is held equivalent, that it shi^ be levied
for a public purpose^ as destroying all enclo-
sures and so fortti.
Was this an oath to levy war? The old
writers held, that war could not be levied,
tmless the persons engaged to levy it were
arraved modo guenino; unless they were as-
sembled with ^ all the pomp and cireomstance
of war." The law ts so laid down by sir
Matthew Hale. I am aware, there has been
a relaxation in the law siece that period i end
aim
57 GEORGE IIL
TrMo/Anirtm M^KhUey
Hial it is not iMeesrarf tint the penotis tball
be so ankied; but there most be arisiDg or
insorrecdon of a multitade; and a few tndi-
▼idnals assembled^ aimed or noarmedy is not
letying war.
Sir Michael Foster corrects the old doctrine
as laid down by sir Matthew Hale, p%ge 206,
first folio edition : *^ Lord Chief Justice Hale,
speaking of such unlawful assemblies as may
amount to a levying of war within the 25th
Edward Srd^ taketh a difierence between those
insurrections which have carried the appear-
ance of an army formed under leaders, and
prorided with militaiy weapons, and with
drums, colours, ite. and those other disorderly
tumultuous assemblies which have been drawn
together, and conducted to purposes manifest-
W unlawful, but without any of the ordinary
show and apparatus of war before men-
tioned.
** I do not think any great stress can be laid
on that distinction, it is true, that in case of
levying war, the indictments generally charge,
that the defendants were armed and arrayed
in a warlike manner; and, where the case
would adroit of it, the other cireumstances of
swords, guns, drums, colours, &c. have been
added. But I think the merits of the case
have never turned singly on any of these cir-
cumstances.''
^ In the cases of Damaree and Purehase,
which are the last printed cases that have come
in judgment on the point of constructive levy-
ing war, there was nothing given in evidence
of the usual pageantry of war, no military
weapons, no banners or drums, nor any regular
consultation previous to the rising. And yet
the want of those circumstances weighed no-
thing with the Court, though the prisoner's
•counsel insisted much on that matter. The
number of the insurgents supplied the want of
military weapons; and they were provided
with axes, crows, and other tools of Uie like
nature, proper for the mischief they intended
to effect.
>Furor arma ministrat.
^^ Sect. 1. The true criterion therefore in
all these cases is, quo anbno did the parties as-
semble. For if the assembly be upon some
private quarrel, or to take revenge of particu-
iar persons, the statute of treasons hath already *
determined that point in fevourof the sub-
ject."
And aftenvards : ^* Sn^JTy '^^ words of
the first clause descriptive ofthe offence, * if any
man ride armed openly, or secretly, with men
of arms,' did in the langu^pe in those times
mean nothing less than the assembling bodies of
men, friends, tenants, or dependants, armed
and arrayed in a warlike manner, in order to
effect some purpose or other by dint of num-
bers and superior strength. And yet those
assemblies so anned and arrayed, if drawn to-
gether for purposes of a private nature, were
not deemed treasonable."
Again^ *f Sect. 11. Upon the same |trinci-
[aoo
pie,, and widiin the reason and equity of the
statute, risings to maintain a private claim of
right, or to destroy particular indosnres," and
so forth.
^ And upon the same principle^ and within
the same equitv of the statute, I think it was
very rightly held by Awe of the judges, that a
rising of the wearers in and about London to
destroy all engine4ooms, &g."
So he goes on to the end of the chapter,
stating, that though wariike apparatus is not
necessary, there must be a rising in order that
the multitude may compensate for the want oC
regular array.
The second requisite is, that the insurrectioB
shall take place in order to accomplish a publie
object. It is no levying of war, if one noble^
man rise against another, to bum his house or
destioy his inclosurirs, for these are private,
not public objects.
llie' case of lord George Gordon vras referred
to when we were last here. There, the qnestioB
was not whether it was necessary there should
be an insurrection to constitute the levying of
war, but whether an insurrection, which had con-
fessedly taken place, was for a public purpose.
It was not upon the first, but upon the secoad
requisite, that the doubt arose. It was con-
tended, that the purpose being to compel par-
liament to repeal a statute, was not a poUic
purpose ; and lord Mansfield, in an able speech,
says, — ** The prisoner at the bar is indicted
for diat species of high treason whidi is cdled
levying war against die king ; and, therefore,,
it is necessary you should first be informed
what is in law levying war against the king, so
as to constitute the crime of high treason,
within the statute of Edward 3rd, and, perw
haps, according to the legal s^niification of
the term, before that statute. Tnere are two
kinds of levying vrar :^-one against the pereoa
of the king ; to imprison, to dethrone, or to
kill him ; or to make him' change measures, or
remove counsellors ; — ^the other, which u said
to be levied against the majesty of the king^
or in other words, against him in his regal
capacity ; at when a muUUuJe rite and attenwie
to attain Iw force and violeneef aiigf object of a «e-
nend pidJicnahre; that it levying war agauui
the nujettff of the hmg ; and most reasonably
so held, because it tends to dissolve all the
bonds of society, to destroy property, and to
overturn government; and, by force of arms,
to restrain the king from reigning according to
law.
'' Though the form of an indictment for this
species of treason mentions drums, trumpets,
arms, swords, fifes, and guns, yet none of Uiese
cireumstances are essential. The question
always is, whether the intent is, by force and
violence, to attain an object of a general and
public nature, by any instruments, or by dini
of their numbert. Whoever incites, advises,
encourages, or is any way aiding toracik a mud"
titude to attembled with suq^ intent, though he
does not personally appear among them, or
with his own hands commit any violence iftiiat*
901]
Jar AdmtMtslenng unlawfid Oaths^
A. D. 1817.
[3Wi
wDCfv, yet he is equaUy a principal with those
who act, and guilty of high treason.'**
If yon will go on to the end of the learned
judge's speech, you will find the question was,
whether the' purpose of the insurrection was a
poblic one, and consequently, whether the war
levied was against the king or not.
Bat there is nothing in the oath here, even
according to the prosecutor's interpretation,
which binds the teker to levy war at aU — to
rise in arms— or to assemble tumultuously for
the purpose of obtaining any object, either
pnblic or private.
There are other four treasons-Hidhering to
^ king's enemies— counterfeiting the great
and privy seals — counterfeiting the coin — and
slaying the chancellor and other judges in the
eiecntion of their office. These may be passed
over in silence, for it will not be pretended
that die oath alludes to them. Neitner can it
aUnde to the treasons relative to Papists — ^to
the debasement of the coin — or the obstruc-
tion of the Protestant succession.
Then there is a treason which was intro-
daeed by the 36th of George 3rd. By that act
it is made treason to conspire to levy war for
certain purposes. The statute says, that ^ if
any person or p^rsons'whatsoever, shall, within
- the realm or without, compass^ imagine, invent,
devise^ or intend death or destruction, or any
bodily harm tending to death or destruction,
maim or wounding, imprisonment or restraint,
of the person of the same our sovereign lord
the king, his heirs and successors ; or to de-
prive or depose him or them from the style,
noiumr, or kingly name of the imperial crown
of this realm, or of any other of his majesty's
dominions or conntries ; or to levy war against
hii majesty, his heirs and successors, within
this realm, in order, by force or constraint, to
compel him or them to change his or their
neasnres or counsels, or in order to put any
force or constraint upon, or intimidate or over-
awe both Houses, or either House of Parlia-
ment; or to move or stir any foreigner or
sCraDger with force to invade this realm, or
any other of his majesty's dominions or coun-
tries, under the obeisance of his majesty, his
heiiB and successors ? and such compassings,
ioBaginalions, inventions, devices, or inten-
cioiis, or any of them, shall express, utter, or
declare, by publishing any printing or writing,
or 1^ anv overt act or deed ; l^ing legally
ooDvictea thereof, upon the oadis of two law Ail
and credible witnesses, upon trial or otherwise
eoDTicted or attainted by due course of law,
then everysQch penK>n or persons so, as aforesaid,
oflfending, shall be deemed, declared, and ad-
judged to be a traitor and traitors, and shall
eniFer pains of death, and also lose and forfeit
as in caaea of high treason."
We may lay out of view what is enacted as
to devices directed against the king's person,
or attempts lo depose him. The only part of
the statute to which the prosecutor can allude,
* 21 How. St. Tr. 644, 645.
is that which relates to a compulsory change
of the king's measures ; or to the intimidation
of the Houses of Parliament. But your lord-
ships will observe, that it is not declared trea-
son by the statute, to alter the king's counsels
by compulsion, or to intimidate the parliament,
but to lety war for either of these purposes.
Now this indictment does not set fortn that the
oath libelled on contained an obligation iolm/y
war for these or for any other purposes.
But the lord advocate seemed to hint,
on a former occasion, that it was sufficient
to render an indictment under the statute
libelled on relevant, if he set forth that
the oath administered containcNl an oblige^
tion to perform an act, which the jury should
hold an overt act of treason, although the in-
dictment did not specify what the treason was
of which it was an overt act. For example, he
said that the indictment here set forth, that the
oath bound the taker to subvert the govern-
ment by physical strength, and, in particular,
to obtain annual parliaments and universal
suffrage, by unlawtul means ; and those acts
being overt acts of treason, it followed, that
the charge in the indictment was accurately
laid. But I ask your lordships, if this doctrine
be well founded? Is it sufficient, under the
statute, to libel that an oath was administered,
binding the party — to do— what? — Not to
commit treason, but — to do an act which the
jury shall discover to be an overt act of trea-
son. An overt act of treason is that which
convinces a jury that treason has been com-
mitted ; but it is no more treason in the eye of
law, than the evidence of a crime is the crime
itself. If the charge of an overt act of treason
were equivalent to the specific charge of trea-
son itself, then, instead of the ten or twelve
treasons which I have enumerated, there would
be thousands of treasons in the law, because
there are a thousand acts which may amount
to evidence that the crime was perpetrated.
This would be to let in the whole host of con-
structive treasons, which ^rere abolished by the
statute of Edwaid 3rd. No oath could then
be administered, which might not, per m^
furnish a relevant charge under the 52nd of
the king; for the prosecutor would be at li-
berty to say, that although no particular trea-
son was sonified in the libel, the jury would
discover th&t an overt act of some treason or
another, fell under the obligation contained in
it. This would be replacing the law in ex-
actly the lame situation in which it was in
England, previous to the statute of Edward
3rd : and in which it was in Scotland, previ-
ous to the union.
What was the defect in the treason law of
those periods? It was that the prosecutor
char^ the accused with meditating or per-
forming an act, such as subverting the cod*
stitution, altering fundamental laws, and so
forth, which he thought fit to denominate trea-
' son ; and thus, almost any act might be con-
strued into treason. These constructive tretk
sons were abolished* and a strict and ttehnicil
^003 57 GGORGE III,
Trial ofAnirem M^Kiule^.
C304
defiottion of the erima substituted in their
room; and, unless a person is accused of a
treafon so defined, the accusation is good for
nothing. The prosecutor Aust specify overt
aeiSy but it wiU not do to specify them alone ;
be must further aay what the particular treason
is which be means to prove by them. In like
nanner, in this case, the prosecutor must say
not merely that the oath libelled on bound the
taker to commit an overt act of treason, but
what the particular treason was which it bound
bim to commit. If it is not a relevant charge
'Of treason to assert that a man conspired to
subvert the constitution by physical force,
neither can it be a relevant charge under this
Statute that he administered an oath binding
tbe taker to subvert the constitution by physi-
cal force. The person w(io administered the
«ath lOannot be dealt with more harshly than
the ilraitor himself. If constructive treasons
are abolished as to the one, they must be
idiolished as to the other also. The law must
be consistent with itself.
I need scarcely refer your lordships to his-
torical illustration in support of what I have
said on the law of treason. You will remem-
ber that, during the feeble and abject govem-
SMUt of Kichard 2nd, certain questions were
put to the judges, upon which they delivered
answers. One of them was this. A statute
had been made which had been supposed to
be a subversion of the fundamental law of the
Jnagdom, and an encroachment on the royal
»power ; and a question was put, by command
.l>f the king, ^' what punishment they deserved
that compelled the -king to the making of that
statute? Whereunto the judges gave answer,
4hat they should suffer as tmitors/' There
wsfe other eight answers that do not bear on
the present question. Nobody will deny, that
to compel the king to consent to a statute, may
be an overt act of treason. To put him under
>Sonstraint» is a common overt act of treason.
Bot the judges, without regavd to the distinc-
tion which I have adverted to, and confounding
what may or may not be an act of treason
.aecoffding to circumstanoes ; in other words,
what may or may not be evidence of treason,
.with the crime itself, they pronounced that the
persons who compelled the king to make an
improper statute were guilty of treason. Now
I will read what sir Matthew Hale (vol. i,
•p. 84.) says, with regard to the answer so
given by those judges ; <' The king called to-
gether the two chief justices, and divers others
of the judges, and propounded divers questions
touching the proceeding in that parliament,
and the obtaining of that commission; and
they gave many liberal answers, and among
.tlie rest, ' Qnalem posnam mereotur, qui com-
Sulerunt sive arctarant regem ad oonsentieo-
um confectioni dictonim statuti, ordinationis,
etcommissionis? Ad qoam questionem una-
nimit^r respondenint, quod sunt, ut proditores,
rneritb puniendi. Item qualitSr suni illi pu-»
Hiendi, qui impediverunt regem, quo minus
potertkt exeiosre qyis i|d regalia et pmrogati-
vam suam pertinoeruntF Unanimit^r etiam
respondenint, quod sunt, ut proditores, etiam
puniendi,' with divers other questions, and
answers to the like purpose.'' That is the very
answer I read from the State Trials. You see
what he says, '' This extravagant as well as
extrajudicial declaration of treason, by these
judges, gave presently an universal offence to
the kingdom; for presently it bred a great
insecurity to all persons : and in the next ^^^
\ivnsuicraitmopufificationis 11th R. 2nd, there
were divers appeals of treasons, by certain
lords appellors, wherein many were convict of
high U'eason, under general words of accroack'
mg rot^alpotoery tubvertitig the realm, &c. : and
among the rest, those very judges that thus
liberally and arbitrarily expounded treason in
answer to the king's questions, were, for that
venr cause, adjudged guilty of high treason,
and had judgment to be hanged, drawn, and
quartered, though the execution was spared ;
and they, having led the way, by an aroitrary
construction of treason not within the statute,
they fell under the same fate by the like arbi-
trary construction of the crime of treason."
And he adds again,
*' Now, although the crime of high treason
is the greatest crime against faith, duty, and
human society, and brings with it the greatest
and most fatal dangers to the government,
peace, and happiness of a kingdom or state,
and therefore is deservedly branded with the
highest ignominy, and subjected to the greatest
penalties that the law can inflict ; vet, bv these
instances, and more of this kind that might be
given, it appears, 1. How necessary it was,
that there suould be some fixed and settled
boundary for this great crime of treason, and
of what great importance the statute of 25th
£. 3rd was, in order to that end. 2. How
dangerous it is to depart from the letter of that
statute, and to multiply and enhance crimes
into treason by ambiguous and general words,
as accroaching of royal power, nwveriing qfjw-
damental laws, and the like ; and 3. How dan-
gerous it is, by construction and analogy, to
make treasons, where the letter of the law has
not done it ; for such a method admits of no
limits or bounds, but runs as far as the wit and
invention of accusers, and the odiousness and
detestation of persons accused will carry men.^
The venerable author here declares, that all
accusations of this kind, such as encroaching
on the royal power, or subverting the funda-
mental laws of the realm, are too vague as
charges of treason ; and that the answer which
those judges gave is worthy of the highest re-
probation, and was given in opposition to the
statute of Edward 3rd. He never speaks upon
the subject, throughout the whole course of his
work, without animadverting, in terms equally
severe* on the- conduct of those judges. At
page 266, he s^ys, that *' although the statutes
of Richard are repealed as to the new treasops
which they introduced, yet still they are of
force and efficacy to the damning of those ex«
travagant opinions and declaraticms.^ Now I
3051
Jbt AdtumtUring utdawfiA Oath*.
A. D. 1817.
[306
entreat your lordships to turn to the present
il^dictment, aod see what it is that the public
prosecutor calls upon you to declare to be trea-
son in this case. One would suppose he had
purposely used the very terms which sir Mat-
thew Hale has branded with his stigma.
** Which oath, or engagement, or obligation,
to the foregoing purport, did bind, or did pur-
port or intend to bind the persons taking the
same, to commit treason, by effecting by phy-
sical force, the subversion of the established
goTemment, laws, and constitutioQ of this
kingdom."
Are you not here called upon to declare,
that subverting the realm* or the fundamental
laws of the realm, is treason ? Are you not
called upon to enhance an act into treason by
ambigoous and general words? When his
lordship requires you to find this indictment
relevant, he requires you to make the very
same answer which the English judges did in
the reign of Richard 2nd, and which sir Mat-
Aew Hale so strongly reprobates — ^an answer,
•n account of which one of those unhappy
fudges was dragged to the gibbet, and aU of
them held up to the execration of posterity.
I may illustrate this proposition in another
way more fiuniliar to your lordships, by re-»
€erring to our own, instead of the English law.
)f r. Hume expresses himself in the following
words : — ^" I have said in the second place that
a libel is not good, unless it give such an ac-
count of the criminal deed as may distinguish
Ifaia particular charge from all other instances of
the same sort of crime, and thus bring the
panel to the bar, sufficiently informed of that
whereof he is accused ; otherwise the purpose
would not be fulfilled, which the law enter-
tains, in ordering the panel to be served with
a copy of his libel, ana allowing him so many
days to mak& preparation for his defence. In
confirmation of this rule, M'Kenzie has rightly
appealed to that statute respecting the crime
of ibrestalling, which allows an offender in this
sort to be indicted, generally, as known and
leputed to be a common forestaller, without
any more specif detail of his transgression ;
thus plainly implying, that such a course of
accusation is contrary to the tenor of our com-
mon law, and is justifiable only under the au-
thority of a positive enactment. It is certain,
accoiuingly, with respect to any article of
dittay, which is stated quite at large, without
any reasonable specification of the time, place,
or manner of the thicg which is alleged to have
heett done, that the panel cannot be put on
hia defence against it.*"
Now I should like to know what species of
tieason-^in the words of Mr. Hume, " what
tort of the crime,*' the lord advocate had in
yn»Wj under the description of 6ffectin^, by
phyaiqal force, the subversion of the estabbshed
government.
To obtain ahnual parliaments and universal
iiifirage by violent and unlawful means, may
* 3 Comm. 310.
VOL. XXXIII.
be overt acts of compassing the king's death*
or of levying war, or of conspiring to levy war
to obtain an alteration of the law. If the
public prosecutor may have in view tliree dif-
ferent treasons, distinct from each other, how
is it possible, according to Mr. Home, that this
can he a relevant indictment, when it does not
specify which of them he had in view ? This
argument, you will observe, is distinct from
the other. Formerly I argued, that to libel an
overt act of treason, is not to libel treason ;
now I contend, in addition to that plea, that
to libel treason is insufficient, unless the sort
or species of the treason is also laid. And
whatever holds with regard to a libel for trea-
son, necessarily holds with regard to a libel
for administering an oath binding to commit
treason.
But there is one consideration more, to shew
you the extreme danger of admitting charges
of constructive treason ; and it is this, that the
facts here represented as overt acts of treason,
do not in reality amount to treason, or afford
any evidence of the existence of treason. In
truth, the law, the constitution, and the govern-
ment, may be subverted by violent means, and
yet no treason be committed. It is no matter
that the case is not very probable ; it is quite
sufficient for my present purpose, that it is
merely possible. Suppose the case, that an
individual robs the Bank, and bribes parliament
to make the government despotic, where is the
lawyer who will affirm this to be treason under
the 25th Edward 3rd P Suppose that an in-
dividual compels a judge, by violence, to grant
criminal warrants for arresting illegally certain
members of parliament, in consequence of which
they are prevented from voting against
universal suffrage and annual parliaments.
This is not levying war to put constraint upon
parliament, under the 36th 6f the king ; for the
act of an unarmed individual, as we shall suppose
him, caunot be the levying of war. Yet nere
the constitution is overturned by violent and
unlawful means, without the commission of
treason. These are examples to show the
danger of departing from the salutary principle
of the law of England, that where treason is
charged, it shall be accurately specified. If
you depart from that principle, and find the
present indictment relevant, you overturn the
whole law of treason — you let in all the con-
structive treason which existed before the 25th.
of Edward the 3rd and the security which the
subjflbts of this kingdom deriwd from that ex-
cellent statute will be destroyed.
One circumstance I had nearly forgot to
mention. It is only another instance of the
extreme inaccuracy with which this indictment
is framed. It was pointed out the last time we
were before your lordships ; but the public
prosecutor has not corrected the error. The
terms of the oath, as he has stated it, in the
third clause, are, ** and that I will support the
same to the utmost of my ppwer, either by
moral or physical iireneth, as the case may re-
quire;'' and yet, when he comes to mention the
X
JTOTJ
57 GCOROE m.
Iriai afAndrOo StlOidtjfk
C30»
rmport of the oath, in the subsequent part of
the indictment, he says the obligation was, to
use physical^/brcf . Now, you see he does not
do this ^carelessly or unintentionally; for he
repeats it after his attention had been expressly
called to It by the prisoner and by your lord-
ships; and his doing so is just saying he thinks
himself entitled to substitute one word for
another, although they are of an import ma-
terially different. If he is to be indulged with
that liberty, it is in Tain to talk of construction
at all, for he may make any oath signify ^at
he pleases. Strength and force are undoubtedly
two different things, as was well illustrated by
Mr. Clerk on a former occasion.*
The grounds then, I go upon, are these.
Finty I maintain that this is an accusation of
treason, which cannot be tried in the present
form. Secondly, That the obligation contained
ki this oath, with the exception of a misde-
meanor, does not infer any thing criminal ; and
that even if it did, it does not necessarily infer
any thing treasonable. Thirdly, That the
leaning which the prosecutor extracts from
the oath, is not the meaning that, by any fair
construction, it can bear. And Lastly, Sup*
posing it did bear his meaning, that the acts,
which he says amount to treason, do not
amount to it. The indictment is altogether er-
roneous; -the obligation whidi it affirms the
4ath imposed, is not affirmed to be a specific
ti^ason properly defined ; and, in fact^ it may
be no treason at all.
- There is another objection to this indictment
of a nature a little more subtle, and which
fests on a principle of the law of England ap-
plicable to this statute. If you give leave to
ine of my brethren to address you on the sub-
ject, that objection may be stated to you with
more effect. On a former day, your lordships
stated that it was your rule to allow several
counsel for the panel to speak in succession at
the commencement of the argument on the
relevancy ; and it is because I am not so well
qualified to do justice to this point, that I
would rather devolve it on another, who is
more conversant in English law. The objec-
tion rests on two or three propositions. It is
well established in common law, that felony
merges in treason; and when, from the evidence
ita a trial on a charge of felony, treason appears
to have been committed, the trial cannot pro-
ceed for the felony. Now here, the conclusion
of the broseeutor is, that the oath was
trmtcrouJy aidministered ; and the oveit act
refers to an oath which would in itself, if ad-
ministered or taken, amount, uecordaig to the
proieeutcr, to the crime of high treason. It is
no answer to say, that the statute here enacts
that an oath binding to commit treason should
be held to be felony ; for this reason, that it is
dnother principle of the law, that whereShe
legislature declares a certain act to be felony,
it shall be held not to have been treason before
the statute. There might be many* oaths
■MB
See the preceding eayev
I Inndingto commit treasoswlndi oatliB mig^t be
taken without the taker actually conumtting
treason by so swearing. An oath to levy war
for destroying stocking-frames,, may not be
treason, whereas other oaths binding to commit a
treason, in the very act of administration or of
taking, form treason of themselves. The legis*
lature might have in view only the species of
oaths, which binding to commit treason, do-
not, in the administrating of them, infer the
commission of treason. Another rule is, that
where there are two statutes relative to any
matter, and the one does not repeal the other,,
they must be interpreted so that the one nsay
be consistent vrith the other. Statutes, there-
fore, as'to treason, which have passed since the
statute of Edward 3rd, must be construed, if
possible, so as to be consistent with the latter.
This limits, therefore, the statute of the Mndi
of the king, to those oaths only which are ad-*
ministered witliout the commission of treason,
at the time of administration ; and, in common
sense, it could not otherwise be interpreted
without endangering the whole fabric of the>
constitution. What would be the consequence
were the case otherwise ? A person adminisNT
tering an oath, the very administration of
which is treasonable, might be protected fronr
a prosecution for treason, by an indictment
bemg served ujf)on him under the statute. It
is plain, therefore, that this statute, in so for as
treason is concerned, can only apply to oaths
binding to that species of treason in whiob
the taking of the oath is not of itself treason.
These principles will be illustrated more at
length to you by Mr. Grant, and supported by
authorities.
Upon an these grounds taken together, we sub-
mit that this indictment is as objectionable as
the former, and that the prisoner, therefore,
should be dismissed from tne bar.
Lord Jtatice Ocr^.— Before Mr. Clerk is
precluded from making any observations o»
the subject, I think it right to direct bis attes-
tion to a circumstance which has occurred te
the Court, as deserving the ponsideratien of
boUi parties. In reference to all the four par-
tieukur charges, as to the administration of this
alleged unlawful oath, this indicttpeat con-
clndes in these words : — ** The said oath,, or
engagement, or obligation to the said purport,
binding the persons taking the same to commit
treason, as said is.*' These are not the words
used ie the conclusion of that part of the in*
dictment which follows the recital of the ottdi :
" which oath, or engagement^ or obligatioe'to
the foregoing purport; did bind, or did purport
or intend to bmd, the persons taking the same
to commit treason, by effecting, l^ physical
force, the subversion of the established goveiiK*
ment, laws, and constitution of this ktogd4un>
and es{)eciallv by obtaining annual parliament*
and universal stmrage, by unlawfbl and violent
means.*' In the four .particular instances of
the administration of the oath specified in the
indictment, neitbes ^ purpotting,'' nor ** in*
909]
inlaitofd Oaths.
A. a 1817.
Imduig,'* tre mentioned, which are the words
of the statute.
I tlunk it right to bring this under the ob*
aenratioD of the bar. Ibe objection was al-
ready in your lordship's yiew.
Mr. GfWit, — ^If in a case of this extreme
anxietjy my attention could be directed to any
thing personal to myself, I should certainly
leel under the greatest embarrassment, in ad-
dressing your lordships, after the speech which
you have just heard. I cannot, however, on
the present occasion^ feel the least concern for
any thing that belongs to myself. Not Only is
this case one of great anxiety, as it involres
the lives of the unfortunate men who are to be
tried for the crimes which are charged in this
indictment; but I regard it as one of the
createst importance in point of law. It is, so
far as I know, the first case in which the Court
of Justiciary in Scotland has been called upon
to decide on a question of treason, according
to the principles of the law of England re-
garding treason, which were imported (if I may
use the expression) into this country imme-
diately after the act of Union between England
and Scotland.
I am bound to believe that your lordships
are conversant with the English authorities
«pon this subject, because you are bound to ad-
minister the law according to these authorities ;
and, therefore, when- 1 refer to them, and when
I address to your lordships the same sort of
itfgument which I should address to the courts
elsewhere, I am aware, that not only no
apology is necessary for doing so, but that it
is my bounden duty so to do, because these
are authorities in the law of Scotland. When
I say this, I do not mean to assort so un-
reasonable a proposition as that it can be ex-
pected from your lordships that you should be
as intimately acquainted with the phraseology
of this part of the law, and with the cases by
which Jt is governed, as you are with the
phraseology and esta'bUshed practice of the law
of Scotland, as it applies to the cases which
generally come before you.
Therefore, when I request your attention to
Ac alignment which it is my duty to state to
.you, I am aware that I demand of your lord-
ships an attention to a subject with which you
cannot bl so thoroughly familiar as you are
with any other branch of the law which you
administer; and I am also but too sensible,
that I am not capable of either explaining or
supporting my argument in the manner which
the deep importance of the case demands.
I am b6und to perform my duty in the best
manner I can ; but, I confess, I feel an un-
common degree of anxiety on the subject, be-
cause, having considered it with die utmost at-
tention of which I am capable, I am satisfied,
in my own mind, that I cannot fail in esta-
blishrag the propositions which I have to an-
nounce, except from a want of that talent for
eiplanatioB and expontion which the subject
reqmres.
[310
I have to lay down certain propositions; in
supporting which, I hope that though I shall
have occasion to refer to several authorities, I
shall not have occasion to quote them at such
leneth as to occupy very much of your time;
and I am the more disposed not to eucroach
jpon it, as your attention must be exhausted
from what you have heard, and as I have tlie
disadvantage of addressing you after so able
and luminous a speech as that which Mr.
Cranstoun has just aelivered.
I am first to maintain, what I think will be
conceded, that, 'whether this oath do or do not
^to the commission of treason, is a question qf
JEngUth law. ^ * » ./
1 shaU next state to youi' lordships, and I
think I shall satisfactorily prove to you, that it
isamaxim, in the law qf England, that an^tqf
liigh treason cannot be tried as a felony.
I shall then state to your lordships, that thk
opplies still more rirongfyto cases tried in Scot^
landr^ioT, whereas, in England, a case amount-
ing to high treason upon the evidence, cannot
be tried as a felony, and no judgment can be
given upon such a case, but the person ac-
cused is entitled to be acquitted upon such a
trial, although the form of trial in cases of
felony does not differ so essentially from that
m cases of high treason as it does in Scotland
^how mu6h more strongly must this apply in
Scotland^ where the whole form of your pro-
cedure in cases of treason is distinguished by
a positive statute, from your forms in trials for
other crimes. By a positive statute, your
lordships, sitting as you are now, cannot try
an offence which amounts, according to the
statement of the public prosecutor, to high
treason, by the machinery which you are now
employing—you cannot try it on the indict-
ment of the lord advocate. You can try it
only on the indictment of a grand jury, and
by that course and form of proceeding which
would be pursued by the court of KingVbench
in England.
Then, I shall submit, that this is your situa-
tion at present, unless it can be shewn that there
umv thing in thU act of the 52nd qf the Kinsr,
wh9ch has abrogated that rule of the common law,
and repealed that statute; and, I think, I shall
satisfy your lordships, that there is nothing in
this act of Parliament that does so abr^ate the
common law, or repeal that statute. There is
nothing in this act from which we can infer
that it was the intention of the legislature to
do either : on the contrary, it is impossible to
infer from this act any such intention without
the greatest absurdity; and the greatest in-
justioe and wrong would be introduced by so
doing.
If I make out these propositions, I shall
succeed in shewing to your lordships that this
is not a relevant indictment; and that it is not
a relevant indictment, not only because it does
not sufficiently specify and charge any treason,
but because the public prosecutor is in this
dilemma, that, if it does, he cannot try the
oiTeDCe in this shape. I desire him to take his
311 J 57 GEORGE III.
Trial of Andrew M'Kinley
r3i3
^hoice of the two propositions. lie cannot
maintain both. Either this which the oath
bound to do is charged as treason or not — it is
either a relevant charge as such, or not. It
will not be said it is relevant to charge it as
treason without words, which in their ordinary
meaning amount to a description of some
treason. Then I say, if they do not amount
to a description of a treason, the libel is irrele-
vant, upon the grounds which my friend Mr.
Cranstouo has stated. If, upon the other
hand, the prosecutor says, that the specific
treason is here sufficiently alleged and set
forth, I desire him to say, by what law he can
try tins offence in this Court by this mode of
proceeding.
Without going over again the argument of
my learned friend, which I should only weaken
by attempting to resume it, I must, in support-
ing my ovra views of the case for the sake of
the argument, suppose that he has failed in his
proposition. My intention is, to direct you to
the other branch of the dilemma. If this in-
dictment does imply a charge of treason, al-
though the specific words which we say ought
to be in the indictment are not used; then we
ask. What sort of treason or overt act of
treason do they charge ? It is said, that this
oath was administered to a great number of
persons, to many hundreds or thousands —
that it was traitorously administered to them
— and bound these many hundreds of persons
to commit treason, *' by effecting, by physical
force, the subversion of the established govem-
ment, laws, and constitution of this Idngdoro ;
and especially by obtaining annual parliaments
and universal suffrage, by unlawfiil and violent
means.'' If this means any treasoq, whatever,
it can only mean the compamng and imagining
the king's death ; or the treason mentioned in
the 36th of the king — ^levying war, in order to
compel his majesty to change his measures, or
to constrain one or both houses of parliament.
Now the compassing and imagining to levy this
war, is, by the act of the 36th of the king,
declared to be a treason. The administering
this o^th, then, to give the prosecutor his own
way, would be an overt act of such compass-
ing, or of compassing the king's death. If so,
it is an overt act of treason, and cannot be
tried as a felony. (I would request of you, my
lords, if I fail in any part of the argument
which I am maintaining to make myself intel-
ligible, to intimate to me when I do so; for I
wisli to take up as little time, and to render
myself as intelligible as possible.) I say it is
a known rule of the law of England, that
felony merges in treason — that treason drowns
felony, {f a person is accused of felony, and,
upon the evidence, it comes out to be an overt
act of treason, be must be acquitted upon that
trial. He cannot, by the law of England, be
convicted upon an indictment of felony, where
the crime amounts to an overt act of treason.
This is a maxim in the law of England, of
to ancient a date, that it is difficult to find it
in the more modern authors^ in other than gene
ral terms, because it is a proposition which ni>-
body has ever ventured to dispute. If we
turn to the Year-Book 31 Hen. 6th. we find
that the greater offence drowns the less — ^And
this is a general maxim. For instance, tres-
pass is extinct in felony. Suppose goods are
taken, and an action of trespass is brought for
them, if, upon the evidence, it appears that the
crime amounts to felony, the prisoner roust be
acquiVlted of the trespass, because the felony
drowns the trespass — the trespass merges in
the felony ; and he must be acquitted of the
trespass and re-indicted for the felony. The
Year-Book 31 Hen, 6th. 15,* says, "It was
agreed that in case of a robbery, the person
robbed shall not have an action of trespass for
the goods, for the trespass is extinct in the
felony, et ornne magus trahit ad se minus,*'
Where an action of trespass was brought by a
husband for beatiug his wife, whereby she
died ; the action vras found not to lie, because
the crime was a felony.f The policy of the
law is stated by Mr. Justice Jones in Dawkes
r. Coveneigh.t "If the party robbed may
have his election, either to indict the felon, or
to have his action of trespass ; this would
prove very dangerous.'' And the Chief Jns*
tice Roll gives the same reason. Many felo-
nies would thus be smothered'. By the law of
England, your lordships know, these are
popular actions. Where there are popnlar
actions, persons, from many motives, would
indict for the lower offence. But the law says.
No. If the evidence shew that a greater sort
of offence has been committed than that which
is charged, the person tried must be acquitted
on the indictment for the lesser offence, and he
must be re-tried for the greater offence, and
the prosecutor shall not have power to choose
the tower, so as to dispense with a trial for
the higher.
You are aware, my lords, that treason, by
the law of England, is not confined to what
we commonly call treason. It consists of two
sorts, high and petit treason. Petit treason is
the murder of a husband by his wife, or a
master by his servant. It has been decided,
where, upon an indictment of murder, it came
out to be a case of petit treason, that the per-
son must be acquitted on that indictment,'
because the felony is merged in th\e petit trea-
son. If this is the case as to petit treason,
still more must it be so as to high treason.
I am aware that Mr. Justice Foster (as to
whose opinion I shall speak presently) doubts
the authority of the case in which this was
said to be determined ; and, he says, that, be-
cause petit treason and murder are of the
same nature, and petit treason is considered in
law only as an aggravated species of murder,
the murder shall not be merged in the petit
treason. But what does he say he would do
himself? Does he say he would direct a ver-
♦ Quoted in Bro. Ab. 145, voce Trespass,
t Huggins' Case, 4 Jac. 1 ; 2 Ro. Ab. 557.
J Sty. 247,
3] 3 J
far AJbrnnidtring unla»/kl Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
1314
diet of guilty of murder on sach lodictmcDt ?
Ue says> that be would not direct an acquittal
for fear the acquittal of the petit treason
might be pleaded against a new indictment for
murder; out that be would discharge the jury
of the indictment altogether, and would direct
a re-indictment fm the petit t^ason ; for that
a. prisoner is entitled, when treason is charged
against him, to the forms and privileges of a
treason trial, his peremptory challenges, two
witnesses, &c. &c. And, therefore, says the
judge, I would discharge this indictment, and
I would again direct an indictment for the
petit treason.
There is not a case in the books, of a rer-
did boring been pronounced for murder when
the ^tB amounted to petit treason. I have
not found such a case alluded to; but I find
the above opinion of this judge as to the case
of petit treason, which is only an aggravated
species of homicide. When other authori-
ties say, generally, a person charged with the
lower crime should be acquitted, that judge
says, he would, in the case of pietit treason,
dischaige the jury. He does not say he would
desire him to be acquitted for the reason I
have stated; but he says, though the two
crimes are the same in substance, petit treason
b^ng an aggravated species of murder, he
would not put the culprit to his trial where the
prosecutor ought to nave indicted for petit
treason, and Sie prisoner is entitled to that
mode of trial which is appointed for every
qiecies of treason.
All these arguments apply more strongly to
high treason than to petit treason. It is trae,
in high treason, the penalty is greater^— the
forfeitures are different. But so they are in
petit treason.— In the case of a woman, the
judgment in petit treason was, that she riiould
be burned to deaih. fiut the principle is,
that on account of the odiousness of the crime
of high treason, the attention of government
to put it down is more excited, than with re-
gard to other crimes : and, in proportion as
Siis operates on one side to increase the pen-
alty, the law watches over the pasoner on
the other, and gives him peculiar privileges in
his trial. — And the judges hold themselves
'hound not to balance between the two classes
of cases — they l^old themselves bound to ex-
ecute the law a:t it stands ; and they think
that the law has)udged wisely, and that it is a
great advantage to the prisoner that he should
be tried according to the mode of trial ap-
pointed by the. law, though it be attended
with the dtfadvantage of greater punishment
in the event of his guilt being established.
On this subject, I think, I need do nothing
more than shortly cite some authorities to vour
lordships. First, I shall cite a case where
there vras a trial for murder; and the cir-
cumstances having amounted to petit treason,
the prisoner was acquitted, ana a trial was
ordered for the petit * treason. That case is
mentioned in the State Trials, vol. 6th, in the
cascof Coke andWoodbume. Ilwasaease tried
in 1718, and cited by the prisoner Coke in his
defence.* It was said to nave occurred at the
assixes; and on a conference with all the
judges, an acquittal was directed, and the
culprit was re-indicted for petit treason, con-
victed, and executed. I need go no further
to shew, that if the facts had amounted on an
indictment of murder, or other felony, not to
petit treason, but to high treason, an acquit-
tal must have been directed. In a case in
Dyer's Reports, page 50, a, a general pardon
having been granted, of all treasons and
felonies, with the exception of murder, it was
found, that petit treason was not within the
exception, but within the pardon.
I observe that the counsel for the Crown, in
the case of Coke and Woodburae, three of
them, very learned persons, admitted that the
case cited, as decid^ in 1712, was good law.
They admitted, that the killing a husband or
a master could not be tried on an indictment
of murder, because a different and distinct
offence. The Chief Justice did not deny, but
seemed to admit this as good law. Whether
that case had been so decided, was a qoestioD
of fact ; and you will observe that this case of
Coke and Woodbume, in which it was cited,
was tried in 1721, between eight and nine
years after the opinions of all the judges in
the case cited, were supposed to have been
given; so that it is not easily conceivable, that
if there had been any error m point of fact, it
would not liave been noticed. But, having
mentioned this case, it is proper to take notice
of a passage in Mr. Justice Foster's second dis-
course on Crown Law, page 326. It is as follows :
** While the case of the King against Svran,
reported before, was depending, and before
the second bill was preferred, a question was
made, whether Swan could be convicted on
the indictment for murder, if it should come
out in evidence that he was servant to the
deceased at the time the fact was contrived or
committed? and, consequently, that this
offence was petit treason. *
*" There is a case cited (6 State Tr. 224 .)»
in tlie printed trial of Coke and Woodbume'
which (if Much case there ever vhu) hath, as iar
as the authority of it goeth, determined that
question. At the summer assizes at borches«
ter, 1712, a woman was indicted before Mr.
Justice £yre, for the murder of another wo-
man; upon evidence it appeared, that Ihe
person murdered was her mistress, which
made the crime petit treason. The Judee
directed this matter to be specially found;
and, upon conference with all the Judges, it
was holden, she ought to be acquitted upon
this indictment, as she accordingly was, and
was afterwards indicted for petit treason, and
convicted and executed. This case is not to
be found in any report printed or MS. that I
have met with, or heard of; nor have I, upon
a strict inquiry, met with any footsteps of
such case, among the minutes of proceedingg
• 16 How, St. Tr. 84.
8151
ffl GEORGE III.
Trial ofAnireiA M'Kmkif
rsia
on the Cfown side, in tbe cOQoty where
the caae is supposed to have arisen, though
tiie minutes, from 1708 to 1722, have been
earefullj searched. For these reasons, and
what is suggested in the marginal note, I con-
clude that no such case ever existed. Lord
Chief Justice Hale is very full and express on
tbe other side of the question : that a person
who is guilty o^ petit treason may be indicted
•f murder, for it is a species of murder ; and
a pardon of murder pardoneth petit treason."
1 quote this passage for the purpose of
•hewing^ that the learned Judge's only difficul-
ty was, that petit treason was a species of
murder; but he never c^uestioned that, gene*
rally speakiUg, any mmor offence should
Qierge in the greater on^ of treason.
Then he goes on to say, ^ But though I am
satisfied, that the law considereth petit treason
and murder as one offence, differing only in
mrcumstance and degree ;«yet, whether it may
be advisable to proceed, upon an indictment
for murder, against a person plainly appear*-
ing to be guilty of petit treason, is a matter
that deserveih great consideration, and pro-
bably determined the attorn^-general to
prefer a fresh bill for petit treason m Swan's *
case; for, though tbe offences are, to most
purposes, considered as substantially the same,
yet, as there is tome difference between theiti
with regard to the judgment that is to be pro-
nounced upon a conviction, and & very mate-
rial one vrith regard to the trial, a person
indicted for petit treason being entitled to a
peremptory chaUenge qf 35, 1 think, if the pro-
secutor be apprised of the true state of the
case, as he may be if he useth due diligence,
be ought to adapt the indictment to the truth
of the fact.
<' But if, through a mistake on the part of
the prosecutor, or through the ignorance or.
inattention of the officer, a bill be preferred
as for murder, and it shall come out in evidence
that the prisoner stood in that sort of relation
to the deceased which rendereth the offence
petit treason, I do not think it by any means
advisable, t6 direct the jury to give a verdict
•of acquittal; for a person charged with a
crime of so heinous a nature ought not to have
the chance given him, by the <Jourt, of avail-
ing himself of a plea of auterfbits acquit.
In such a case, I should make no sort of
difficulty of discharging the jury of that
indictment and ordering a fresh indictment
for petit treason.f In this method the pri-
soner will have advantage of his peremptory
challenged, and the public, justice will not
suffer. And, on the other hand, in case of
an indictment for petit treason, if it be proved
that the defendant killed the deceasea vritb
Auch circumstances of malice as amount to
murder, but the relation of servant, &c. is not
■ ■■ ■' ■■- ■ ^~^^— ■'"
•l8How. St.Tr. 1198.
. t See the case of Penelope Edwards, cordm
Lawfenoe^ J. 6 CkUw. Btim^ 467, ed> of 1620;
iKufi. 695
proved, I have no sort of doubt that, on suck
an indictment, tbe defendant may be found
Jfuilty of murder, and acquitted of tbe treason,
or murder is included in every charge of petit
treason,./^toic^ proditorie et ex malitid pr^ea^i*
taid MUaDRAVIT."
Upon this it may be observed. First, that
although Judge Foster considers murder and
petit treason offences of the same nature, so
much so, that on an indictment for petit
treason, a verdict may be found for murder,
yet the greater advantages afforded by law to
the prisoner on the trial — ^the peremptory
challenge of 35 of the jury — tlie requiring two
witnesses — and other circumstances— entitle a
Erisoner to be indicted for petit treason, if
is offence actually amount to that descrip-
tion ; and if it do amount to that description,
and so comes out in evidence, but through
mistake, or ignorance, or inattention of the
prosecutor, the indictment is preferred as for
murder, the prisoner is entitled to have that
indictment dismissed. Secondly, If petit
treason were to be considered as a distinct
and higher species of offence, it is clear, in
Judge Fosters opinion, there would be no
doubt whatever but the prisoner, under such
circumstances, must be acquitted.
But there are abundant authorities to shew
that this has ever been the doctrine of the law
of England. Thus, in the Year-Book, S.
Henry 7th 10. where there was a question
about an accessary in the harbouring one
guilty of treason (your lordships know, that
in felony there may be accessanes by the law
of England, but in treason they are all prin-
cipals). Chief Justice Hussey says, " l^ere
can be no accessary in treason ; tbe receiving
a traitor cannot be only a felony, but is treason
et in catu ibidem,*^
Thus, Saccombe's case, 33. Henry 8th is
thus reported by Lord Chief Justice Dyer.*
^* A woman had poisoned her husband, which
offence is made treason about the 31st Henry
8th (22d Henry 8th.); and by the general
pardon granted by parliament in 32nd Heniy
8th this « offence was pardbned. Now the
son had brought an appeal against the wife ;
the question was, whether this appeal lies, and
some thought that because the offence is made
treason, it mergeth each lesser crime as the
crime of murder, which was before at common
law, and so the offence is no^ punishable as
murder, but as treason, and so no appeal lies.
But aome were of a contrary opinion, &c.
But the opinion of the judges was, that the
appeal was not maintainablo/' And the re-
porter refers to the case 3 H • 7. above stated.
And in Coke's report in the cases of par-
dons, 29th Elizabeth f it is laid down, '' If
murder or petit treason be made high treason,
thereby the murder or petit treason is ex-
tinct, for high treason doth drown every less
offence.''
■^— ^— <■— 1.11 . 1— ..— ^iM.^wf.1*——
• Dy . 50, «.
'|*6rRep. 13^6*
arr\
Jot Aimiiaiiknmg 'wAeltffA Ooths.
A. O. 1817.
D318;
And Judge Foster^ niiMe opinioD that
murder is not memd in petit treason I hare
already noticed, referring to Saccombe's cafse,
which I have jnst read to yonr lordships from
the report of my Lord Chief Justice Dyer, and
denying its aothoiity to prove that murder is
nexged in petit treason, expressly founds on
it as an aathority to shew that all inferior fe"
lenies are merged and extingoished in the
ofience of high treason; and that when an
oflence amounts to high treason, a trial for
fieiony is i»an«d.
I read from the same dissertation I have
already quoted.
** Theve is a case in Dyer," says the learned
judge, ** wUch has been thought to fevour the
opinion, that the crime of murder is merged in
petit treason ; and that a pardon of treason
discharged it, notwithstandmg the ezceptioo
of murder ; but that case proveth nodiing like
it. A wife, about the 3l8t Henry 8th poi-
soned her husband. Then came a general
pardon, by which treason was pardoned, but
with an exception of wilfol murder. The
heir brought an appeal of murder against the
wile, and it was adjudged that the appeal did
not lie. This case doth not prove that mur-
der is merged in petit treason, but that both
murder aiui petit treason were merged and
extinguished m the offence of high treason ;
for at Aat time, by virtue of the 22nd Henry
8tb, all wilful poisoning was high treason, and
being so, the appeal, not being saved by the
act, was barred whether the treasoa had been
pardoned or not.'**
I mention these caftes to shew, that the doc-
trine of the law of England is, that the minor
ofieooe merges in the higher offence. I need
not trouble your lordships with further au-
thorities upon this subject. I think what I
have stated is suflBcieot to prove tl^e general
ufroporition, that, by the common law of Eng-
land, all feloities merge in the offence of
high treason ; and that an act, amounting in
its circumstances to high treason, cannot, by
the law of England, be tried as a felony*
But I would now beg to call your attention
Jto this, which I think very material in the pre*-'
sent case ; that the argument is stronger iQ
Scotland, under the act of queen Anne, uan in
England under the common law. You know,
dkat by the act of queen Anne f whidi was
passed after the Union, and under powers re-
served in the act of Union, the whole law of
England, upon the subject of treason, has been
imported into Scotland. The mode of trial has
been imported — and od this subject Aete are
two clanses to be adverted to. One is per-
Bnssive to the queen, and her heirs, who may
direct a commimion of oyer and terminer, to
try treason in Scotland. The other is impera-
tive, and requires your lordshipd in this
Court to inquire of all treasons in the same
manner as the Court of King's-bench/ The
♦ Post. Cr. Iaw 325» + 7 Anne, c. 21.
third faction enacts, That the ^ Justice Court
of Scotland shall have fiiU power and anthori^s
and ers Acnefty reqwtd to inquire by the oathft
of twelve good and lawful men of me county^
shire, or stewartry, where the respective courts
shall sit, of all high treasons and misprisions oC
high treason committed within the said county^
&C.; and thereupon to proceed, hear, and de^
termine " (that is, they aie regnarad to proceed^
hear, and determine) ^'the said offences
whereof any person shall be indicted before
them, in such manner as the Court of Queeh*»«
bench, or the justices of oyer and terminer ia
England, may do by the laws of England.''
So that here is a pdsitive statute requiriiw
this Court to proceed, and determine, accor£
ing to the forms of the King's-bench in Eugi
land. And, it will be conceded, tlmt unless
there are words in this act of the fi2nd of the
king, sufficient to repeal the former enactment,
it is not competent to this Court to inquiry
into cases of treason, in anv other way thanr
the courts of England would inquire. The
words are imperative. The first clause might
be interpvetea, ' as if a trial itaight take place
according to the ancient forms ; but as to th^
second clause, there can be no doubt that it
demands a contrary interpretation. >
It were a waste of time to say a word
further upon tlie subject, to prove to your
lordships thai the rule of the common law of
England as to trials for treason, and the regn«
latiqns of the statute as to such triab in Sooti
land, are as I have stated; And it would be ^
still greatier waiste of time to attempt to show^
after this statute of queen Anne, that if any
treason appear upon the evidence, you connol
proceed otoerwise than according to the forma
of the law of En^and, in cases oi treason.
We come,, therefore, to this aimple questioB.
Does, this act of the 52nd of his majesty, on
which the indictment is laid, aimount to an sJbm
rogation of that rule of the common ' law of
which I have spoken, or to a repeal of this act
ef queen Anne? But, it is a rule that acts of par<»
liament shall be interpreted according to the
rules of the common law ; and my lonl Coke
says, that, in particular cases, the words of an
act tha\\ be restricted in order to bring them
within the rule of the common law. lliere is
no necessity for that here, where there are
two acts of parliament, and no words in the
second repealing the first. If the words of
the second can admit a construction leaving
the fonner free to operate, it is necessary so
to construe it. It is necessary for the Crown
counsel to show, either that there are words in
the 52nd of the king, that repeal the act of
queen Anne, or that that act of the 52nd of tlie
king, cannot receive effect without such virtual
repeal — ^tbat the evil which the act was made
to control and remedy, could not be controlled
and remedied, unless you were ta interpret the
act as repealing eo much of the act ot queen
Anne.
If I can show, there is nothing in this act of
the 5Snd of the king> in its fullest and most
310]
57 GEORGE III.
THal ofAndrm MyKivky
[320
ample interpretation — ^in the purposes it em-
braceSy or in contemplation could embrace —
nothing that in the least interferes with the act of
queen Anne, or the regularmodeof yourinqaiiy
in any case of treason— then you are bound to
give to this act of the 52nd of his majesty, no
other interpretation than is consistent with the
act of queen Anne, a statute which is funda-
mentally connected with the constitution of
Ihis country. No act, that is introduced for
the benefit of the subject, is to be held re-
pealed, but by the express words of some
subsequent act — still less is an act to be so
repealed, which is a fundamental law of the
country. The law of queen Anne is as
much a part of the act of Union, as if it
had been inserted in it. It was passed in
consequence of a power reserved by the act of
Union* It is an act upon which the liberty and
the safety of the subjects of this country de-
pend, in cases in which the Crown may bring
them to trial for the highest state offence. It
is, therefore, a fundamental part of the law of
the country.
• For a particular purpose, that of putting
down local disturbances in England, this act,
the 62nd of Jthe king was passed ; and you are
called upon by the Crown counsel, to give this
act, intended for this purpose, containing no
words of repeal of the act of Anne, nor incon-
sistent with its provisions, an interpretation
which is to subvert the form of trial for treason
in this country. You cannot listen to the pro-
position for a moment.
Let us see what the 52nd of the king goes
to. Its preamble is : ^ Whereas an act pass-
ed in the 37th year of the reign of his present
BMijesty, intituled, An act for more effectually.
Ereventing the administering or taking of un-
iwAil oaths: And whereas, it is expedient
that more effectual provisions should be made
as to certain oaths ; be it therefore enacted,*'
fee.
The intention of the act is the same with
that of the 37th of the king, and it onlv ex-
tends its provisions further. If you refer to
the 37th of the king,«chapter 123, you will see
what is the preamble of that act — you will
there see the foundation of both : '^ Whereas
divers wicked and evil-disposed persons have
of late attempted to seduce persons serving in
his majesty's forces, by sea and land, and
others of his majesty's subjects, fcom their
duty and allegiance to his majesty, nnd to in-
cite them to acts of mutiny and sedition ; and
have endeavoured to give effect to their wicked
and traitorous proceedings, by imposing upon
the persons whom th^ have attempted to se-
duce the pretended obligation of oaths unlaw-
fully admmistered ; be it enacted," &c. Both
acts have the same object, and arise out of the
same mischief. In the 37tb of the king, this
is declared to be the attempts of evil-disposed
persons,, to seduce persons serving in the
forces, and others, to mutiny and sedition. In
the 52nd of the king, the object and the mis-
chief are. declared to be the same as in the
former act. Reference is expressly made in
the preamble to that former act, and it is
added, " Whereas it is expedient, that mora
effectual provisions should be made as to cer-
tain oaths.*'
So that both acts proceed upon a view of
the legislature, to repress the attempts of per-
sons setting about to excite others to mutiny
and sedition; and the penalty for both admi-
nistering and taking, by the first act, is the
same; viz. transportation. In the second act,
the odrnvrntening is death, without benefit of
clergy. That is the difference between the
two acts. The 52nd of the king, leaves the
persons tMng the oath to the punishment of
the 37th of the king ; but extends the punish*
ment of adminutermg to death. And,' as to the
37th of the king, are you to hold, it was the
intention of the legislature to enable the
courts to try those Kuiltv of a treasonable con-
spiracy, as guilty of a relony,'punishable with
transportation? I ask, if it is possible to con-
ceive that it was the intention of the legisla-
ture to abrogate the law of queen Anne in this
instance? We are to gather the intentions
of the legislature from the preambles of the
acts, and we may throw light on them by the
history of them when passed. We see the
preambles — we know the circumstances in
which they were passed — we know the
object and intention of the legislature in
framing them. And, from these considera^
tions, and transportation being the penalty
enacted, X ask, are you to be told it was
the intention of the legislature to repeal the
material cUusjS of* the act of queen Anne, as
to trials for high treason ? I say, tl^at cannot be
maintained for a moment by any lawyer de-
siring to have the reputation of common sense.
It cannot be maintained, that either of the acts
(that of the 37th, or of the 52nd) was intended
to have any such effect. According to the
prosecutor's interpretation of the acts, taking
an oath to murder the king, might be tried as
a common felony, — as a felony to be punished
by transportation only. And can an oath to.
commit the highest species of treason tliat
would have the effect of overturning the whole
government — an oath to commit the roost atro-
cious of all crimes— was it the intention of the
legislature to repeal the act which considers
these deeds as the highest species of treason —
(o repeal that act, and to make the taking
of such oaths — and to make such conspira^
cies, a transportable felony? It cannot be
maintained for a moment. Then what are the
words of this act, that the prosecutor makei
such a construction of it, as to th^ intention' of
the legislature, and that without express words,
of repeal ? I state confidently, that the statute,
founaed on in the indictment, cannot be held
to have repealed the statute as. to trial^. of
treason : and there is an end of the. \ybole
foundation of the argun^ent, that we can in-,
vestigate this trial in the shape and form, in
which it is prosecuted.
I. apprehend, ^^at, iu interpreting this, act,
m^
Jot' Administering titdatofut Oaths,
A. D. 1817.
[332
tQ f^.^ ^ retates to t&e question, whether
H^ n&9on ^ti within it, we musi again
KaTl recoiiise to the law of England ; because
'aloD^ with the introduction of the general law
of treason jntb Scotland, we must hold, that
the legislatuTe introduced the whole law of
England, as applicable where treason is in
question. The question, therefore, Whether,
m sound construcUdn, this act applies to' a
case of treaison? is a question of^interpreta-
tion not merely by the law of Scotland, but
Ify^ tH'e law of England ; and you will see at
<^nce, that, if there were a difference in the
niode of interpretation b^ the laws of the two
coiuitries, the rules of interpretation in the
English law, and aot those in the law of Scot-
Uuid, must lie f<Alowed. There it no differ-
ence in thie mode of interpretation by the two
laws. Bnt, I know that, in the law of Eng-
land, it is most distinctly laid down, that sub-
septet acts of parliament are to be so expound-
ed, chat they may not contradict former acts,
^rhich they do not contain express Words to
lepeal. Inus, in Roll's Reports,* an 61^
book in Norman French, th^ phraseology of
the reason of the common law giveth gneat
light; and the judges, as much as may be,
follow the rule thereof.
I would desire of your lordships to apply
to the 52n4 of the king this rule, and to inter*
pret it, as far as may be, agreeably to the rule
of the common law, on the one side ^ and to,
the statute of Anne, on the other side ; and
see if they may subsist together/'
It so hapjpens, that this is not the first oc-
casion (there having been many instances^ in
which acts have been passed, enacting into
ifelonies, circumstances that appear very muck
like overt acts of treason ; and lord Coke, in
his exposition of the law of treason, has tliese
words referred to by Qale : ** that the passing
an act, making an offence felony, is held to be
a judgment of parliament that it was not
treason."
' I would call ^our lordshins' attention to aiv
act of parliament, which so tar as I know, has
never oeen repealed, 3 lien. 7th. cb. 14»
which recites, ^Forasmuch as by quarrels
nii^e to such as have been in great authority,
p&ce, and of council with kings of this realm
which is abundantly quaint, it is laid dovrn as hath ensued the destruction of the kings and
a general rule, ** Leges fosteriores priores amtrd' the undoing of this realm ; so as it hatli ap-
rids ^rcgmitJ* But, it is said, ''This cannot peared evidently, when comjMSSing pf tM
be by ambiguous, and general wpr^s.'' And,
li iB^ added, '^ When two general statutes are
mai^e^and fMie contradicts the .other,'' (U is
meant to sajr^alvpatently contradicts), /Vboth,
if ^ey can be, snaH be so expoimdisd that the
tme^inay not ccptiadict the other. ^ And .a sub-
nc^jiient act, wtuch can be reconciled with Uijb
former, ihaU noi be a repeal of it.^ Api in
Owh^ns's Digest, under the word parliament,
iL d. tne Teamed ^uthor, treating of what shall
be' a repeal of a statute, sa^s, '* A subsequent
act which may be reconciUd with a former
sh^ not be a repeal of it.'^t And he refers
to a passage in lord Coke's Reports, whic|k I
shaQ presently read. And he says, " Every
statute ought to be expounded, not according
io the letter^ but according to die intent," re-
ferring to Roll and Plowdeo. And below,
"The preamble is a good means for collecting
tde intent.'* '^So the ground and cause of
the making; of a statute explabs the intent."
An^^ <«So a statute ought to be construed
accoi^ing to the reason aiid rule of the
comnibo law,'' referrin(^ again to Plowden.
Ai^, ''So a case, ont^of the mischief intended
to De^ remedied by a statute, shall be construed
iol^'pfai of the purview, though it he within
death c^f such as were of the ains'a true sub-
jects was had, the destruction of the prince
was imagined thereby ; and for the most part,
it hath grown, and been occasioned bv envy
and malice of the king's own household ser^
vant^, as now, of late, soch a thing was likely
to have ensued ; and, forasmuch as, by the
law of this land, if actual deeds be not had,
tiiere is no remedy for sucb faUii comnassingf,
imaginations, and cpnfed^^cies, bad ag^qst
any lord, or any of the ^king's coi|ncil, or any
of the king's great officers in bis houaehold« as
steward, treasurer, ancl comptroller, and so
great inconveniences might en^ue, if such
unffodly demeaning slioul? notbe straitly pu-
nished before that actual dee^ were done."
Then it enacts, ** Tliat if any servant, admitted
to be the king's servant,, sworn, ^ and his name
put into the chequer-roU of his household, kc.
make any confederacies, compassings, conspi-
racies, or imaginations with any person o^
{>ersons, to destroy or murder the king, or any
ord of Uiis realnu or other person sworn to the
king'js council, &c. that the said offence be.
judged felony ; and the misdoers to have judg*^
ment and. execution, ail felons attainted ought
to have by the common law." Any servant of
.^.^*i^. P-. ^i> ■>4»»>8f f>^ M «^tute of
^Qofter, by wl^ch an action of waste is givep
tlW^^^f?^^^ holdeth by law of England,-'
tpifptiirten) .''or otberwise for term of life.*'
say^ '^AlDeiL the assignee of the tenant bir
tne e6axtj^ is. within the letter of this law,
yet ho action bt waste shall be brought against
the assignee, for in construction of statutes,
' •Vol.2, p. lib. tVot5,318,ea.6fldSil
vol/xxiii.
i^ipords of the statntfs". and be quotes lord the king, entering into a conspiracy to destroy
'^^'^^ ^nd liififi p. 33^ Aiid lord Coke, 'or muider the king, qr any lord of this, realm,
^'^1 - *. .4 » shalllje judged guilty of feiony, and the bene-
fit of dergy^ even is not excluded.
So here is an act of jparl)ainant, deolaring»-
that any of the king's hoiis^old, who sbaU
conspire to murder him, may be punished
with transportation. What is the observation,
of my lord Coke upon this statute I He says,
^ to destroy or murder the kin^. . By this act,
it exprettly tgspeareih^ by the judgment of thfy
whole paraSmentj that besides the confederacy,
Y ♦
33a> ^ GEORGE tIL
TtitA ^Awdr«» M*KU^
[$•4
conspiracy, or imagination, there mast be
some other overt act, or deed tending there-
nnto, to make it treason within the statute of
25th £dw. 3rd. And thertfore the bare con"
Jkderact/f compaumg^ compiracyf or magmaiSanf
by wordi onfy, it miuk feior^ by thii act. But,
it* the conspirators do provide any weapon, or
other thing, to accomplish their devilish intent,
thUy and the Hke^ 0 an overt act to make d trea-
son." So that, though the words are so gene-
ral, that, under the act of Hen. 7, a person
might be indicted of felony for conspiring the
death of the king, it had never entered into
the head of lord i^oke, that, if this were mani-
fested by an overt act, felony, and not trea-
son, tiouid be the relevant charge. On the
contrary, he expressly says, that, in order that
a prosecution may take place upon that statute,
ft is necessary that the act charged be not
treason.
Now, an oath administered to 500 persons,
binding them to levy war against the aing, to
control him, and oblige him to change his
measures, or to control parliament, is an overt
act of a trea56n created by the 36th ^of the
king. ' In this respect, I cannot distinguish the
case of the statute of Henry Tdi from the pre-
sent ; and if, under the law of Henry 7th a
man who had entered into a conspiracy to
murder the king, coold not be tried for a
transportable felony, neither could he under
the prt'sent statute be so tried, having admi-
nistered such an oath. *
Lord Hale says, ''Regularly, words, unless
committed to writing, are not an overt act
within the statute of Edward 3rd, and the reason
given is, because they are easily subject to be
mistldcen or misapplied, or misrepeated or
misunderstood by the hearers. And this ap-
pears, by those several acts of parliament,
which were temporary only, or made some
words of -a high nature to be but felony. The
statute of 3 Hen. 7thcapil4, makes conspiring
the king's death to be felony ; which it woula
not have done, if the bare conspiring, without
an overt act, had been treason.''
In like manner, this act of the 52nd of the I the act of parliament, and it would be an
king, makes the administering of an oath
binding to commit any treason or murder, or
any felony punishable by law with death, a
felony ; which it would not have done, if the
administering of that oath had been an overt
act of hiffh treason.
And that proposition includes this other,
that if there be circumstances attending the ad-
roinij>tering which constitute high treason,
tlien it would not be a felony wirhin this act.
If- my leaimed friends will Help me out of this
dilemma h shall be obliged to them. It is an
implied judgment of parliament, that the act,
yftmch k makes a felony, is not an overt act of
treason ; and, if an act of pariiament is pro-
duced, which makes that a -felony, which would
otherwise be an overt act «f treason, the in-
ference is, that these words of the act are to
receive a limited interpretation. I apply this'
to the act of the 52nd of the king, and say,
that it can have reference to those nstanoes
only which are short of overt aicts of hig^
treason. The administering of an oith not
amounting to an overt act of high treason,
may be a felony within this act, but not othe^-
wise, because parliament cannot be presumed
to have intended to make that felony which
vras treason ; and no overt act of high treason
can come vnthin the act as a felony. It can-
not be at once a treason and a felony.
My lord Hale, in treating of the question,
how far subsequent statutes are to be taken as
interpreting the statute of Edward 3rd, and ex-
plaining, by the judgments of the legislature,
what facts are, or are not, overt acts under that
statute, has this passage: '^The statutes tst
and 2nd Philip ana Mary c. 3., Ist Ed. 6. c. 12.,
23rd Eliz. c. 2, making sevend offences felony,
have this wary clause, ' The same not being
treason by statute 25th Ed. 3rd,' '* and he says,
''Enacting an offence to be a felony, is a
great evidence that it was not treason before,
and a judgment of parliament in point ; for it
cannot be thought, that it would make that less
than treason, which was treason by 25th Ed.
3rd.'' Where lord Coke wishes to shew, that a
particular act cannot be an overt act of treason,
he thinks it sufficient to shew, that the legis-
lature has treated it as a felony.
I fear I have trespassed too long on your
lordships' attention. I would apply what I nave
stated to the present case, and I need not take
up much more of your time. I would api^y
this reasoning to the act of parliament in
hand ; and I maintain, that there are but these
two mo4es of construction here — Either the
act was meant to apply only to those oadis
binding persons to commit treason, the admi-
nistering or taking of which oa^s does not
constitute an overt act of treason, — ^I aav,
either this necessary restriction of the words
is to be adapted in their construction — or
else, there is one other alternative, and it must
be held,- that the statute of the 52nd of the
king repealed the acts of Edward Srd and queen
Anne. There is no third way of interpreting
insult to the understanding of ihe Court, to
argue which you should adopt — whether yon
should take that construction, which makes the
act provide for the emergency forwhidi it was
passed, and leaves untouched the statute of
Anne, which was introduced for the safety of
the subject — ^whether you shsdl adopt' that
construction which unites, vrith the remedy for
the |;rievance in the view of the legislatore in
passmg the act, the leaving the valaable pro-
visions of former statutes untouched— or whe*
ther voK IhaU take the ofoosile oonstmcdon,
which would rep^ the whole of these laws,
and- would introduce into the law regardillg
treason, a rule which would be opprostve to
the subject, and unsafe to the sovereign, by
reducing to a transportable felony an overt
act of treason.
There is a clause in the acts of pariiament,
of the 37th and 52nd of the king,— the list
for AiminiUrntg taHamful OatA*.
3351
dauae d these acts,— in the foUowing terms :
''ProTided also, and it is hereby aeclared,
that any person who shall be tried and ac-
quitted, or convicted of any offence against
this act, shall not be liable to be indicted, pro-
aecnled, or tried again for the same offence or
6ct, as high treason, or misprision of high
treason ; and, that nothing in tnis act contain*
cd shall be construed to extend to prohibit
any person guilty of any offence against this
act, and who shall not be tried for the same as
an offence against this act, from bi'ing tried for
the same as high treason, or misprision of high
treason, in s^h manner as if this act had not
beennuide.'* ^ conceive, that it is from loosely
interpreting this clause, that there was a no-
tion entertained by some persons, that there
is something in it which opposes the construc-
tion I have put on the other clauses. You
will observe the very same clause, which is
in the statute of the 62nd of the king, is in
die act of the 37th of the king; which last
mentioned act regards the intentions of the
parties, as well as the purport and intend-
ment of the oath, and whicn makes the ad-
ministering, as well as the taking, of the oath
oolj a transportable felony. The clause is
in the one as well as the other act. Let us
see— It is first said, ^ That any person who
shall be tried and acquitted, or convicted of
any offence against this act, shall not be liable
to be indicted, prosecuted, or tried again for
the same offence or fetct, as high treason, or
misprision of high treason ;** — let us see, if
there be not a case consistent with our in*
terpretation, which renders this enactment
• A. D. 1817.
[326
Sappose a person to be brought to the J)ar,
under this very ch^e. which is here stated
against the prisoner, for adroinisterinjr or taking
an oath binding to the commission of high trea-
son, bat by the levying of a war, other than
thai particnlar sort of war described in the
statute of the 36th of tlie king. It is laid
down by all the authorities, that the conspir-
ing to levy war generally is not an overt act of
treason. The conspiring the death of the
king is a treason^ and the actual killing of
the king cannot be prosecuted as a munier,
but most be prosecuted as an dvert act, testi-
fpng an intention to put the king to death.
Conspiring to levy war is mtf treason — the
levying of war itself it treason. Then comes
the statnte of the 36th of the king, which de-
clares the compassing or imagining the levy-
ing of war for certain purposes, as, to con-
stxain the king, or either or bt>th houses of par-
liament shall be considered an overt act of
treason. The meaning of this oath, then, if
It be not mere words which mean noting,
was to bind a number of persons to leyv war,
and this to constrain the king, or either or
both houses of parliament, and this amounts
to an overt act or treason under the statute of
the 36th of the king, and cannot be tried as
aCdofiy.
'Suppose war levied for the purposes pro--^
fessed by those unfortunate persons who- as-
sumed the name of Luddites ; for the purpose
of destroying, in the town of Nottingham and
its vicinity, particular pieces of machinery
used in the knitting of stockings. To destroy.
stocking*frames, or any particular pieces of
machinery, in any particular place or dis-
trict,, is neither levying war under the statute'
of Edward 3rd, nor under the 36th of the
king. Suppose they had levied war — suppose
they had conspired to levy this sort of war —
it would not be treason. It could only be
tried under this act, which makes it feldny.
Suppose a person accused of felony, under
this act, for aaministering oaths, to levy such
sort of war as is treason under the act of
£dvrard 3rd, but the con^irmg to levy which
is not treason; and, suppose him to be ac-
quitted— and suppose war afterwards levied'
by those with whom he had conspired ; then,
by the law of England, vrithout the last clause'
in this act, he might be tried over again for
treason, thoqgh he had been acquitted on the'
trial for felony. It was necessary to insert
this clause, or else this evil would have arisen.'
The legislature were aware, when they en-'
acted, that the administering of an oath to
commit treason should be felony, that it ap-'
proached near to an act constituting high
treason; and they therefore declared that^'.
though it should happen afterwards to be dis-
covered that it amounted to high treason, if
this did not appear at the time of a trial for'
the administering as a felony, the administra-
tor should be entitled to plead the acquittaL
That was equitable.
Suppose a person convicted of the minor
offence of taking the oath, and sentenced to'
transportation ; the act declares he shall not
be again tried for this minor offence, though
it may have involved him in high treason. It
is a reasonable object to attribute to the legis-
lature, the intention of putting by this law the
subjects of this country in safety, and prevent-
ing them from being oppressed by the officers
of the crown.
The legislature have in their view, that, in
cases of treason, the counsel of the crown are
employed, and great pains taken to convici
the accused — that the minds of the jucy, too,
are likely to be poisoned with prejudice against
them. The legislature, therefore, where there
is a charge of treason, give different rules and
afford different safeguaras, from those in com-
mon cases of felony ; and, is it reasonable that
ibis act of parliament, made for a particular
purpose, should be held to deprive the sub-
ject of these safeguards ? — or can it be held
that great treasonable offences may be com-
mitted, and only punished by transportation ?
You see how the judges proceed in such a case
in England. If a person be indicted for felony
and, either upon the face of the indictment,
or otherwise, it appear to the judges that the
act charged is treason, they would desire the
indictment to be vrithdrawn. and an indict-
ment for treason to be preferred. Suppose
^m
57 GEORGE III.
the trial proceeds without anj snch oljectiou,
andy on the evidence, treason is found to have
been committed, the judse discharges the
jury of that indictment. Judgd Foster says,
1 will not give a chance of acquittal, but *I
win discharge the jury, and will give the pri-
soner the benefit of the mode of trial appoint-
ed for cases of treason.
What is the result of an^opposite con3trac-
tion of the act? It is this. All actions are
popular in £ngland. Persons accused by an^
one of the people of conspiring to commit
treason, must be broiight before a grand jury
— ^but, according to the prosecutor^s construc-
tion of this act, tney may be guilty of treason,
and yet be tried in the ordinary way, and as
only guilty of a felony. An accomplice may
indict them under tl^ese acts, and' those, who
ought to be capitally punished for treason,
may be transported for seven years as for an
inferior felony.
I submit upon all these Tie^ the prose-
cutor's construction cannot be put upon this
act. Felonv merges in treason ; and i( in an
indictment tor felony, the prosecutor make a
charge of treason, or if the (acts of the case
turn out and appear on the fividence to be
treason, you cannot proceed in the trial for
felony ; neither by the rule of the common law
of England, nor by the statute of Anne referred
tp. There are no words in the act 59od of the
king, which go to repeal the the act of Anne,
or iibro^te the common law. The interpr^
tatjon given by the prosecutor would involve
the acts in contradiction ' and absurdity, and
ascribe views which'cannot be ascribed to the
Isgislgtiire. I submi^ that, according to my
construction, the act is consistent with die re-
medy for the eyil — with the intention of the
legislature — ^with common sense — ^and vrith
sound construction of law>
I may have stated some things at too great
length and some at too little. I was anxious to
explain my view of this case; and in so doing
I have, I fear, trespassed too long on your
lordships time and attention.
Lord JfuOee Cl&k. — The^ is^ no occasion
for an^ apology at all.
Mr, Clerk, — An important objection to the
Indictment has been noticed by the Court,
with respecit to which, it has been asked by
your lordsl^ips, * wfaejLh^r the counsel for the
prisoner have a wish to argue it? I beg leave
to offer a few obsifervations upon the point.
The objection is^ that the allegations in the
indictment do not describe tjiat offence, which
is prohibited by the act of parliament, and
ibat therefore the indictment is irrelevant ^nd
inept^ The crime described }n fh% sUtute, is
the administering an oath or engagement,
furporting or intfindu^ to'bio4 tlie person
taking the same, to commit any treason, ^.
But the prisoner is not charged with an pffence
so described ; the charge gainst him in the
•FWein^p.^. • ;
Trial ofjfndmp M^Kinky {jggg^
minor proposition of the lndic|9ieilt being,
that be administered an oath or ehgagem^i,.
binding (not purporting to bind) the peraon9.
taking the same to commit treason. Thus
tbere is a manifest difference between the
statutory offence and that which Is cjiargurf in
tlie indictment.
To administer an oath, ffurporfuig or igf^pvf'
mg to bind the person t^ing the same, Is i^
act highly criminal, and accordingly, it I9 hjf
the statute punishable with death. 'Sdi tne
allegation against the panel charges him with
an act, which is not punishable by the statute,
in which no such offence is mentioned, tn
all probability no statute will ever be' made,
declaring that which is charged against the
prisoner in this indictment to be punishable
with death, or with any other punishment op
penalty whatever. But, at all events, the pro-
secutor has totally failed in this indictasent to'
describe the statutory offence. Indeed, the
prosecutor's description of the crime sup*'
posed to have been committed defeats it^if,
by containing a plain and direct contradic^on
in its terms. He alle^ that the prisoner
administered an oath, Unditig the persons tak*
ing tihe same to commit treason. Tios allq;^-
tion pre-supposes that a person, takins an oath
to commit high treason,, is txituify hotmd \fj
such ^ oath, which is an evident absurdity.
An oath may be bindinir where its obligatiofi
is to do a thing that is legal or mnooetU ; bat
no obligation or binding enga|en|ent can ever
result from ah oath to commit &gh treason,^
or an oath to commit any other crime. I^oVidy
can be hotrnd, by the most tremendous oath,
to violate every previous obligation and en-
gagement he has come ni^der. 4s the pro*
secutor describes the offence, thereibrey no
such offence could exist; and the statement «€
it is a contradiction in terms, in so fiur as it
supposes the par^ taking the oath to be boond
by Sk aU^tance^ without which he could not
commit high treason; and supposes, at tlio
same time, that he was 90^ bmmd by bis alle-
giance, but actually bonnd by the c^4h whidi
he took. Such an absurdity as thi^ can never be
sustained in any criminal chaj^e, or ^^eed in
any legal proceeding; and mud|i less jcan it
be sustained i|i a charge vipon which' tbp
accused party is to be tri^ for his life.' '
But, thou^ the absurdity were less evident
than it is, the objection to the terms of the charge
is insurmountable, upon the plain and simple
fact that the averment of the prosecutor does not
charge the prisoner with the statutory offi^oe. It
would indeed have been very extraorduaa'nr, if
the legislature, in describing an cifi^ce of so
high a nature as to be pu^Ubable with death,
had fallen into the absuidiiy which' bS4 crept
into tliis indictment. The statute does ppt
assert, or acknowledge the pb^ibiUty of
admioisterin;^ or taking m na^y S^ .if;nx^f^
enough to ^91^ the person taking it Iq iDfnMIHt
Ipeh treason, or to commit njnrd^, m ai)^
other crime. On the contrary, it is cle^^ j||^-
90^]
far, Aiwa$i/d*n»g wiZBtg^ Oalikt,
A. Ik \X\1.
capo
ti9 A ofLth is, to all intents and porppses wbai-
soever, d^tftitote of lundiog force. The
crioiiDalitj contenplatied i;D the statute, ia that
cl Tiolatiogy bj the tota} perrersion and mU-
ujglipatioD of a solemnity, the obli|^atiop8
i^db hjnd n^^ to each other in apaety— a
Tiolation of the most dangerous Datorejjperpe-
t{ff^ ]bx ^ i90*t widred mean^ To ad-
Btpifter an |iMUh« fwfpor^w <''' io^en^uv to bind ,
tpe person )^ing the saine to commit any
treason or murder, is a wicked and dangerous
^olsytipn of th^ most sacred engagements,
though ll cannot alter them. This isthe statutory
crimp ; \mt as no such crime is charged in the
indicti]»ent, t)ie oljection suggested on the
bejich Is petfiKtlj well foundedT
JU^ J}riama^.'-\\, is now my doty to snb-
mlt to ^oor lordships, some remarks upon the
Other We of the question ; and, after the long
discussion which has already taken place, upon
almost the aame indictment as that now under
Sdr Tiew. and after the ample time which you
Te bad for private consideration ot the sub*
ject now before you, I do not feel myself palfed
qpon to enter so much at large into the case,
asotberwise I might have done. Indeed, there
ffere aome argqments used upon the other aide
cif die bar of which ][ fhall omit aU notice as
not appeving to me to hare any intimate con-
nection with the points at issue^ or to be likely
to inflqence the ultxinate decision. But there
ase others which are of gnat importance ; and
to these X shall at once proceed.
The first and gnsat point that appea^a to me
fiv yjinr loidiibip's coii|ideration« a*^ the con-,
strif ct^dn ai^d n^eaniqg' pf this oath ; for, \inl^
the sf^\>^ (he mewing .iq!ch|<^l> ^® W^ VP<^
it, it 18 Vi|)^^^jfes;isary |o Miy a ragle wm npp^
ttiy pth^r part of this indictinent. By what
rple pf constrpctiop then, are wja to find out the
veaning of ^e oath? Are we to tiike the
literal inieaniiig of the words, or to put a more
Ipfero/ ooofiroction upon them? I ani no^
itfiraid of any of the rniym of construction that
may be adopted on the other aide of the bar;
bnt I snppqse it is nnnecessaiy for me to say
any ibing as to ^l^icnX meaning of the wocda,
as this ml obyioosly bear but one interpreta-
tion; and this is not the mode my learned
friends have had recourse to. tiet us then take
the plain meaning and sense of the oath, and
pot opon it thai meaning which, in the common
intercourse of )ue, is put upon yrordis ; and,. I
hare no hesitation in saying, that tins is the
mle of cqnatruction jby which, in my 6piniqn>
the oath should be tried. Itie counsel on the
other side have employed great ingenuity in
a^^tUnppting to^constme Uie oath, and have tslen
m eovM which no man of common sense, in
the ordtD^ affufs of life, would have hit upon.
1bey.ha.Te endeavtHnpad to construe out of the
qath, a reaerf ation of illegality, that is, of illegal
anea^res, ' for the prpfecution ,of the ol^epts in
view lnr,t$oiie hound by the bath. . They assert,
tha^ w^en this oafh vaiidceD; jOu^JDM^fUdjiD
w« w^^wiloo* to Wmm^xImMfim^
in Tiew were meantto-he iiecpsipMfbied by all
legal methods, but not by any illegal methods,
and they say,that ypnrlorqsbips are called upon
to give this construction an4 meaning to the
oath. Upon the other hand, \ snbmit that there .
is no reservation pf illegality within the com*
pass of this oath. The oath is general, and has
no lesiervations ; it extpnd^ to, and indudes all
methods neces^ry for the accomplishment of
the ends in view, whether by moral or physic^il
strength.
In constniing the meaning of the oath, in a
question of relevancy, you will take into view,
, not the mere meaning of the words of the oath
itself, bnt al^ all the circumstances vnder
which it is libelled tf^at the oath >ras adfiuais-.
ten^ and tal^n. ' It is libelled, that the o^th
w^ Mnfcke^ly^ m)lu49l^y» ^<^ traitorously ad-
ministered; and iniported an ohlig^ion tp.
cbn^mit treason. ' If the oaM^ nroy mean ' wjuit
the pirosecntor aays it does, as he li^eU thfit
the act Tfas done wickedly, maliciously, and
t^aitorotisly, I have to submit ^at the charge
is relevant, and ihat the prosecutor is not
bound, in this sti^ of the process, to shew thaf
thb is of necessity the meaning of the qath.
He is entitled to stimd upon this frpond, that,
if the oath may mean what he says it does ; and
my bear the meaning with whioi, in Ubie indict-
ment, he says it wai administered ancl taken,
you are bound, libelled as it is, tp give it ^e
construction which the prosecutor says it bears,
to the effect of sendin(|; the charge to a jnry.
It will ultimately remun for the jury to decLde
as to the guilty purpo^.
But this u not the naked case before your
lordships. There arp other circumatancea .
which are not to be lost sight of in construing
this oath. Your lordships, in looking at the
indictment, will see that the oath was ad-
ministered at wrti mHtimp; a material cir-
cumstance in considering the views and inten-
tions with which it was aaminiftered. You will
remember, that the society or conspiracy which
was in. view of theperso'nawho adojunisteredand
toi»k this oatli, was one of a very extensive nature,
including a brotherhood of Britons of vrtiy
description ; and that the oath was actually ad*
ministered to several hundred persons. These
are remarkable features of the case, that the
oath was so extensivel^r administered, and that
the object of the association was so unlimited.
It is iho set forth in the indictment, that this
oath has been administered to persons who,
conscious of their guilt in the premises, have
absconded and fled from justice ; and this is a
circumstance relevant to pass to an as|nze, and,
likeall the othef circumstances libelled, must be
taken for sranted as true fay your lordships in
Judging of the relevancy.
The taking of any oatn pf secrecy is, of itself
a presumption o( guilt; and a secret purpose
of any kind is a presumption against the paneL
1 know, .that other oaths i^ere alluded to py the
opposite counsel ; and, as an instance of inno-
cence t^tith regard io the objects of them, those
53KJgi;ej9p^|ipitf 9^. , HiQh I Whmit, that-
3311 S7 GEORGE III.
I am correct in stating the general role, and
that these form an exception. Freemasonry
is an old |>iece of folly» at least ; and» it is not
only notorious that Freemasons have nothing
to conoealy but it has been ascertained by ex-
perience, that mischievous consequences have
not, in this country, foUovred from the oaths
of secrecy of that institution. But, though
there may be secret oaths of an innocent de-
scription, the presumption is against them, and
particularly against such an oath of secrecy as
the present, under the awful sanction of death ;
for it seems to hare been a standing rule of the
conspiracy to murder all informers.
The attempts, however, to shew that the oath
might be quite innocent, appeared at length to
be abandoned, and a distinct admission was
made, that the administerine or taking of this
oath is a ^misdemeanor;** oy which, I sup-
pose, was meant (for the word has no technical
meaning here) something criminal at common
law, though not in the highest degree. Now,
if it be criminal, in what can the criminality
consist but in the treasonable purpose and pre-
paration ? There is plainly no other wicked or
unlawful purpose in view.
The oaths of allegiance, of supremacy, and
others, were alluded to by Mr. Cranstoun, who
ingeniously argued, that, according to our
principle of construction, the administration of
these oaths might be held to imply an obliga-
tion to commit treason. But the question here
is not what extraordinary constructions the in-
genuity of learned men may put upon what
may be placed before them. The question is,
What would a man of common sense think
upon the subject, did it come before him in
any ordinary transaction of life f Such fanciful
illustrations are little to the purpose. But I
happen to have here a specimen of another
oath, the striking similarity of which to the
present cannot fail to Attract 'particular atten-
tion. It was the foundation of all that con-
spiracy in Ireland, which afterwards ended in
open rebellion against the government; and
your lordships wUl see how the terms of the
oath cited in the indictment tally with the
terms of the oath, or test, as it was called,
which I am now about to read : ** In the awfiil
presence of God, I, A. B. do voluntarily de-
clare, that I will persevere in endeavourmg to
form a brotherhood of affection among Irishmen
of every religious persuasion ; and that I will
persevere in my endeavours to obtain an equal,
mil, and adequate representation of all the
people of Ireland. I do further declare, that
neither hopes, fears, rewards, or punishments,
shall ever induce me, directly or indirectly, to
inform on or give -evidence against, any mem-
ber or members of this or similar societies, for
any act or expression of theirs done or made,
collectively or individually, in or out of this
society in pursuance of the spirit of this ob-
ligation."^ I hear one of the opposite counsel
Trial ofAnirm^ M'KinUy
r333
* See the trial of Finney for high treason,
5 How. Mod. St. Tr. 1075, in which the aboTe
oath, or test, was given in evidence.
remark, that this oath contains no oblifption to
commit treason ; but, I do not know with what
view the remark is made, unless it be to mark
the contrast between the oath which introduced
the Irish rebellion and all its terrible conse*
quences,with that more atrodons oath now
under consideration.
Hie terms of the oath in the indictment are
now so well known to your lordships, that I
need not point out the particular differencea
between the two oaths.
What the prosecutor says is, that this oath
means to bind the person taking the same to
commit treason ; and it is objected, that be
has not told your lordships, on the face of
the indictment, what species of treason the
taker of the joath is bound.to commit. Heie I
must request your lordships' attention to what
appeared to me to be apalpable fallacy in the
opposite argument. The case was aU along
pleaded by the learned gentleman, as if the
prosecutor had been chargine the panel with
the crime of treason itself. Now there is no
charge of treason ; but a charge of administer-
ing an unlawful oath — an oath binding to
commit treason, which object of the oath must
indeed be libelled, otherwise thereis norele-'
vant charge. But the indictment is not to be
construed as if it had been libelled that treason
was actually committed ; nor is such a specifi-
cation of treason to be required as if it had
been charged as the offence of which the panel
is accused, and for which he is brought to trial,
and not merely as existing in intention. The
essence of the relevancy is what the panel dU^
not what Ae had m rHern ; of which, no more
can be told than what the oath itself reveals.
Any thing else is an inference in law, which
can add nothing to the relevancy. Now,
although the prosecutor has not drawn an in-
ference in law from the facts, he has told your
lordships, not only the acts done, but all that
he knows of the acts which the parties bound
themselves to commit. He tells what the facts
are, which, it is the infierence in law, if done,
would have been treason. But in judging of
the relevancy, you are not merely to judge
whether the prosecutor is riffht in his^inference
from the facts ; your lordships will go to the
oath, and draw the conclusion in your own
minds. At the same time, I have no hesita-
tion in saying here, that the kind of treason
which the parties bound themselves to commit,
is plainly that of levying war against the king.
I shall presently speak more particularly to
the treason, and will show, that the treason
which the oath bound ' to commit is that now
alluded to.
Before leaving the oath, I may make some
further remarks upon what, with such ingenuity
and force, was stated by Mr. Cranstoun. In-
stead of taking the whole . oath into view, he
divided it into four parts, and drew separate
conclusions from all those parts-^a rule of
construction quite out of the question. It
mi^t.be as well pleaded to a jury, in,a case
of circamstantial evidence, that they are to
aaal
MHUnffid Oathi,
A. D. 1817.
[334
of each drcunistance by itsdf. In con*
ftniug theoath. Air, Cranstonn set. oot with
statingf that a brotherhood of afiection is an
innoccDty suod even a laudable object, and
somewhat qpaintly added : ^ That it is a plei^
sant thing for brethren to dwell together in
unity.'* This may be veiy ingenious, but I
say, with deference, that it is tnfling with the
case, to make such remarks to your lordships.
The oath is not to be torn piece-meal. The
meaning is to be drawn from a fair considera-
tion of the whole of it. I might as well take
each wor4 or letter of the. oath indiTidually,
ai&d say, that erenr word or letter taken by it^
self is not criminal, as thus break it into parts,
and argue upon each without reference to. the
rest. Not that I think his conclusions, even
93 he took the clauses, were justified by the
clauses themselves. I cannot admit any such
thing — but I protest against this way of con-
struing the 08th,^or construing any thing.
. It was said, founding upon the pther aigu*
ment, the reservation of illegality, that we may
petition for annual pariiaments and univers^
suffrage— that these objects may be accomplish-
ed by lawful means — and, from this, the con-
clusion was drawn, that there was nothing
illegal done or intended. But the question is,
whether the end can justify any means that
mav be employed in obtaining it. It b the
viount mlamt which we charge as criminal, and
these are left totally out of view, in the argu-
ment on the other side o( the bar.
Then the word ^ strength '' is taken up, and
a eoostmction is £^ven to it to show, that the
term in the oath was applicable to an indivi-
doal and not to a number of * individuals.
Tbere the learned gentleman lost sight of the
beginning of the oath, where the brotherhood
is mentioned. From this, however, and the
whole context of the oath, I apprehend it to
1>6 perfectly clear, that in considering the
meaning of the word ** strength,'* we are not
to apply it to an individual, but to as many as
could be brought to join in this society or
conspiracy.
On the whole, I must confess that I have
not been able to discover the distinction be*
tween force and strensth in this oath. It
would have conveyed the same conclusion to
my mind, if the one word had been employed
asw«ll as the other. Physical strength has
just as plain and obvious a meaning where it
stands, as any words can have. It is not an
nnoommoii expression among the lower orders
of politicians ; and, I am afraid, the idea is
perfectly familiar to them. Now, notorietv is
as good a rule of construction as could be bad
recourse to. It was said, that grammatical nice-
ties areout of place here, and that strict rules of
criticism would be misapplied in interpreting
the language of such a man as the panel at the
bar. I pmectly approve of the remark. I
wish the oath to be taken in the meaning
which men in the lower ranks of life would
apply to it. Strength, i^ it here stands, can
mean nothing else than the means, the power.
or fDioe to be employed against the obstacle or
oontraiy force that might stand in the waj of
the accomplishment of the objects in view,
whatever they inight be; and the united
strength of numbers is plainly meant.
Supposing it were possible to put such a con-
struction upon the words as that contended for
on the other side of the bar^ let us see the effect
of it — ^let us attempt to insert such unambigu-
ous words as would unquestionably give the
oath what they say is the meaning of it : and
by a fairer test it cannot be tried. — ^Tbus :
*' But I bind myself to do nothing contrary to
law, or to attempt anything by force against
any subsisting right ;" I ask whether if these
words were stuck into the middle of this oath,
they would not stultify it, and make it quite
contradictory, and palpably absurd.
A great deal was said about the presump-
tion in favour of the innocence of the panel.
This is a common topic of declamation ; but,
I must confess, I never could understand the
presumption of the innocence of a panel. I
am aware that the omu probatuU lies upon the
prosecutor, and that if he fail to make out his
case, the panel must be assoilzied ; but I see
no room for a presumption of any sort, but
^hat arises from the want of contrary proof;
and I know of no such doctrine in any work
upon the criminal law of Scotland. The fact
is, that in a question of relevancy, there is
rather a presumption of guilt; or, to speak
more correctlv, an assumption of the truth of
the libeL Every thing is supposed to be
wickedly and maliciously done, as libelled f
and the question is, supposing all this proved
as charged, does it infer a punishment in law ?
as, otherwise, it is impossiole to allow a proof
of what is alleged. — 1 misht argue, that the
presumption is against the man who takes
such an oath as that libelled, which even my
learned friends admit to be contrary to law,
and a punishable offence, though not of the
description set forth in this indictment ; and
that, from the very circumstance of the panel
having taken such an oath, the onus lies no
longer with the prosecutor to prove his guilty
purpose, but with the nanel to reconcile his
conduct to innocence if^ he can. But, upon
any view of the subject, I should like to know
what presumption, or what rule or principle
calls for such a construction as that put upon
the oath. Is it the protection of innocence, or
that *' iffue of public duty " that was spoken of
in tlie last debate, or any laudable principle
under the sun, that makes it necessary to do
such violence to language and common sense,
to suppress the truth, or to pervert the plain
'sense and fair meaning of any thing ?
I shall now beg l^ve to request your lord*
ships' attentiop to what the persons adminis*
tenqg and taking thb oath bound themselves
to do ; and, I have to Submit, that it is plain,
from all the authorities upon treason, that the
accomplishment of universal suffrage, when
carried into effect by the force of numbers, is
treason, by levying war against the king. It
iMf^] 57 o£X)fiefe ki.
TfM tfAfOfti^ M'Khtty
Isait
fSdd, tiflhch mA(t dtit srdbitetfor a siidgle day
ilHtfe^ iQcb a s^^stetii df thingpi^ io the present
dredinfftanc^ df this eitensiye eibpire. The
accompHshtil^fat of aiiy public ptiiport h^
Violence i« treasbh; btit to' a<kM>tDmii8h tini-
Tennll sdftrag« bjr vloleiicey is nndoabtedly
t d6^til;tioii of thfe Cbnstitutidii itsdf. I
db' not b^tietd that ihkte is H differndbe
dl^on^ injr of the ^r^t anthoritiet upon
tfafs pblMt. Id lookrag fl:it authorid^ I
natttfdly had reconrsie to soine of the late toals
lor treitfioh in Eofrland, to see how the judges
th6re laid doii«n thb latjlr in such cates. Loitt
LoKghbohHigh; in the case of Lord Oeorge
Gorddtt, said, ^< I am peculiarly hiippy that I
ath' euatpl«d totftate the law on the shbiect,
not ftom any rtetisonings 6r deductions of my
oWn, whidh are liable to error^ and in which a
change or inaccuracy of elpression might be
StoductiTe of mudi mischief; but from the
ht authotitr, ftom which my mouth only will
be employed in pronouncing the law, I shall
State it to ydu in the word^ of that great able,
and learhed jhdge, Mr. Justice Foster, that
true friend to th^ libertiesjof his country.'^ I
Sttote this, to show to what authorities the
English judges hare tecouhie,when consideriuff
questions of this kind. At the end of this trial,
ue same law wai liud down by lord Mansfield;
but I shdl fitst reid the passage' firom Foster
ilimself. Pait of it was alreddy read by the
kaf^ed gentleman opposite, bift, as he stopped
Idabtly where I vrished him to go on, I snail
bt^ dnd^r the Necessity of riding the whole. I
f^u At ydur lordships' att^fttion to the miantier
in' which F6!itet differii from th^ opinion 6f
Hale, on the very point on Whidi Hale's au-
thority luts been so much rested on in the pre-
seht case, and for which he hlu been caued
the '< great father of the law of treasons."
Ilale*!) opinion does not appear to me to be
qiiofed as so completely conclusive on the
question by the great authorities in England '
as is done here. They have recourse to more
recent expositions of the law.
•<<Lord Chief-Justice Hale,*' says Foster,t
''speakiuff of such unlawful assemblies as may
amount to a levying of war within the 25 Eliza-
beth, c. 3, taketh a difference between those
insurrections which have carried the appear-
ance of an army, formed under leaders, and
Srovided with military weapons, and vri th
rums, colours, Sdc. and those other disorderly
tumultuous assemblies, which have been drawn
together, and conducted to purpcMies mani-
festly unlawful, but without any of the ordi-
nary shew and apparatus of war before men-
tioned.
*' I do not think any great stress can' be
laid on that distinction. It^s true that, in
case of levyiogqf war, the indictments gener^ly
charge, that the defendants wei^ armed and
arrayed in a warlike manner; and, where the
case would admit of it the other circumstances
• «i Hdw. St. Tr. 490, t Cr. L; 208:
cif s#6rds; guiis^drums, colout^ &t. h&Ve bee<i
added. Buty 1 thkk, M mmk of the cai^
hk^^ ubver mrned singly on any of tfaidie cif-
cutnstances.
'*Iti the ctes 6t Damatfeeand PUrchlise;,
Which M the bst printed caSes that' have
come hi jUdgmchit on the poiht of cbnstrocUve
levyidg war, thdte was nothing given in evi«
denc^ of the usuid pageantry of war; — ^no
mititaiy weapons — nb burners br drums — ^nor
any regular consultation previomr to the rising.
And yet the wihit of th'ose circtimstanc^
weighed nothing with the Court; thbugh the
priboner*8 codnsd ItisUfted mucH oU that malf-
ter. Tttif number of the insurgents supplied
dib Want of ddlitaty Weapons; and they were
provided With axies, crows, and other tools oT
the like natdric, proper for the mischief thej
intended to eifect :
M
Mt e^v^^r aev ^^Hv ^^P^vwwvv Vwv
''Sect. 1.— The tra^ criterion, therefore, in
all these cases, is 9110 ardiitQ did the parties
assemble f For, if the a^lembly be upon ad-
count of some private quarrel, or to take
revenge of particular persons, the statute of
treasons hatti already determined that point in
favour of the Subject.''
**Sect. 3. (p. 21d.)— But every ihsurrec-
tibn which, in judgment of law, is ^intended
agaihst the person of the king, be it to de-
throne or imprisod htm — or to oblige him to
alter his measures ^t government — or to re^
movfc evil councillors from about liim — ^Uiet^
risings all amount to levying war within die
Statute; wK^er attended with the pomp and
circumstanbesofopenwkrofno. And every con*
spiracy to levy vrar for these purpose!l, though
not treason within the clause of levying war,
is yet an otert aift within the other clause oT
compassing the king's deiith. For those pur-
poses cannot be effected by numbers and open
force without manifest ddnger to his person.
^Sect 4. — Insurrections, in order to throw
down all enclosures, to alter the established
law, or change religion, to enhance the price
of all labour, or to open all prisons ; all risings
in order to effect these innovations, of a piiS-
lic and general concern, by an armed force,
are, in construction of law, high treasoiu
within the clause of levying war. ror, though
they are not levelled at the person of the king,
they are asainilt his royal majesty ; and, be-
sides thbyhaVe a direct tendehcy to dissolve
all the bonds of society, and to destroy all
property, and allgov^i'nment tbb^ by numbers^
and an armed force 1 Insurrections likewise
for redressing national grievwices, or for the
expulsion or foreigners in general, or indeed '
any single nation living here under the pro-
tection of the king, or for the reformation o^
re&l or imaginary evils of a pithlie naiuret ani
In which the insureents haibe no nedal ihtertst;
riflings to effect Uiese ends by U)rce and nunh-
bers, are, by construction of law, within Uie
clause of levying war; 'for they are levelled at
the king^a cto^ Imd royal dignity,'^
S^7J
for jUmittiiienwg unlamfid 0kth9.
A. D. 1«17
f •
isst
PtartheTy lA tpfeakiaf of Um case of DaiMre*
Pdichase, fcromriy meataoiied, h« sayn,
(p. »15) '^ Ufdn tka trial of DtnwiMk tlM oMes
reteved to oolbrek in seotioiit 4tli ind 5lhy
wore cited at tha bar; -ood aQ the judges pre-
aoiu wore of opiinoo, that the prisoaer was
guilty of the high treason charged upon him
m tho tndictment. For hero was a rismg with
«B aTowod- intention' to domoliah all meeting-
hottaca in general; and this intent they car-
nod into enooiition as fiir as they wore able.
K the aaoeting houses of the protostant dis-
aanteta had toen erected and supported in
daBanco of ^ law, a rising to destroy such
honsos in general, would have fidlen under the
ralea laid down in Keiling, with regard to the
donaolishing ail bawdy-houses. But since the
»oeting-h<wses of piotestant dissenters aze^
by the Tolevalion act, taken under the pro-
tection of the law, the insurrection, in the
present case, was to be considered as a public
dedanUson by die rabble against that act, and
an attempt: to render it ineflReotual by mimken
md ofm firoe- — Accordingly, Onmaree was
Ibund gnilty, and had iudgment of death, as
in eases of high treason.
Thcae were the passages oooted as anthoritiea
by lord Loughborough in the trial I have men-
tioned. And in the charge to the juiy by load
Mansfield, at the close of the trial, a summary
of the same doctrine is very clearly laid down.
^ There are two kinds of levying war; one
against ^ person of the king ; to imprison,
to dethrone, or lo kill him ; or to malie him
change measniea or remove counsellors — ^the
other, which is said to be levied aaainst the
BM|esty of die king, or, in other words, against
him in his royal capacity; as when a multi^
tnde rise and assemble to attain by force and
violence any object of ageneral publicnature, that
is levying war against the majesty of the kina ;
and moot reasonably so held, because it tends
to dissolve all the bonds of soeiety, to destroy
property, and to overturn government, and, by
HNce of arms, to restrain ue king from reign-
ing according to law.
** Insarrections, by force and violence, to
raise the price of wages, to open all prisons,
to destroy meeting-houses, nay, to destroy all
brothels, to resist the execution of militia
laws, to throw down all enclosures, to alter
the established law, to change religion, to re-
dress grievances real or pretended, have all
been held levying war. Many other instances
aigbt be put Lokd chie^justice Holt, in sir
John Friend's case says,-^^ If ^persons do as-
aeaable themselves, and act vrith force in oppo-
smon to aome law which they -think inconvo-
■tent, and hope thereby to get it repealed,
thii ia levyfog war and treason.* In the pre-
aentcaae, it does not rest upon an implication
that Iher hoped, hyoppoeitidn to a law, to get
itiepeaMd; but the proeecution proceeds upon
the direct ground that the oliject was, by force
and violence, to compel the legislature to re-
peal a law : and thererore, ^thout any doubt,
I tell you the joint opinion ol«is all, that if this
VOL. XXi&II. ^
multitttde assembled with intent, by aots of
force and violenoa, to compel the legislalnre
to repeal a law, it is high titaaon. Tbodgh
the form of an indictment for this species of
treason mentions drums, trumpets, aras^
swords, fifes, and guns^ yet none of iheae cir-
cumstances are essential. 7^ funtkm efaajfS
ii, wketktt tke mtmt u 6y ./orca end'tMoies^
to ettotn en object of a gemBrtU mnd pubUe
terej^ any imtmmenUf or by dmt ofikeir
In like manner, segeant Hawkins thus ex*
presses himself:-—'* Those, also^ who make afi
insurrection in order lo redress a public grie-
vance, whether it be a real or pretended one,
and of their own authority attempt with force-
to redress it, are said to levy war against the
kin|, although they have no direct design
against his person, inasmuch as they insolently
invade his pierogative, by attempting to do-
that by private authority, which he by puhlie*
justice ought to do, which manifestly tends to
a downright rebellion ; aa where great num*
hers by force attempt to remove certain persona
flrom the king ; or to lay violent hands on a
privy counaellor; or to revenge themselvee
against a magistrate for executing his oflfot ;
or to bring down the price of victoals ; or to
reform the law or religion; or to pull down all
bavdy-houses ; or to remove all enclosures in
general, &c. But where a nomber of men
rise to remove a grievance to their prtvato in-
terest, as to puU down a particular enclosure,
intrenching upon the common, Ice. they are
only rtoterSb"
I am not afraid to place beside all these
great names our own authority, Mr. Hume, in
whose work you will find a most luminous and-
accurate summary of tha doctrine which I
have now been quoting from the English an*
thors. Mr. Hume f says, ** In the construction
of law, the levying of war against the king ianot
understood in those insurrections only which
have immediate relation to the person of his
majesty, as if the object be to dethrone or im-
prison him, or to drive him out of the realm,
or to cause him alter his measures, or to*
remove evil counsellors from his presence. It
equally embraces nil those risuigs, which*
though not aimed directly at the person of Uie
king, are however against hij rojral majesty,
that is, against his crown or royal dignity,
asainst his prerogative, authority, or office.
Under this description, according to all autho>
rities, falls an insurrection for any of these
objects, — to reform the established law^ reli-
gion, or political constitution of the land ; ot
to obtain redress for national grievenoes, whe-
ther real or imaginary. For though they b« '
real, the la# and government of the realmi aa
tong as they subsi^ cannot know any thing of
this course of correcting them, nor mahe an- :
count of it as ai\y other than rebellion against
the king, who, as head of the stato, is bound
to prevent all such forcible interference of *
■ ■ ■ ■ — ^— ^^^
* 21 How. St. Tr. 644. f ^ Comm. 437.
Z
3391
57 GEORGE III.
Trial ofAndrgw M'Kinl^
[340
private person! with bis own fuDCtionti or
those of the legisUoire power.*'
By all tbe aulboritieSy the same rules of law
are clearly and distinctly laid down, and they are
quite applicable to the present case. The
treason which the oath binds those taking it
to commit, if the public purpose in view bad
been carried into effect, tis. the establishment
of universal sufiirage, by force and. violencoi
• would have been levying war against the king.
A passage was quoted from lord Hale by.
the learned gentlemim, in disapprobation of
an expression in the indictment, ^ the sub-
version of the established government,'' as.
being too vague for a charge of treason. But,
it would not escape your observation, that he
read only three lines, and left out the subse-
quent part of the passage in the indictment,
which is the example and explanation of what
he did read, and contains every specification
that is possible in the circumstances of the
case. The statement in the indictment is,
<5 which oath or engagement, or obligation to
the foregoing purport, did bind, or did pur-
port or intend to oind, the persons taking the
same to commit treason, by effecting, by pby-
aical iorce, the subversion of the established
goYernment, laws, and constitution of this
kinffdom, siiid ttpeciaUy by obtainmg anmud
parSameiUt and unhenal tuffrage by untmofid
and vioktit meam.*^ — As to the word force, it
was introduced merely to express our con-
ception of the meaning of the oath, and to
shew, that we understand tirength, where it
stands, to include every meaning that any per-
son could suppose to be contained in force^
had it been there; and it is for your lord-
ships to say whether we are right or not.
There is another part of the indictment to
which an objection was made — the passages
at the end of each specific charge, which, it is
said, are not exactly in terms of the ex-,
pressions of the statute. The truth is, those
clauses are altogether mere surplusage. There
is, besides, a previous reference to the gene-
ral clause at tne commencement of the indict-
ment. • /' Administer or cause to be admin-
istered, or did aid or assist at the administer-
ipg, an oath, or engagement, or obligation,
. tn the terms above ut forth, or to the tame pur-
pffrt.** Bnt,' above all, there is a most distinct
reference in the phrase, **at taid it,** which,
takes back the attention to the whole preced-
ing generali^. This is the general mode of
expression where many instances of a crime [
charged are stated — ** at taid it,** being added
to etich instance that is .given. Forgery and
uttering forged notes, for example, are charged
in a general clause at the beginning of an
indictment, and then particular instances are.
g}ven in much shorter terms, referring to the .
. preceding generality; and, unless this is done,
what precedes must be totally useless, and.
mere surplusage. Now, you will observe, the
general charge is the only one in which the
oath appears, and reference must be made to
the clause containing the oath in which the
words of the statute are exactly .repeated.
9ut, in any point of view, it never was thm
doctrine of our law to require the repetittoa
of the precise same techniod terms as are used
in the major proposition.* The act of par-
liament libelled on, contains references in this
manner, from one claniie to another.
. There is another.part of the indictment to
which I am surprisea the opposite counsel did
not make an objection similar to that to which
t am now speaking. It is in what is called
the '* at least" clause, where the word itOend
does not occur. But the answer is, that the
word is of little Tslue to the prosecutor in the
present case, where the express meaning is lo
clear; and, at all events, the attention most
be carried back to what precedes by the
words, *' at taid it," ^ The said oath or en-
gagement,*' also, implies the whole of what
goes before. But, in case, this answer should
not be satisfactory, I beg leave to read an
opinion delivered from the chair of this Court
by your loidship's predecessor, in the case of
M*Iotyre, and others, tried for house-break-
iug, in 1809 ; and his lordship did no more
than illustrate the doctrine laia down by Mr.
Hume. I read from Buchanan's reports, page
84. In addressing the jury, the learned judge
said : ** It was formerly held, that if the public
prosecutor did not succeed in proving the
whole train of circumstances stated in the in-
dictment, the jury could not convict the pri-
soners. This was felt to be a great evil;
since, in a long and minute statement, it was
very often found, that a few particulars were
not reached by the evidence; and therefore
the act was passed, which declares it sufficient
for the public prosecutor to set forth in his
indictment, that the panels were guilty actors,
or art and part ; not tying himself down to
prove the whole specific detail of the fticts,
but simply, that the panels were special actors
of the crime, or art and part, that is, accessary
to it by participating in it, or giving assistance
either before or after the commission. But
there is nothing in the %^t which says in what
part of the indictment this charge shall be
brought forward. It is usual indeed, to state
it in that part of the indictment mentioned
by the prisoner's counsel ; but if not stated in
the first part, it must come in the last part —
in the clause beginning with * at least.' But
if it be stated in the first part of the indictment
as accompanying the direct chaige, it is un-
necessary to repeat it in the latter part.''
From this it appears, that the indictment
would be perfectly relevant without this dause
at all ; and, on- the other hand, if this clausn
be correct, it will supply every other defect
of specification in the indictment.. In. short,
it is here entirely for the benefit of the prt^
secotor. Hume, Vol. 3. 412, &c.
One part of the case still remains unnoticed ;
that new view of it pleaded by Mr. Grant.
I am not sure that I was successful in obtain-
• 3 Hume 304-
S41]
Jqt Administering unUmful Onihi.
A. D. 1817.
[342
faig a dutioct conoeption of the bearing of
gre^ {Mm of that argument. Bat I must
haxaid one or two remarks opon it before I
sit down.
The first remark I shall make is sufficiently
obTioos, that it was quite contradictory of the
argument held by Mr. Cranstoun, who main-
tained that there is no treason in the case ;
and your lordships are reduced to the ne-
cessity of rejecting the one or the other.
That pmnt of view I need not enlarge upon.
Your lordships will next observe, that this
statute, upon which the indictment is founded,
is not an English statute. It is a Scottbh
statute Jto all intents and purposes, when be«
fore your loidsfaips in this Court ; and I cannot
oonoeive by wtasit operation you can, in inter-
preting this Scottish act, introduce a rule of
the common law of England. I may ha?e
miacoDceiTed the leanned gentleman's argu-
ment ; but I must state fairly the impression
which it left upon my mind. Yon will ob-
serve, that, in this act, there is an express
clause extending it to Scotland, and providing
how it-is to be carried into effect here. '< Pro-
vided also, that any offence against this act,
if committed in Scotland, shall* and may be
piosecttled, tried and determined, either before
the justiciary Court at Edinburgh, or in any
of the circuit courts in that part of the united
kii^om." And then follows the clause,
^ Inat any person who shall be tried and ac-
3ttitted, or couficted of any offence against
lis act, shall not be liable to be indicted, pro-
secuted, or tried again for the same offence or
bcc as high treason, or misprision of high
treason ; and 'that nothing in this act con-
taiaedy shall be construed to extend to pro-
hibit any person guilty of any offence against
this act^ and who shall not be tried for the
tame as an offence against this act, from being
tried for the same as high treason, or mis-
prision of high treason, in such manner as if
this act had not been made.*' How it is 'pos-
sible to get over these clauses of the act I
know not. From this last clause it clearly
i^ypears to have been in the view of the legis-
lature, to make punishable under this act a
crime that might have been punishable as
treason. Now, if punishable here, it must be
by our common forms, and cannot be other-
srise. The statute ef queen Anne, in cases
of high treason, extended to Scotland the
Eogli^ statute law of high treason, and re-
Slatcd the fonns for trials for high treason;
t it did not introduce any general principle
of the common law of England for the inter-
pretation of Scottish acts of parliament* If
this bad been a trial for high treason, that act
wosid have required us to have recourse to
die statute of Edward 3rd ; but this is a trial
of a Scottish law offence ; and it is impossible
to nmintaSn that the statute of queen Anne,.
hj implicatioD, abolished the common law of
Iwotland as to Scottish law offence— off<Qnces,
pwtape, of a totally different description from
By- what rule of law then' are you
to proceed in applying this act against the ad-
ministration of uniawfttl oaths but by the law
of Scotland?
.Your lordships do not require to be re-
minded, that it is possible to try primes by a
lower denomination than the highest by which
they may be tried. It happens daily, in the
{>ractice of this Court, that the prosecutor se-
ects a lower denomination, notwithstanding
the panel might be tried for a higher offence.
There is another rule of the law of Scotland
which sets the matter at rest — that in no case
whatever can there be a second trial for the
same crime. That is not the case in England.
A man may there be tried over again for the
ftict, under a different denomination of crime';
so that it cannot, under any view of the sub-
ject, be prejudicial to the panel to be tried
under this act, as he can never again, upon
any pretence, be called to account for the
same fiicts charged against him in this indict-
ment. This principle shows how useless the
principle of the law of England contended for
would be in our Courts, and how inapplicable
to our practice.
In the cases of sedition tried in 1794, I
rather think in the trial of Skirving, it was.
laid down by several of the judges, and ad-
mitted at the bar, that some of the acts charged
amounted to treason, and yet they passed to
the jury in a charge of seaition. Ihe objec-
tion was not indeed pleaded at the bar, but
the fact was in the view of the judges, and ,
particularly, if I mistake not, mentioned by
lord Abercrombie, and the Lord Justice
Cleric.* It did not therefore pass unnoticed,
and yet the judges and lawyers of those days
saw no objection to let the charges go to a
junr.
I dare say I have omitted many things which
I ought to have stated. But there is a great
part of the argument on the opposite side of
which I purposely omit to take any notice, as
not beiuff at all material to the points at issuer
or at all likely to affect the result of the case
in this Court ; in particular, a good deal of
general discussion and remarics on the general
nature of your lordships' duty in the nresen^
case, as being different from your Juty in
common pases. T trust, my lords, I have said
nothioff Uiat can tend to introduce into the
proceedings of this place, the tone or cha-
racter of political discussion ; ■ but I cannot
help remaning, that some things have been
saia on the other side of the bar of rather too
popular a nature, addressed, as they have been,
to the unbiassed ears of your lordships ; -and
(though I am confident they proceeded f^om
the best and purest motives), intended, as I
must suppose they were, unless it is admitted
that they were foreign from the purpose, to
■influence the grave deliberations or the judges
*^ How. Mod. St. Tr. 512, 511 ; see also,
Muir*s case, ibid. 235; Palmer's case^ ibid.
291 ; Margaret's case, ibid. 623, 626 ; Sin-
clair's case, ibid. 796» 799, 800.
$4SZ SI GEOitGK lU.
TrM ^AitJrtm M'Kinkjf
"»44
of a supreme Court of jiietieey before wlioin a
oaestioD is at stakey affecting* oq the one hand,
tne life of a fetlow-creature, aad^ on the other,
the safety of the state : — *' fuoi ck odiOf ivm-
$itiif tr^ atque mmrianrdiAf vtcmm cue detet.**
Lord Advocate. — As I have no wish to tres-
IMSS unnecessarily on your lordships' time, nor
to push any case further than it will fairly bear,
1 content myself with remarking, that I think
nvery thing has been said that is requisite to
satisfy you that this indictment is relevant;
and I do not feel myself called upon to take
up the time of the Court longer.
Mr. Clerk. — ^My lords, I am happy to think,
that I shall not occupy so mudi of your time
■8 would have been necessary, if my learned
friend on the other side had not left untouched
a great part of the argument that has been
•tated for the prisoner at the bar by the
counsel who spoke before me.
It seems to me, that Mr. Dnimmond has
not sufficiently attended to the true nature of
the question before the Court. The tendency
of a great deal of his argument was to show,
that the oath libelled on by the prosecutor
.cannot be understood in an innocent sense, or
in any sense consistent with the innocence of
parties to it. These are propositions which
4he prisoner need not coot^ict in this trial,
as it is not now incumbent upon him to show
Uttt the alleged oath was altogether free of
^ guilt or criminality. On the contrary, the pro-
' secutor must establish against it the species of
criminality imputed in the indictment. It is
evident, that an act or deed may behighljrcrir
minal, though it does not infer the guiH oi
high treason; and that a great deal of guUt
may be incurred by an oath, although it does
sot purport or intend to bind the person taking
it to commit the crime of high treason* The
prosecutor insists, that the purposes of the
oath were criminU ; and, possibly, he might
jMve said a great deal more than he has said
to the sai^c effect. But, it cannot be allowed,
that wherever any crime at all has been com-
.mitted, that must be the crime of high treason.
The prosecutor did indeed enlarge a good
deal u]|)on the enormUy of the crimes intended
by the oath. But, in the present case, there
ie no question about the enormity or any other
l^t toan the guilt of high treason.. The spe-
eies, and not ue enormity of the crime, is first
lo be oontidered. The greatest atrocity at-
tending a crime which is not treason, will not
eonvert it into treason.
I must aUso take notice, that my learned
friend, in his endeavours to magnify the guilt
of this oath, had recourse to a new doctrine,
eipressing at the least his own doubts, as to
the legal presumption of innocence in favour
of a prisoner on his trial, and even denying
that there is any such presumption. But even
.this extraordinary doctrine, though it were
ioand, woiUd not, by depriving, ibe prisoner
4^ th^ legal advantages of nis deSinoe, convert
the enme alleged, how aggravated soever^ into
a crime of a di£brent spteies not alleged, or
change the sort of criminality appearing from
the oath now in question, into a criminality of
a different species, not Appearing from the
oath. But I am amased at the boldness, as
well as at the novelty of denying the legal pea*
sumption in favour of innocence, which, till
now, I never heatd disputed ; and I never wee
present at any criminal trial in which it wae
not admitted, either in express teims, or hgr
evident impUcation, in every argument eft
either side in the proceeding.
It may be admitted, however, that the oath,
though it is not liable to the unfounded end
imaginary construction averred bv the pnhiie
prosecutor, was mischievous and ^oHnal ta
lU tendency ; insomuch, that tite partiee to il
mieht have been punished with some severity,
under an indictment accurately setting fordi
the true nature of the offence. But the poblip
prosecator, instead of bringing the merits eC
the case to a fair trial, in which it is probable
that the general good wishes of the community
would have attended him, has not only charged
the prisoner with a treasonable int^t, but, ia
the support of this unteiiable hypothesis, hee
imputeo even to such parts of die oath as are
evidently innocent, or at least entirely free of
treason, the whole atrocity of that offenee.
This attempt is hardly a subject for argument.
Neither the endeavours to form a brotherhood
of affection, nor the endeavours to obtain uni-
versal suffrage and annual parliaments, nor die
secrecy, were treasonable in themselves. Some
of the objects in view were even legal and Ma»
nocent. A brotherhood of affection is,, if I
understand it^ at least innocent, and it may be
a useful and meritorious institution. A pins
for obtaining universal suffrage and annnal
Sirliaments, is held, by manv, to be ineape*
ient in its nature, while others think it not
only expedient, but absolutely necestaiy.
That endeavours majr be legally used for ob-
taining such a change in the Uiw of pariiasient»
will not be denied by any person who undefw
stands what is meant by the statement. And
though vei^ illegal means may be used for pie*
ducing so important a diange, it does not fol*
low, either that every means iised for that pofw
pose are illegal, or mat the means, if iUegel*
must necessarily be treasonable. A resolotiea
of s^recy would not have been illegal; aad>
though I readily allow that an otik of secreej
was at least questionable, tlie absurdity ii
charging it as a treason, or as being an oatk
to commit treason, must be manifest.
I must repeat, that without anjr prwodice t*
the prisoners defence against this indiclmest,
it may be supposed, that the oaih had an iUa*
gal or criminsl intent. The question upon the
nature of the oath is not, whether it impoite
an obligation of an illegal or arimiml natwt ?
but whether, as it is recited in the indietmeni^
it is an oath purporting or intendrng to liaed
tbe person uking ikie same tot winmit iMI
crime of hifl[h treason ? Hm ir. tbe piope^ jiiMe
of the qaesuoo, which oit^t te be k^ siMdily
us]
Jw AdmbtUtering unhnnfid Oaihi.
A. D. 181
i*
[340
in view. And bete'il mtty be observed, tbftt
the meaning of the oath cwi only b« discorered
from he own terms; ftnd thift» as the true
meaning is disputed, the same rules of inter-
pretalioo must be apfrfied that are applicable
m other oases, to ascertain the * meaning of
voids ; keeping alwajfs m view, not only the
IMeral roles of interpietatioD, but those rules,
the operation of which is more confined, and
which l^>ply mofe particolarly to words in
which a eriminal iiite&t is alleged.
la such h qoeetiofi as this, thb prisoner is
•atitled to expect, that suspicions and con-
jselmns tie to be laid tmt of consideration ;
andespeciaRy ^MSb which do not originate
from the terns of the oith itself, but from* ei«
tnoraeus eircamstanoes, or allegations as to
the views of the person who administered, or
the petaoii who tdok' il^ or those connected, or
alleged to be eonneeted with them in the same
mMMitaiiingt. Fdr if the oath is an offence in-
dietabte on the statute, it is so indictable
merely in respect of its own proper meaning,
er the meaning of its words, and not in respect
of any talent io the parties to il, or their sop-
poeed confederates, not appearing from the
wmds of the oath, and lar less, can saspidons
er coQJeetnres as to the mtent of such persons,
bft admitted under this indicHment. IRiataik
eath tadictable under the statute, purports or
miends to bind the persons taking the same to
eemmit the crime of high treason, may be
proved in two if ays ; either by the plain and
iiseet words of the oath, where it binds the
party dearly and unequivocally, to do that
which it is high treason to do ; or where it
binds them to do that, which, by plain and
teneoaable inference, is an overt act of treason.
Bm, as anspicioiis and conjectures, drawn
from drcnmstances that aie extraneous to the
onth, are inadmissible ander an indictment on
the sCatnte, so, by parity of reasoning, it is
cqiaaUy dear, that suspicions or conjectures,
aven wheta they are drawn from the words of
the aalk, and from nothing else, are inad^
aumible. For it mast be proved, and not
nseraly saspaeted or oonjecfnred, from the
teiue of the oalh^ that it purports an obligation
to commit high treisoo. Demonstration is re-
ly and net mere suspidon or oonjectttu'e ;
■a not limited bjf the truth, but get
tlienMies of human mgenuityr Wherever
admitted, the conclusion mast be
and arbitrary. This is npt authorised
by the statute Kbelled on; which mflexiUy
fcqnirea an oath purporting or intendmg to
bind the person, taking the same to commit
tfaaaoB, and thus evidently requires a certainty
•rising from the terms of the oath, urithoot a
aiztare of guesses, suspicions, or conjectures,
htm plansible soever they may be. -
And farther, it may be remarked, thai if
aaftaittty is required as to this import or mean-
ing of tl« oath it is not sufficient to allege
agiimit the prieener, dui an oath, in such
wmump nmgr Mre been misuid^fatood by the
|fefHNi tHMig' tt^ end aupposod to be an obli*
gstkm to commit high treason, though it really
was not so. For ignorant or illiterate persons
may very easily misconceive the meaning of
words; and even those who are better iw-
formed, may so misconstrue them, as to think
their meaning is bad, when, in reality, it ii
innocent ; or, if the meaning is criminal, t4
think it is treasonable, when it is not treason*
able, and when no .such meaning was in the
mind of other persons to whom the woids weire
used. Under an indictment of this kind^
therefore, whether against the party who ad-
ministered, or against the party who took the
oath, the misunderstanding or misconstriAstaon
of oUier persons can signify nothing. It ought
to be considered, whether the terms of the
oath do necessarily and unavoidably nuirport
an obligation to commit high treason ; and die
prisoner is even entitled to mmntain, dial if
the oath can be understood in any otlier sens^
with a probability that it wai so understood
by him, or by the person taking it, there was
no obligation to commit high treason, such at
the statute means, and there is no relevancy
in this indictment.
And this may be inferred even from tho
terras of the indictment itself, in which it it
alleged, that the oath was administered wick-
edly, malieioosly, and strange to say, traitor^
cum/. The terms wickedly and mdictotislyit
were necessary to denote the ciimind qnthty
of.the act, or the wicked intent of the accused ;
and they exemdiiy the principle, that no
person is to be neld as a criminal, where he
acted without a criminal intent.
Iv this case it is not alleged against the
prisoner, that there was any treasonable or
other wicked purpose, or indeed any particular
purpose in view, when the oath was adminie«
teradl. No treasonable, or seditious, or other*
wise illegal assodation is so much as men«
tioned or hinted at in this indictment. Tba
allegation of the public prosecutor is confined
as it ouffht to be, to the nature of the oath itself;
the words of which are set forth as being su^
fident evidence of their own criminality,-
without the aid of extraneous drcuihstances.
Here, then, the prosecutor is at issue with the
Srisoner, upon the question, whether this oathr
oes plainly and neoessarily import an obHga««
tion to commit hi^ treason, or is equally
criminal with an obligation, in terms exprese
mid direct, to compass the death of the king ;
to levy war against him ; or in any other terms,
expressing, without ambiguity, an obligation
to commit high treason, or to commit a crtmia
that is punishable in terras of this act of pM^
liament. That the oath contains no iAich oIn
ligation, in express or direct terms, is suf-
ficiently obvious. And it is only by a forced
and unnatural construction of the words, that
the prosecutor has attempted to make out,
that there is in the oath, not an express obU^
gation to commit high treasois, for that seemw
te be oat of the question, bat anoUi^tion to
he ooUnctM firom siippotfitiMte 4f itnplicitioo
and piakufapcioa darivM from diilM|it parte
847]
57 GEOUGB III.
Trial of Andrew M^KMey
[34S
of tb€ oatfay in whichy hoi merely a wicked
inteot, but the most wicked of all intents on
the part of the prisoner is taken for granted,
without any evidence or any reason whatever.
This is not dealing fairly with a question of
this kind. Admitting that all the words of
thia oath are to be taken into consideration,
and combined, where they are capable of being
combined, for the purpose of ascertaining
whether there exists in tne whole, or any part
of the oath, -a criminal intent, of that species
that is alleged in the indictment ; it is evident
that the conclusion for, or against the prisoner,
ought to be gathered from the reasonable in*
ferences or presumptions, and not from ex-
ftglfented suppositions of wicked intention, for
which there is no foundation in the terms of
the oath.
But if this is the nature of the question be-
fore the Court, it seems to be of some impor-
tance to remark, that a decision upon the
relevancy of the indictment is in truth a de-
cision upon the merits of the case, if it shall
be proved that the prisoner did actually ad-
minister the oath ; for your lordships cannot
sustain the relevancy of the indictment without
being of opinion that tbe oath purports and in*
tends as the prosecutor says it does.
Your lordships will therefore pause before
you pronounce an interlocutor sustaining the
relevancy of this indictment ; for by so doing,
you just, in so many words, give your opinion
that the. oath has had the bad meaning assigned
to it, anKi can have no other meaning. In
other words, you pronounce a verdict against
the panel — and yet it must remain a question
for tne jury, if it shall be proved that the oath
was administered — Whether the words of the
oath, imported the statutory offence or not t
In every other case, you sustain the relevancy
of an allegation, of which the import is clear
and unequivocal ; but by following a similar
course here, you confirm the prosecutor's inter-
pretation of an act, In itself ambiguous, to say
the least of it ; and, in fact, exhaust the main
question as to the guilt of the panel
And therefore, unless your lordships shall
be satisfied that the oath necessarily imports
the obligation alleged, you must reject the in-
dictment upon the relevancy. For, if the oath
do not necessarily import an obligation to
commit high treason, tne. panel administered
that oath without being guilty of the crime
alleged against him.
And uoder these circumstances, the judg-
ment of your lordships ought, according to the
common rules, to be in favour of the prisoner.
Where there is any doubt, it operates m favour
of the panel. He is presumed to be innocent
until he is proved to be guilty ; and that pre-
sumption opemtes upon every doubtfol case.
In dubOi benigttiora ^referenda ntM. And
(bis maxim applies very 'strongly to the con-
struction of woids alleged to be of a criminal
nature. My learned friend applied it, vritfa his
usual ability,, to vthe words in tne oath respect*
ing the plan of brotherhood, annual elections,
and universal suffrage, and the support of thaw
objects by physical strength.
We are told that these parties had very
criminal purposes in view ; and therefore, it is
to be presumed that nothing innocent was in
the oath. But I can never admit the justice
of such reasoning. Where a project or en-
gagement of any sort, which does not of itself
import that violence is to be used, is to be
supported vrith the whole of a man's power,
innuence, and even strength, it is to be under-
stood, unless there are plain words from which
the contrary should be inferred, that it binds
him only to use his utmost lawfol endeavours,
and for a lawful object. Upon the principles
of the prosecutor in this case, any engagement
whatever may be construed as an obligation to
commit treason.
After reciting the terms of the oath in this
indictment, the prosecutor proceeds to pot n
construction upon them which is evidently
fiuilty. It is faulty in many respects. Thfr
allegation is, that the oath purports an
obligation to commit high treason. And how
is the supposed high treason to be committed ?
'* Bv effecting, by physical force, the subversion
of tne established government, laws, and con-
stitution of this kingdom, and especially, by
obtaining annual parliaments and universal
suffrage, by unlawftil and violent means.*'
This is the allegation. The relevancy of this
part of the indictment stands upon the natur*
of that allegation.
Now, in cases of high treason, the averment
must be, that a certain speoj/Sc iremtm was com-
mitted— it is not sufficient to say generally
that high treason was committed. This pro«
position cannot be, and- it has not been dis-
puted where the crime of high treason itself is
charged. But we are told that this is not a
trial for high treason. This, however, is
nothing at all to the purpose, for the ratio iegm
is equally applicable here, as in trials for high
treason. Supposing this were a trial for high
treason, the averment in the indictment as to
the nature of the oath would not be sufficient,
because it does not describe* any particular
species of high treason — ^it merely describes
a common law treason, which was abolished
by the statute of Edward 8rd. Ever since that
salutary act was passed, treason has stood
entirely upon statute. Every prosecution for
treason must be founded upon a particular
statute>-and it must set forth, specifically, the
nature of the treason that is charged.
And, although this is not a trial for high
treason, but a prosecution against the panel
for having administered an oath for commitiing
high treason, it is evident that the panel is in
the same case as if it were a trial for high
treason. For, if justice requires that the
treason shall be specified in a trial for treason,
the same principle must require, that in n
charge that a criminal oath was administered,
the nature of the crime to which the oath refois
must be'stated^ for otherwise the accused has
no notice as to the nature of the crime for which
he is btought to trial.
3491
Jitr AdminiUtriiig unlaxvfid Oaiks.
A. D. 1817.
[350
If it had bcfn an obligatioo to commit
Kurder, would it b«re been sufficient to tvf,
that it was an obligation to commit a felony ?
Certainly not. And here, since it is said to be
an oath binding to commit high treason, the
panicttlar kind 'of high treason ought, for the
same reason, to be specified, as there are many
difierent kinds of treason.
So far we get on in our way, then. — The
kind of treason that was to be committed should
have been specified, for treasons ate distin-
gDtihable from one another, as much as murder
from robbenr, or any other fek>n]r. He who
compasses the death of the kins, is guilty of
ooe species of treason; he who levies war
against him, is guilty of another kind of
treason. In the indictment beibre us, we have
no distinction of treasons ; we have just an
allegation of an obligation to commit treason.
The indictment does not mention any one of
the statutory treasons.
A complaint was made of my learned friend,
that he read only the general words of the
danse in the indictment which comes after the
recital of the oath, and not the special words
whidi follow. They say he read, '* Which oath,
or engagement, or obligation to the foregoing
pprport, did bind, or did purport or intend to
una, the persons taking the 8ame> to commit
treason, by effecting by physical fbri^e, the
subversion of the established government, laws
and constitution of this kingdom." And they
say, that he should have added, ** and especially
by obtaining annual parliaments and universal
snffiage, by unlawful and violent means."
Bot &e omission was altogether immaterial.
The omitted words do not contain a charge of
any specific treason.
It may be, that the treason meant by the
poblie prosecutor was the levying war against
the king. Bot still it was necessary to let us
know by the indictment that such was the
prosecutor's meaning, for the oath does not
so /eiplain itself, as to import, with certainty,
an obligation to commit any crime known tn
tbe law.
The words in this part of the minor propo-
sitioo do contain little more, and nothing dif-
ferent from the old charges of treason, which
were long ago abolished by act of parliament,
S5th .of I^^imrd 3rd. The charge of a
oomnon law treason is not known at the pre-
vent day : and we little expected to have found
such a one in any indictment before your lord-
shipa. To prove this, we referred to the au-
thority of sir Matthew Hale. Among other
angularities in Mr. Home's argument, he de-
nied that this was an authority.
Mr. Dnmummd, — ^You are mistaken, I did
not say so.
Mr. C/frfc.— I think you termed his vrork a
£salty performance; and said he was very
little to be followed in a question of this kind,
and yet, that he was the person whom we called
the great father of the treason Uw. It is hardly
worth while to inform your lordships, that Mr,
Home is mistaken as to the work of which he
speaks. Hale's Summanr of the Fleas of the
Crowir, .is nota book of authority. But his
History of the Pleas of the Crown is a different
woTk, and of the highest authority. Mr. Home
founded his observation on a passage in the
report of sir John Wedderbum*s case in Judge
Foster's work. But if he had read the veiy
next sentence, he would have seen the distino->
tion pointed out between the summary and the
history. I shall take the liberty of reading a
passage from the original preface to the History
of the Pleas of the Crown.
^Some years ago there was published a
treatise intituled Pleas of the Crown, by sir
Matthew Hale ; but this was only a plan of
this work, containing little more than the heads
or divisions thereof, concemine which the
editor, in his preface, expresseth himself thus:
He (our author) hatn written a large work,
intituled an History of the Pleas of the Crown,
wherein he shows what the law anciently was
in these matters ; what alterations have from
time to time been made in it ; and what it is
at this day. He wrote it on purpose to be
printed, finished it, had it all transcribed, for
the press in his life-time, and had revised part
of it after it was transcribed.^
I understand, that a vote desiring the ex-
ecutors of Hale to print the great work on the
Pleas of the Crown, to which we have referred^
was pa:ised by the House of Commons after
his oeath, a most honourable testimony eer*
tainly to the author. And Judge Foster himself,
talking of an argument of Hawkins, calls him
" a good modern vrriter on the crown law, the
best we have except Hale.'' I need say no-
thing more to support the authority of Hale ;
and if I were in any other place where his
work is better known, it would be unnecessary
to shew that be is the first of all authorities
in questions of treason. His opinion has been
over-ruled in one or two points ; but his au-
thority is of the highest class.
It is true, that in the history of comnea law
treasons, we find chaiges of accroaching the
royd power, and other vague chams of trea*
son, such as that now before us. But all theye
haye been long exploded. There have been
no such charges |Heferred during the last or
present century.
It is yery remaricable, that in one of the
instances-^a most singular instance— in which
a charge of that kind vras made, and carried
into effect— I mesm upon the trial of the great^
earl of Strafford,* who vras charged with^ this
general common law treason,— «n endeavour
to subvert the fundamental laws— so yioltnt
was the House of Commons, so timid the
House of Lords, and so weak the Sovereign,
that a bill vras passed charging him almost in
the same terms mat are employed by the pub-
lic prosecutor in this case. The bill of attain*
der states, that the Commons have ** impeached
Thomas, eari of Strafford, of high treason, for
— i_ . ■ ■ ■■' — -
♦ 3 How. St. Tr, 1881.
t61i ^7 GEORGE III.
Trial o/Andriem M^Kinky
tut
endeaToariDg to sulivert the ancient uid fan-
damentftl lawi and govennnent of hii iuajesty*t
raaliiiaof England and IraUmd; and tcT intro-
duce an arlntrary and tyrannical ffOTemment
againi t law, in the said kingdoms/ Ice.*
And the act of parliament for rerersing the
attainder^t proceeds in the recital: ^Whereas
nomas, late earl of Strafford, was impeached
of high treason, upon pretence of endea? ouring
to sttbTert the fundamental laws, and called to
a public and solemn arraignment and trial,
l^i^re the peers in pariiament, where be made
a particular defence to every article objected
against him, insomuch that the turbulent party
l£ea seeing no hopes to efiect their anjost
designs, by any ordinary way and method of
pro<»eding, did at last resoWe to itiempt 4he
destruction and attainder of the said earl, by
an act of parliament, to be therefore purposely
made, to condemn him upon accumulative
treason, none of the pretended crimes being
treason apart, and so could not be in the
whole, if they had been proved, as they were
iiol."
I need enlarge no further on this subject.
Your lordships see that lord Strafford was at-
tainted on common law constructive treason,
expressed and described in the same vague
terms as in this indictment, and contrary to
the statutes; and that the reversal proceeded
oil the ground of the illefulity of sucn charges.
It if therefore impossible to sustain this
part of the indictment. It should have been
oetter expressed, h:id it been a charge of trea-
son; and where the charge is, that an oath
was administered to commit treason, the treason
must be described as specifically as where trea-
son itself is prosecuted. There is no difference
between the two cases. Where a trial is for
high treason, the treason must be described.
If the trial be for administering an oath to
oommit high treason, the panel is in danger if
y6U do not describe the treason, or if you de-
scribe it as a common law tveason. Is he not
in the same danger as to the folouy, that he
would have been as to the treason itself f
The same equity applies, and the same regu-
lacHy of proceeding is due to him in both cases.
The reason is, it is necessary that the panel
should have notice of the crime that is to b#
charged aniast him. The ^aigeof admlnis«
taring an oath to commit treason, should spe-
cify the treason. If a full description of wbal
is charged against a panel is not given, he hat
nothing to put him on his gnard. I need
hardly enforce this upon your lordships* eon*
sideratton; it has been so long established by
practice, that the prosecutor must detail in thle
indictment every diing he knows.
The prosecutor has not done soliere. Ha
has given no account of tlie carpm deUeti in
this case. It is only suted generally to b« the
administering an oath binding to commit trea-
son. He should have set forth the kind of
treason in legal terms, so that my client might
understand it. And, in point of fact, we sup*
posed it to be another sort of treason that was
meant, and not that which Mr. Home DruoH-
mond has told us it is.
I submit lo your lordships, that this, instead
of being a description of treason, is just one'
of those loose constructive allegations that the
law has reprobated for many centuries.
What is the oonstmction I Let us look at
the oath again. This oath is held by tiie
public prosecutor to be an oath to commit
violence. Unless it is an oath to commit vio-
lence, be knows he has no case. It is held by
the public prosecutor, to be an oath to com-
mit violence by attacking others; and not
merely to use strength in defence against the
attacks of others. I am sure, that does not
appear upon the face of the oath. It says, I
will support the saine, either by moral or phy-
sical strength; but it does not purport to bind
any body to employ strength, eitlier lawfoUy
or unlawfully, in attacking other persons.
But the public prosecutor takes all this to
granted, that the strength to be used is not
merely to be used in defence, but also in
attacking others. It is not laid in the oath,
whether the physical strength is streogUi of
body, or strength of mind, or the strength
which arises fi^m wealth, or from numerous
friends, connexions, or dependents. No ex-
planation is given as to what sort of physical
¥ou may remove the oath from the treason strength it is. But it is taken for granted by
by many steps* Suppose a charge made, that
one sent another to administer an oath to a
third person, or that there were several soch
steps, tUl at last you cane to the charge that
ao oath to commit high treason was adminis-
lered, are you not under a necessity at least to
describe what was done ? It is all one whe-
ther you are to l>e tried for committin|^ the
criaie, or for sending ai^other to commit it
Hfd the oath been to commit murder, the
nurder must be set forth ta the same way as
in an hidictment for murder ; had it been to
commit theft — in the same way as in an i»*
dictment f^r theft; and the same reason ap»
pKes in all the cases.
• S How. St. Tr. 1518.
t Stat. 18 k, 14 Car. S, e. 39.
the public prosecutor that it means strength of
body. It is further taken for granted, that this
strength is to be used in combination with that
of other persons, although there is not Uie
least groond for that construction of the oath ;
for it is the oath of a person in the singular
number, and there is no reference in it to any
exertion of strength in combination w^ other
persons.
It is taken for gn^ntedj that this phyiioal
strength or force is to be employed not only
where it maybe law^Uy employed, but also
where It must be unlawnilly employed; and
this, as a propositioB necessarily ariaing froni
the terms of the oath when you take th«
diftrent dausee altogether. The oath of se^
ccecy, it is said, is intended to cover unlawful
purposes; these, it ia next inforred, most hm
3531
Jbr Admnitlering unlaiufid Oatht.
A.D. 1817.
[334
violent, ireasonabley not purposes of defence,
byt of attack — ^not by one individiial, but by
a great comblnatloa of persons, whose attacks
would amount to the specific treason which is
comioitted by levying war. Further, it is
taken for granted, that the prisoner, along
with the supposed persons to be engaged with
him, are to use the aims of war, though there
lis nothing in the words of the oath to justify
that poUuiatum. The oath is cau tiously worded,
and you will not have the worse opinion of it
for that. The moral and physical strensth are
to be used as the case shall require ; and e?eiy
thing U to be taken for granted upon these
words. It is to be taken for granted, that the
case would require the employment of moral
and physical strength; that not only physioal
strength was to be used, if the case lawfully
required it, but if it required it, unlawfully.
In short, there are about fifty different con-
stmctions, all in this way taken for granted, in
order to make out this to be an oath to oom*
mit treason.
Task your lordships, then, whether this is
not a constructive treason that is alleged l^
the public prosecutor, more violent, more
uncandid, more unjustly alleged, than ever
was alleged against lord Strafford, or any in-
dividual who ever suffered the greatest injus-
tice. Could such an allegation ever have oeen
supported at any period of the English go-
vemment? €^n any one case be pointed out,
in whidi so many constructions were necessary,
so many malignant ^purposes to be taken for
granted, in oraer to make out treason i The
oath may be highly criminal ; but the question
ii^ whether it is so to the extent of being an
obligation to commit treason ? It is not ; and-
tberefi:>i]B, the indictment of the prosecutor is
irrelevant.
Two other points to which I have not
hitherto adverted, are of considerable import-
ance in the present case.
It is hardly necessary for me to enforce
what was stated to your lordships by Mr.
Grantywith respect to the proceedings upon
this trial, on the supposition that the indict-
ment involves a charge of treason. I shall
aasiime the differetit points that were stated
tjr.Mr. Grant. They were stated from the
&ig^h law books ; and no answer or contra-*
diction has been given to them. Let us there-
iMe see the ln£Brence to be fairly drawn from
his aj)giinient.
It is true, this is not a trial for treason ; but
if n charge of high treason ■ is implied or. in«
velTed sn theindictaaifent, it is a case which
moat be tried, aoeprding to the. treason laws^ if
« sanilar case would o» tried in England ac-
cor£i^| ^ these laws. For the treason laws
in both countries being the, same, every
ceee vllieh bas the benefit of these laws in
^gUodf 'fi|ist h«iva the benefit of the same
l^wa in Scotland. -Xodeny this proposition,
ie to deny thai the treason laws are the same
ifa the two couiitries. The law of treason has
p imported (if I may use the expression) i
from England into this country. It may have
its advantages and disadvantages. I shall not
say iliat the law administened by your loid-
ships' predecessors was not as good as the law
of England as to treason. It is enough to
say it was different ; and that it was consider-
ed to be for the benefit of the two kingdons
that their laws should be the same on all points
ef treason.
Mr. Home did not seem to nndeistand what
we have to do with tliat Uw. Your lordships,
however, will understand this. The law of
Edward 3cd, and all the other laws concerning
treason, I apprehend, necessarily come to be
considered by your lordships, in consequence
of the act of parUament declaring in broad
terms, that the law of treason shall be the same
in both countries. We must therefore inquire,
when a crime is charged, whether it is con-
nected with treason. A charge of theft is not
connected with it. But here is a charge of
administering an oath to commit high treason.
That certainly has some connection with trea-
son itself. But, in consequence of the terms
of the act of jparliameot on which the tndict't-
ment is raised, you are authorised to go on
with the trial of the statutory crime. But sup^
pose high treason is charged, or, in making
inquiry into the terms of the iiidictment, it is
found to involve a direct charge of high trea->>
son, you have been told from good authority;
that, if brought into the Court of KingVbench,
the Court would Observe that there was a
charge of high treason, and that the party
should be tried in the way^ and according to
the form of trials for high treason. I ask your
lordships if it is possible to dispute that such
is tfie rule of the law of England ; and it can-
not be disputed that the rule is also part of
the law of high treason in this country ; for
the law declares that treason shall be tried
and punished in the same way in the two
countries.
According to my friend, Mr. Home, it It
neither to be tried nor punished here as in
England. Itrif, he says. This indictment is
to be tried by your lordships according to your
ordinary forms of procedure ; and, Secmtdly^
The crime is not to be tried or punished as
high treason. But, if the law of England has
bcien truly stated to me, you will consider the
diarge bsought before yott as one of high trea-
son, Jmd .follow the same course as would be
adopted by the Court of Kins's-bench. If you-
are not bound to do so in this case, in what
case would you be bound to do so ? What
applies to one case of high treason, must apply
to another.
Then, supposing the general rnle to be, that
the charge or an inferior crime most merge iti-
a charge of high treason, let us see how it ap*'
pears that the crime charged in the indict-*
ment does not- merge in high treason; lam-
assuming treason as alleged ; and I shall shdw
you that it is alleged in this indictment.
By the apt of the 52nd of the king, it is de-
olared, that the administering an oath pur*
2 A
355]
57 GEORGE III.
7Vm/ tfAnirm M*Kideii
C356
porting to bind penons to commit treason
%\k'dXi b« a felony, and punished as such. If
the general rule is, that the lesser cnme merges
in the treason, the lesser crime of administer-
ing the unlawful oath should merge in the
treason in every case, where the crime alleged
amounts to treason. But there are many cases
ill which the crime alleged does not amount to
treason, and there are therefore various cases
to which the act of the 52nd of the king ap-
plies ; for, although the statute declares the
criminal act of administering an oath binding
to commit treason, to be punishable as a
felony, without benefit of clergy; yet, in a
subsequent part of the act, it is declared, that
if not tried and punished as a felony, it may be
tried and punished as a treason. This is de-
clared by the last clause of the statute.
An oath may be administered purporting to
bind to commit high treason, without necessa-
rily involving the person so administering the
oaiii in a charge of high treason. There are
many ways of committing high treason. An
oath that purports to bind to commit high
treason, does not necessarily involve the crime
of treason itself. So that here there may ap-
pear two sorts of cases to which the act may
or may not apply. There may be the case of
an oath administered, purporting to bind to
commit treason, and no treason at all be
chargeable against the parties; and another
case, in which, such an oath being administer-
ed, the very administration of the oath is an
act of high treason. Tliere ave cases of both
sorts, and it would be endless to enumerate
them all.
The law of England must be administered
in all cases of treason tried in Scotland.
When a crime is charged against an individual
under a lower denomination, and it appean
from tlie facts as stated in the indictment, or
from the evidence in the course of the trial,
that the case is one of treason, the crime of
the iower denomination which is charged,
merges in the crime of high treason. I cannot
make that point clearer than it has been made
by Mr. Grant, and I do not mean to argue it
again. It seems to be part of the law of Eng-
land as to oi/ crimes, and it is htrt the law as
to the crime of treason. In our law, this is
not die case as to oMer crimes than treason;
and we have many instances iii whidi offences
are tried by lower denominations, which
might have been tried under higher deno-
minations.
Here a difficulty meets us which may be
soon disposed of. We are told, that though,
Jby the law of England, this merging takes
place, yet that the law of Scotland is other-
wise; and we are asked. What have we
to do with the law of England here ? Are we
not to follow our own law?— We do follow
our own rules except in cases of treason. If
ive are asked, what have we to^, do with the
law of' England? I answer, we have to
do with it, because it is our law of treason.
And here I beg leave to remind your lord-
ships of the well-known decisionB in the civil
court on the plea of prescription founded on
the Endish statute passed in the 31st year of
queen Elizabeth. It had formeriy been de-
cided by the Court of Session, not long after
the Union, that the 31st of Elizabetli was no
part of the law of Scotland, and that the Hmitai-
tion of penal actions in the case of usury could
not be pleaded on it. Afterwards, it vras de-
cided, that the 31st of Elizabeth operated as .a
limitation to these penal actions; but tfaie
Court had again returned to its first opinion,
and decided against the limitation* But, last
of all, the Court, in various cases that occurred
some years ago, found that the English statute
vras to be considered as a part of the law of
Scotland, and was pleadable as a limitation of
penal actions founded on the act of queen
Anne against usury. One of these judgments
vras affirmed in the House of Lords in the year
1S14,* and so the law is settled.
Here, then, was an English statute which
originally had no effect in Scotland, and which
could not have been pleaded in any Scots penai
action, if the act of queen Anne had not
made it a part of the law of usurj in Scotland
as well as in England. It was introduced as
part of the Scots law with mudi difficulty,
contrary to former decisions, by a sort of
equitable implication, without direct words.
And vet we are told by the public prosecutor,
in this case, that the most express words,
giving us the benefit of the English law of
treason, contained in a statute which must be
considered as part of the treaty of Um'on be-
tween the two kingdoms, are to have no effect
at all. For it is manifest, that, according to
the doctrine of the public prosecutor, we have
not the benefit of the English laws of treason
in any one of those cases, in which the public
prosecutor charges, under a denomination
lower than that of high treason, a crime of so
high a nature that it merges in treason. In
other words, the public prosecutor may charge
the most odious offences under any denomina-
tions he pleases ; and, though the cnarges really
amount to treason, the accused has no benefit
from those laws, which, in every age, have
been held so' necessary to protect him against
a charge of high treason.
Your lordships will attend to anothier part of
this statute of the 52nd of the kin|r^ fh>m wUdi
it will be plain to you, that it must have been
the intent of the enactment, that, in the case
either of the inferior crime stated in that act,'
of a felony with benefit of clergy, punishable
«by transportation : or, of the higher crime of
felony vrithout benefit of clergy, punishable
by death, the true meaning of the act is, that
the inferior crime should merge in treason
wherever it appears. Suppose an express and]
positive oath taken to kill the king, or ,to
commit any other horrible treason, and an
overt act committed, if you were not to bold
* SuTtees and others, AppellantS| . v. Allan,
Respondent, 3 Dovo. 254,
•.
357]
far Admiitttltring unlatofiil Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
r368
thpt the inferioi crime, the felony of taking the
€«th» merged in the higher crime of treason, it
would be in the power of the lord advocate, if
a friend of the aelinquenty to sate him from
a trial for the treason, by inflicting upon him
only the punishment of transportation. Is it
to be supposed, for one moment, that it was
the intent and meaning of the act, that a per-
son tmly guilty of the most enormous crime
that could be committed, should be entitled,
by such a manoeuvre, to escape the penalty of
high treason? It is not conceivable. A
fr^ndly prosecution might be brought upon
this act of parliament in order to save a
tiaitor^s life. It is usual to speak of such a
statute as this with reference to people of a
low description. But an offence might be
coD^itted, under this act, by men of the
great^ importance in the land; and, sup-
positkg that every thing that was said of the
ttye^House Plot, or any the most treasonable
ID oiir history, should be realized, and circum-
stances ten times more aggravated should
occur, is it to be conceived that the friends
of such parties should be able so far to pro-
tect them, as to have their punishment made
only transportation ? To state such a thing is
so absurd that you will not listen to it.
If such is not the construction of the act as
to the taker of the oath, it is impossible to put
that coDStroctionas to the administrator of it —
for, from the beginning to the end of it, the
saaie words are used as applicable to both.
They are both impan cam— only, that as to the
one the penalty is death, and as to the other,
tnasportataon. And, therefore, upon this ar*
gument alone, I should be entitled to say, that
u the admiaistrator of the oath is charged with
twaiOtt, he is entitled to be tried by the treason
hnr.
There is another circumstance to be noticed.
There is a clause at the end of the act which
says, that if a party should be tried under this
aci, and should be acquitted, he should not be
liable to be i^n prosecuted under the act for
treason. It is not enough that he is brought
onder trial — be must be convicted or acijuitted.
That is a stroag circumstance, as shewing the
tme meaniiig m this act. ,
The act is extremely for the benefit of the
paad IB so for as he IS only the taker of the
oaJiL Let us see how it stands, if he were the
administrator, I am sure there is no difference
aft an botweeu,the:'penaliy of treason, and of
feiorar. without the benefit of cler^. It is
much th# same thing to a man whether he be
luuiged for treason or for any thing else. The
paoMbaent is death, and there is nothing more
to be said about it. But there is a difference,
whether a man is to be tried for treason or for
Moinr. Where he is to be tried upon the act, it
is hmd that he is not to be tried by the treason
law.' ' He is hot entitled to the great benefits
diat follow from the forms of trial for treason.
It is inore difficult to convict for treason, than
for a^y thing else. In this part of Great Bri-
tain ibe diffeience is not to great at first tight
between the two modes of trial, because here
(of which the present trial is an illustripus ex-
ample), the panel has every benefit of counsel ;
and, by our law, although almost superseded
in some instances, there must be two witnesses
in order to establish a fact. I am sure, that,
in England^ the benefit of being tried by the
treason law roust be great. At the Old fi»iley
twenty or thirty may be tried in a short time
for felonies, and a trial last only ^ve minutes.
A man there may be sent to the gallows before
he knows his trial has commenced. Does it
make no difference to him, whether he is tried
in that method, or with all the benefit of coun-
sel— and by a process under which where the
greatest struggles are. made for the prisoner —
from all which circumstances he has a much
greater chance to escape ? Does it make no
difference to him in this country that he can
be indicted only by a grand jury — that, when
he comes to be tried, he has peremptory chal-
lenges—4uid thati af^er all, the jury so selected
must be unanimous before he can be convicted?
No man in his senses. would hesitate in his
choice, between such a trial, and the ordinary
form of trial, however well regulated it may
be. In fact, the advantage of the treason laws
in Scotland is still greater than it is in Eng-
land, for persons who are accused of treason-
able practices. Nor need I enlarge on a pro-
position so completely self-evident. There is,
therefore, the greatest hardship to the prisoner,
in being deprived of this mode of trial ; and
the provisions of the law for his safety, in a
trial for treason, must not be lost sight of iu
the present question.
Under these circumstances, I contend, that
if there is a charge of treason here, the trial
ought to go forward according to the formali-
ties provided for trials for treason in this
country.
It is said, there is no trial for treason here.
The prosecutor in saying so betrays incon-
sistency. There may be many oaths to commit
treason, which are treason of themselves ; and
does not the charge in this indictment import,
not merely that an oath was administered of
the nature of an obligation to commit treason,
but that an oath was administered that was in
itself treasonable? I do not say that the oath
itself was treason, or an oath to commit trea-
son. I htive been ^ying the contrary — that it
was not an oath to commit treason, and I think
it is far less an oath to commit treason by
levying wa^ against the king. But, as it is
stated and expressed in the Indictment, the
prosecutor' is not entitled to say it was not
treason. He charges it bs, tre^onable on the
face of his indictment, and is he entitled to say
he was mistaken ? We cannot let him off in
this way — for, firttf he tells your lordships that
this oath was administered ; Secondfy^ that it
was an oath binding to commit treason ; and
then, by way of explanation, he adds, that he
means treason by levying war. Look at the
words in the indictment itself. If treason is
cjharged at all, it is such, that either to admi-
3^9]
57 GEORGE HI.
.Trial of Andrew Af'Kinkjf
[360
nidter or take an oath to commit it under the
circumstances' alleged, is itself treason. It is
a treason under the 36th of the king. The
facts here, and the treason, are so loosely de>*
scribed, that it is merely a common law trea-
son ; but can any other meaning be put on the
prosecutor's statements, than that there was
not merely an oath to commit high treason,
faiit that there was a conspiracy to levy war
against the king, for the purposes expressed in
the 36th of Geo. 3rd ? and therefore the charge
is treason. I thought I could have spoken to
this point in fewer words, otherwise I would
not have troubled tou with it at all. But,
upon the whole of this case, the prosecutor
most withdraw his charge, otherwise you must
deal with it as a treason according to the law
of England.
Mfl^t remains is the other objection, (K>inted
out by your lordships ; and, I apprehend, no
a Biwer whatever has been made on the' part
of the public prosecutor to that objection.
It oannot bo answered. I stated formerly,
-that an allegation of an oath * bindtnff the
penons taking it to commit treason, is an
absurd allegation, because no oath can bind a
man to commit treason. But, further, it does
not state the crime declared to be punishable
by the statute, nor that mentioned in the major
proposition of the indictment. It agrees with
neither. The words, ''as said is," will never
eure such a monstrous absurdity. What are
we told in answer to this? First, your atten^
tion was drawn to the ** at least " clause,
where it is said, that the oath is one *' purport-
ing to bind.'^ The statute says, '' purporting
or intending ;" and thus, the ** at least clause
U also .bad. So much the worse for the in-
I dictinent; and 1 do not see why Mr. Drum-
mend should have bestowed so much time
i)4>on'that claase. But, how does he cure the
other objection ? ' He says that it is to these
words, *^* the skid oath, or engagement, or oh^
ligdtioB, to the saip purport, binding ihe per^
uons taking the ^ame to commit treason, as
said is ;'f and that these words are surplusage.
I deny they are surplusage. That is the veiy
' argument that has oeen so often over-ruled in
cases, where ^n entail ha^ been found insuf-
- iicieitt, iu consequence of the defect in the re-
solutive clause. In the case of Tillicoultry,*
and many other cases, the prohibitory clause
was estpressed in the most ample manner
• against selling, contracting debt, and altering
the order ef succession. But the resolutive
clause proceeded jn some such form as this,
' h In case of contrav^tion, /either by contract"'
. ing •debt, or altering the order of succession,
the contravener is to forfeit the estate;" by
. "^H^ch form ^f words, the case of selling was
Omitted' ia the resolutive qlaiuse; and there
was no ^solutive clause applicable to selling.
And thus the heir of entan could not be pre-
^M(ed from selling the envied estate. Against
* Ja^. 1799: afilrme4 Jtrae Moi; Fac.
Cell. No. 99.
this conclusion, it was argued, that tbe resoJu*
tive clause contained general words, which
were sufficient; and that the words '' either
by contracting debt,^ <cc. were surplusage.
But the Court of Session, and the House of
Lords, held that tbe words were not surplusage;
and, accordingly, that the resolutive clause ap-
plied only to contracting debt, and altering
the order of succession, and not to selling. It '
was held that a resolutive clause, declaring
that contravention, either by contracting debt,
or altering the order of succession, was not a
resolutive clause in the case of selling, although
the general words in the clause would have
been good, if its meaning had not been re-
strained by the words which followed, either
by contracting; debt, &c. which necessarilv had
the effect to limit the operation of the clause,
and to make it inapplicable to selling. In
like manner, there are words in this indictment
which would have been sufficient, if they bad
not been restrained by the words, ^ binding
the persons taking the same to commit treason ;
and, in the ** at least " clause, there are general
words which might have been good, if they
had not been restrained by the previous words
in the indictment, and by the words, ** as said
is,'' which necessarily restrain the meaning of
the other words, and confine it to the meaning
expressed in the previous branches of the minor
proposition.
I here conclude my remarks upon this case.
LordJmtkt CMc-^Aher having heard very
able arguments, for seven hours ajod a haif, I
wish to know what course of procedure ap-
pears to your lordships proper for us to follow.
Lord Hermand, — When any difficulty occurs
in this Court, it has always been the practice
to order informations. I think there is the
strongest reason to take all the assistance we
can in this case. I give no opinion at pcesent
upon it. J wish, however, more attention
paid to what was stated on the other side of
the bar. His majesty's counsel might have
said more. Some of the counsel find them-
selves in a new situation in this case. I do
find myself so. When I was young at the bar^
I read many books of English law ; bu^ since
I sat upon the bench, I never had occai»oa to
resort to them. If I give an opinion ageinat
the panel in this case, it nmst be upon strong
grounds that I do so.
Lord Gilliei. — I concur in the course of oro-
ceeding suggested by lord Hermand. One
objection appears to me to be fatal to the in-
dictment; tnat which was noticed by your
lordship. In the part of the indictment, where
the act charged should be set forth in the mosi
particular manner; where, if there was any
mistake in the preceding part, it should have
been corrected ; where every thing should be
full and accurate, the oath ii not libelled as
purporting or intending to bind, but the oath is
said to be one binding to the commiasion ' of
treason. I have heard no answer made to this
9«l]
fiit Admituttmng mHUttofid Oatht.
A. D.. 1 817.
[9«2
objection. I must take the wordt of the act,
Irom which there is here a material deTiatioD.
The word ^ binding,'' may either mean, bind-
ing in law and morsdity to commit treason —
fHsich conld nerer be meant, being an absur-
dity; or that the oath binds m termunt to the
commission of treason. Bat it appears to me,
that the words in the oath do not expressly
bind to commit treason. In these circum-
stances, I should wish the Court to give its
opinion on this objection before ordering in-
mrmations. Whatever your opinion may be
on the other points, this objection probably
appeals to your lordships as it does to me, to
be &tal to the indictment. I gire no opinion
at present on the other points.
liord Piiwnlfy, — ^I am mndi in the situadon
of lord Gillies. I should wish informations,
or time to consider the aigument of to-day,
before giving my opinion on it. Bu^ it ap-
peals to me clear, that the indictment is liable
to the objection whidk' was stated by lord
Giliies, and also to that which was argued by
Mr. Cranstoun, viz. that it charges that the
oath was iraUonnufy administered.
The use of the term ** binding,'' instead of
** purporting or intending to ^ bind," appears
to me to form an objection fiital to the indict-
Bient. That clause m the indictment does not
appear to be surplusage, though I thought so
at first; It is not necessary, in the minor pro-
pcvition of an indictment to repeat the majOr ;
It 18 not necessary, when motder is charged,
and the hctM aie stated by which the mnrder
is .mada out, to add ^ whereby the murder
was eommiuod." That would be surplusage.
This, however, is not a repetition of the major
piopositioii— it is a substitution of words
which do not amount to the crime stated in
the major proposition, and it is therefore in-
aocorate. It does tfierefbre appear to ine
that the indictment is liable to uom objection,
and it is not upon that point that I wish for
informatioa, but upon the other arguments.
Lord JZcston. — ^I think the objection spoken
to is a good one.
Lord AchoeaU.^1 will undoubtedly serve a
seir indictment; and the informations may be
ordeied vpon the new indictment.
JjordJmtiet Ckrkj^l have not heard the
objection obviated ; and it appears to me to
be &tal to the indictment. I go at present
upon tfie distinction which was noticed ; for
here the question is not fairly raised as to the
lekvaacy on the general grounds. The words
employe in the minor proposition eo to a
limitation not warranted by the act of parlia-
nent. I am not called to say what is the
oifect of an oalh that Innds a person to commit
treason. I am called to give my opinion on
an oath which is averred to purport or intend to
bind a person to commit treason. You h%ve
pol before you an act of parliament that makes
it criminal to bind to commit Jreaifon ; ' but
you have a statute which lo^^s it criminal to
administer an oath purporting or intending to
bind to commit treason; ana, therefore, it is
impossible for the public prosecutor to say,
here was an oath administered on four different
occasions, binding to commit treason. Ibat
is not the offence which it was the purpose of
this act to provide against. I have heard no
answer to this objection, and therefore it is
difficult to order informations on this indict-
ment.
If the public prosecutor mean to charge only
the capital felony mentioned in this act of par-
liament, he must employ language applicable
to that capital felony alone, and tne word
^ traitorously" ought not to be used in Uiis
indictment. It ought not to be in it, in order
to raise the question which we are called upon
to try.
I own the jpart of the case upon which I
should wish tor information, is that as to the
positive averment as to the rule of the law of
England.
If the counsel for the prisoner are right, in
stating what would be the rute qf construction
in England, and in affirming, that, on this
occasion, the English rules and forms must
be adopted, they must show this in a manner
to enable us decidedly to form our opinions on
the subject. We do wish for erery aid and'
assistance, if we are to be toU Uutt sudi a
mode of proceeding would be adopted in the
court of King's-bench, and that it is our duty
to follow the same mode of proceeding on this
trial. 'When we are called upon to give our
opinions upon the oath, we must proceed upon
the general principles of construction, as to
the import of the terms of it. I fairly confess,
my difficulty is on the point which I have last
mentioned.
Lord GUliet. — I wish the informations to be
foil, upon all the branches of the case. .
The proceedings of the Court were eatered
on the record in the following terms.
** His majesty's advocate represented,
^ that, since the service of the indictment
above mentioned, tie had raised and exe-
cuted a new indictment against the panel ;
' the diet whereof also stawfe adjourned to
this day. He therefore moved their lord*
ships to desert the diet of the first indict-
ment, reserving to him to insist upon the
second indictment as accords.^'
** The lord justice-cleik, and lord com-
missioners of justiciary, in respect of
what is above represented, desert the diet
of the first indictment against the said
Andrew M'Kinley, reserving to his ma-
jestv's advocate to insist upon the second
indictment, as accords.
(Signed) p. Boyle, I. P. D."
And the second indictment being call-
ed, and ^ the panel being interrogated
thereupon, he answered.. AipI GttUiy**'
3(tSl ^7 GEORGE III.
Trial of Andrew M*Kimley
[364
After parties proc«ratois had been faeaixl
at very great length, upon the teleYancy
of the indictment.
His majesty's adyocate moTed the
Court to desert the diet of the present in-
dictment pro loco et tempore, as he meant
to serve the panel with a new indictment.
*' The loitl justice clerk, and lords
commissioners of justiciary, in respect
of what is above represented, desert the
diet against the panel jro Uxo et tempore,
(Signed) D. Boyle, I. P. D."
Thereafter a petition was presented to
the said lords, in the name of nis majesty's
advocate, craving a warrant for recom-
mitting the said Andrew M'Kiolev to the
castle of £dinbQr|;h, till liberated in due
course of law, which was granted accord*
ingly.
m^
COURT OP JUSTICIARY.
JuHB 23| 1817.
Freient,
Rt. Hon. IXrvid Boyif , Lord Justice Clerk.
Lord Harmtmd.
Lord GiUle$.
Lord PiimUly*
Lord Rett&H.
Comudjbr the Crown.
Rt Hon. Alexander Maconoekk of 'Meadow-
bank, His Majesty's Advocate f afterwards a
lord of Session and Justiciary, with the title
of Lord Meadowbank.l
Jamee Wedderbum^ Esq. Solicitor-General.
H. Home Drummcnd, Esq. Advocate-Depute.
Countel/or the Panel.
John Clerkf Esq.
Geo. Cranstoun^ Esq,
Tho. Thomson, iaq.
Francit Jeffrevy Esiq.
J. P. Granty Esq.
J. A. Mtamnf, Esq.
James Moncrieffy Esq.
Henry Cockbumy Esq.
Lord Justice Clerk. — Andrew M'Kinley,
attend to the indictment against you which is
now to be read.
''Andrew MlUnley, present prisoner
in the Castle of Edinburgh, you are
indicted and accused, at the instance of
Alexander Maconochie of Meadowbank his
majesty's advocate, for his majesty's in-
terest : That albeit, by an act passed in
the fifty-second year of his present ma-
jesty's reign, intituled, ' An act to render
more effectual an act passed in the
thirty«seventh year of his present majesty,
for preventing the administering or taking
unlawful oaths,' it is inter aUa enacted,
''That every person v^ho shall, in any man*
ner or form whatsoever, admioiitori- or
cause to be administered, or be aiding or
assisting at the administering of .any oath
or engagement, purporting or intending
to bind the person taking the same to
commit any treasoh or murder, or any
felony punishable by law with death,
shall, on conviction thereof by due course
of law, be adjudged guilty of felony, and
suffer death as a felon, without benefit of
clergy." And further, bv section fburth
of the said act, it is enacted, "That persons
aiding and assisting at the administering of
any such oath or engagement, as aforesaid,
ana persons causing any such oath or en-
gagement to be administered, though not
S resent at the administering tfiereot, shaU
e deemed pripcipal o&ndera, and shall
be tried as such ; and, on conviction there-
of by due coucse of law, shall be adjudged
suilty of felony, and shall suffer death as
felons, without benefit of clergy ; although
the persons or person who actually admi-
nistered such oath or engagement, if any
such there shall be, shall not have been
tried or convicted." And further, by
section sixth of the said act, it is enacted,
"That any engagement or obligatioa
whatsoever, in the nature of an oath,
purporting or intending to bind the per-
son taking the same to commit any
treason or murder, or any felony t>uni8h-
able by law with death, shall be aeemed
an oath within the intent and meaning of
Uiis act, in whatever form or manner
the same shall be administered or taken,
and whether the same shall be actually
administered by any person or per-
sons to any other person or persons, or
taken by any other person or persons, with-
out any administration thereof by any other
person or persons :" Yet true it is ahd
OF VEBiTY, that you the said Andrew
M'Kinley are guilty of the said crimes,
or of one or more of them, actor, or
art and part: In so far as, you, the said
Andrew M'Kinley did, dt secret meetings,
and on other occasions, at Glasgow, and
in the vicinity thereof, in the course of
the months of November and December,
1816, and January and February, 1817,
wickedly, maliciously, and feloniously ad-
minister, or cause to be administered, or
did aid or assist at the administering, to a
great number of persons^ to the amount
of several hundreds, an oath or engage-
ment, or an engagement or obligation in
the nature of an oath, purporting or in-
tending to bind, the persons taking the
same to commit treason, hj obtaining an-
nual parliaments and universal suffrage
by physical strength or force, and thereby
effecting the subversion of the established
government, laws, and constitution of this
kingdom, by unlawful and violent means ;
which oath, or engagement, or engage-
ment or obligation, in the nature of
aa oath, was in the following terns.
3651
Jixr Aimimtenng vnimj^l Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
1366
or to the fDllowing purport: — " In awful
presence of God, I, A B, do voluntarily
swear, that I will penevere in my en- ,
deavoaring to fonn a brotherhood of
affection amongst Britons of every de-
scriptionj who are considered worUiyof
confidence ; and that I will persevere in
my endeavours to obtain for all the peo-
ple in Great Britain and Ireland, not dis-
qualified ,b^ crimes or insanity, the eke-
tive franchise, at the age of twenty-one,
with free and equal representation, apd
annual parliamen ts ; and tbati will support
the same to the utmost of my power, either
l>ymoTai or physical strength (or force),
as the case may require ; And I do farther
swear, that neither hopes, £eai8, rewards,
or punishments, shall induoe me to in-
form on, or gi^re endence against, any
member or members, ooUectively or indi-
vidually, for any act or expression done
or made, in or out, in this or similar so-
cieties, under the punishment of death,
to be inflicted on me by any member or
members of such societies. So help
me God, and keep me stadfast:" —
And more particularly, (1.) at a secret
meeting held at the . house of Hugh
Dickson, then weaver in Abercromby-
street, or Gallon of Glasgow, or elsewhere
at Glasgow, or in the immediate vicinity
thereof you the said Andrew M'Kinley
did, upon the 20th day of December,
1816, or.upon one.or other of the days of
that month, or of November immediately
preceding, or of January immediately
following, wickedly, maliciously, and felo-
niously administer, or cause to < be ad-
ministered, or did aid or assist at the
administering to Peter Gibson, John
M'Lauchlane, John Campbell, and Hugh
Dickson, all present prisoners in the
Castle of Edinburgh, or to one or
other of them, and to other persons,
whose names are to the prosecutor un-
known, an oath, or engagement, in the
terms above . set forth, or^ to the same
purport, or an engagement, or obligation
m the nature of an oath, in the terms
above set forth, or to the same purport.
And fiarther, (2.) you the said Anarew
M'Kinley did, upon the 1st day of
January, 1817, or on one or other of
the days of . that month, or of Novem*
ber or December ' immediately » prece-
dio^^ at a secret meeting, held in the house
of William l^egaat, tbea change-keeper,
KinMtreet, Xmfistown, in the vicinity
of Glasgow, or. .elsewhere at Glasgow, or
in the vicinity, thereof, wickedly, < ma*"
liciously, and feloniously administer, or
cause to be administered, or did aid
or assist at the administering, to the
said Peter Gibson, John M'Lauch-
lane, John Campbell, and Hugh Dick-
son ; as atw, to- James M^Ewan, now or
lately carding-master at Ilurophrie's Mill,
> /
Gorbals of Glaigow, and M'Dowall Pate,
or Peat, now or lately weaver in Piccadilly
street, AndetBton, in the vicimty of Glas-
gow, who, consdoiui of their guilt in the
premises, liave absconded and fled from
justice; as also, to John GonneHon, or
Cottgleton, now or lately eetton-^pinner
in Calton of Glasgow, or to one or other
of them, aod . to oth^ persons, whose
names are to the proseeuior unknown, an
oath or engagement, in the .terms above
setioith, or to the same purport, or an
engagement, or obUi^'on, in the nature
of an oath, in the terms above set
forth, or to the same purport. And
further, (3.) you the said Andrew
M'Kinley did, upon the 4th day of
January, 1817, or on one or other of
the days x>( that month, or of November
or December immediately preceding, at a
secret meeting, held in the house ofNeill
Munn, then inn-keeper and- stabler, in
Ingram-street, Glasgow, or elsewhere at
Glasgow, or in the vicinity thereof, vrick-
edly, maliciously, and feloniously admi-
nister, or cause to be administered, or did
aid or assist at the administering, to
the said Peter Gibson, John M'Lauch- '
lane, John Campbell, Hugh Dickson,
M^Dowall Pate, or Peat, and James
M'Ewan; as also, to James Hood and
John Keith, both present priaoaers in the
Castle of Edinburgh, Andrew Sommerville,
John Buchanan, and James Robertson,
all now or lately pris<mers in the toW
booth of Glasgow, or to one or other of
them, and to other persons whose names
are to the prosecutor unknown, an oath
or engagement, in the t^rms above set
forth, or to the same purport, or an
engagement, or obligation, in the nature
of an oath, in the terms above set forth,
or to the same purport. And, fub-
TKjBfi, you the said Andrew M'Kinley
did, upon the 5th day of February, 1817,
or on one or other of the davs of that
month, or of January immediate! v preced*
ing, at a secret meeting, -held at the
r house of John Robertson, then innkeeper '
jmd stabler in Gallowgate of Glasgow,
or elsewhere at Glasgow, or in the im-
mediate viciniw thereof, wickedly, mali-
clottsly, and feloniously administer, or
«ause to be administered, or did aid or
assist at., the administering to the said
James Hood, James Robertson, Andrew
$ommerviIle, and John Buchanan, as ateo
to James Finlayson, present prisoner in
the Castle of Edinburgh, or to one or other
of them, and to other persons, whose
names are to the prosecutor unknown,
an oalh or engagement, in the terms above
set forth, or to the same purport, or an
engagement or obligation in the nature
of an oath, in the terms above set forth,
or to the same purport. And you the said
Andrew M^Kinley having been present,
367J ^7 GEORGE III.
TrM of Andrew M*
[366
«
together with all or part of Ae ptenons
above deigned, at a secret meeting, held
for the imrpoee of admiDistehng, or caiu-
ing to be adminbtered, the said otdi or
engagement^ or for other purposes to' the
proseentorimknowni at the hbnse of Alex-
ander Hunter, then change-keeper in the
Old Wynd of Glasgow, on the 32nd day
of Febmaiy, IdlT, and hating' been'
there appvdiended, cohecioos of your
cuilt in the premises, did assume the
false name of John Brothentone; and
hanring been taken before Robert Hanil-
ton. Esquire, Sheriff-depute of Linaik-
shire, you did, in hb preseface, at Glas-
gow, on the S8thdayofFebruaiy»18l7,
and on the 11th day of March, 1817,
emit and subscribe two several declara-
tions; and baring been taken before
Daniel Hamilton, Esquire, one 6f the
Sherifi-substitute of Lanarkshire, you
. did, in his presence, at Glasgow, on the
4th day of March, 1817, emit and sub-
scribe a declaration; and baring been
taken before Hugh Kerr, Esquire, one of
the Sheritib-substitute of Lanarkshire, you
did, in his presence, at Glasgow, on the
5th day of March, 1817, emit and sub-
scribe a declaration; and baring been
taken before James Wilson, &quire,
Sherifi^-eubstitnte of the county of Edin-
burgh, you did, in his presence, at Edin-
bu^ on the 18th day of March, 1817,
emit and subscribe a declaration ; — all
whichdeclarations,beingtobe used in eri-
'dence against you atyour trial, will for that
purpose, be lodged in due time in the
hands of the Clerk of ihe High Court of
Justiciary, before which you are to be
tried, that you may hare an opportunity
of seeing the same. At least, times and
plaees fotesaid, the said oath or engage-
menty or an oath or engagement in the
foregoing purport, or an engagement or
obligation in the nature of an oath, in
the terms abore set forth, or to the fore-
going purport, purporting or intending to
bind the persons taking the same, to com-
mit treason, as said is, was wickedly, ma-
liciously, and feloniously administered,
or caused to be administeied, as aforesaid ;
and some person or persons did aid or
assist at the administering thereof; and
you the said Andrew M%nley are guilty
of the said crimes, or of one or more of
them, actor, or ait and part. All whidi, or
part thereof, being found proren by the
rerdict of an assize, before the Lord Jus-
rice Genera], the Lord Justice Clerk, and
Lords Commissioners of Justiciary, you
the said Andrew M'Kinley ought to be
punished with the pains of law, to deter
others from committing the like crimes in
all rime coming.
^<H. Home Drummond, A, P."
LIST -OP WIT1I£SSES.
'1. Robert BamiUon^ Esquire, sheriff-depute
of Lana^hire.
2. Dmid Hmuli&n, Esquire, one Of the
sheriffif-substitute of Lanarkshire.
8* fli^A JCerr, Esquire, one of the sberifi-
sttbetituteof Lanarkshire.
4. Jomst Ihomfmm, derk to John Drysdale,
sheriflMeric of Lanarkshire. ^
5. Maithem B»-iu, derk to George Salmond,
procurator^fiscal of Lanarkshire.
6. Jo£i LaUe, clerk to the said John Drya-
dale.
7. Joitph Reidf writer in Glasgow.
8. Cfeor^ Sabmmi^ procurator-fiscal of La-
narkshire.
9. Jama WiUon, Esquire, one of the sherifis-
substituteof the county of Edinbur^.
10. Archibald ScUt^ procurator^scal of the
county of Edinburgh.
11. Jama Cirrie, writer, Sheriff-clerk's office,
Edinburgh.
12. Alexander Colder, sheriff-officer in Glas*
gow.
13. Alexander EmUrj now or lately change-
keeper, Old Wynd of Glasgow.
14. Marian McLaren, or M^Lachtan^ now or
lately serrant to the said Alexander
Hunter.
15. John Roberistmf now or lately inn-keeper
and stabler, Gallowgate Glasgow.
16. Agnes Campbdi, wife of Thomas Dow,
now or lately steam-boiler maker and
smith at Girdwood and Company's
foundry in Hutcheson-town, in the
ricinfty of Glasgow.
17. Janet Rentoulj now or lately serrant to
Neill Munn,. now or lately inn-keeper
and stabler in Ingram-street, Glasgow.
18. Alison IFtboii, now or latdy serrant to the
said NeiU Munn.
19. Matthew I^e, now or lately spirit-dealer
in Wilson-street, Glasgow.
20. Jean Boyd^ wife of the said Matthew Fyfe.
21. WUHam Leggot, now or lately change-
keeper, inking-street, comer of Centre-
street, Tradeston, in the ricinity of
Glasgow.
22. JiAn Miiehell, wearer, now or lately re-
siding in Wilkie's Land, Charles-street,
Calton of Glasgow.
23. Eugh Dichon, present prisoner in the
Castle of Edinburgh.
24. Peter G^Ason, present pris6ner there.
25. John M*Lachlaney present prisoner there.
28. Jamei JFlmloyMm, present prisoner there«
27. John Campbell, present prisoner there.
28. Jamei Hood, present prisoner there.
29. William Stmnon, lately prisoner in the
castle of Edinburgh, and now or lately
change-keeper in Main-street, Anden-
ton, in the ricinity of Glasgow.
H. HoMB DauMiioiiD, A, D.
309]
for Mmmiaering unlituffiii Oaths. A. D. 1817. [370
cussion'took place. There is some Tariation
between fthe present and the former indict-^
mentSy bnt the crime charged in them is one
and the same ; and, therefore^ the resolution
then formedi your lordships will now carry into
effect, by ordering informations on the relenmcy
of the indictment.
LIST OF ASSIZE.
Qnmiy rf Edmbm^gk.
Gray of Snipe.
Jokm ThomMcn of Burnhonse.
George Jeffrey^ grocer in DaJkeith.
JUcAorrf Mmciet, merchant there.
Jemet Muiter^Amer^ Longside.
Jmmei NibHe, fanner, Easter Cowden.
D&md Tlkfmon^ farmer^ Westei Cowden.
County of Haddington*
John Andenon of Whitburgh.
Tkomat Jlfi<dbetf of Westbams Mains.
Okaries Crmrford^ farmer, Bast Fortune.
Mmrk TvrnmdL, fiurmer. Upper Bolton.
Jemtt WUmm, farmer, Bolton.
OnmJty ofLmUthgout
WUtiam WiOde of Magdalens.
WUHam SkUim^^ of Boghead.
Andrew MUckeli, farmer at Kinneil Keiie.
Ms Ran, himer at Borrowstown.
Jofen Thommmy fiirmer at Inneravon.
€% of EdhAnrgh.
Bith&rdJoknstmy banker in Edinbuigh.
Jeme$ M*Kensae, goldsmith there.
Robert Great, watchmaker there.
Baberi SUdery dye-cutter there. •
WUHam Neilton, painter there.
Jama TnUy baker there.
Andrew Gfiemm, tailor there.
Patrick Mmn^ painter there.
Jalbi Laadery merchant there.
Samuel Qopperton, grocer there.
Mm BrowHy mercluuit there.
Bobert MUckeil, merchant there.
WUliam Zjockhart, tinsmith there.
John Sinciair^ seed-merchant there.
WUliam Scotiy pewterer there.
Aknmkr JobnUonj ironmonger there.
George Graj/y baker there.
'Thomm Edmonstonef ironmonger there.
William Mmrayy baker there.
Join Smithj spirit-dealer there.
Tkam Hunter^ merchant there.
ToumofLeUh.
JoAn Skarpy wine-merchant in Leith.
Ardnkdd 3d^DowaU, merchant there.
Jmmt O^viey wine^merchant (liera.
^R^bert ^trackan, merchant thew.
BMibtrt.Sandenonf cooper there.
MBberi Brunlonf merchant tbere.
Jobn Colder, grocer there.
D. BoYii-
Geo. FEaouisoir.
David Douoxas.
Urd Aiitke CMr.— What do you say to
ibk indictment ? Are you' guilty or not guilty
<>f the charges contained in it?
' Andrew JH'Ktnley.—^oi guilty.
Lord JufiHee Clerk.'^ynitn the case was
fcnnerty b«ffore us, a*;full and very able'dis-
VOL XXXIU.
Jjfrd Advocate. — I think it proper to state,
that my object is to bring this case before. a
jury as speedily as possible; and knowing,
from what was formeny thrown out, that when
an interlocutor should be pronounced, your
lordships would direct informations shouM be
given in, I have had the information for the
crown prepared, and actually printed, and it
will be ready to be thrown off without delay.
For the purpose of despatch, and in order that
no delay mi^y take place in bringing on this
trial, I crave your loraships to direct, that the in-
formation for the panel shall be ready within a
short time from tms date.
Lord Juitice Clerk, — As there was a very
full ai;gument on the relevancy in the case of
Edgar, where the indictment was similar to
the indictment served on this panel ; and, as
(lie second pleading followed out the same ar-
gument as tne first, we can have no difficulty in
ordering the informations to. be given in at an
early period.
«
Mr. Cockbitm, — Mr. Moncrieff, notwith-
standing his numerous avocations, has under-
taken to write the information for the panel.
In fixing the period for giving in the inrorma-
tions, you will consider he has not yet seen the
paper given in for the other party. The )ast
diet was about three weeks ago ; so that the
prosecutor, knowing the nature of his indict-
ment, has virtually had three weeks to prepare
his information. Therefore, as three weekii
have been taken by the crown counsel, you must
give us an equal period to prepare the informa^i^
tion for the panel.
Lord Jtutiee Clerk. — ^The indictment was
served three weeks ago.
Lord , Advocate. — ^Your lordships will also
observe, that the parties heard each other's
pleadings. I am happy, both for the sake of
the panel and the law, that Mr. Moncrieff is to
write the information on the other side. But,
if Mr. Moncrieff cannot, from his other avoca-
tions, accomplish his task within a short period,
there are other seven counsel for the panel, of
the fint eminence at the bar, and surely, by
this gr^at band of counsel, the paper might be -
prapacid without delay.
Mr. Coek^um. — If each took a'page'in turn,
it might soon be done. There are three*
counsel fpr the Crown, and, from the statement
we have beard, I presuroe.each may have take»^
a week in the preparation of their paper. But,
as Mr. Moncrieff is himself to write the whole
of the information for the panel, three weekt
must be given to him.
2 B
S71J
57 GEORGE IIL
Triul ^Andmi M^KUhy
ECtt
Mr, SoUeU0t G«iMrf£.— Tkeie tie «igbt
oouBsel for the paotl, and when they mIbcI a
particaUr one mm amoAg thamsalTes to write
the informatioDj they are not entitled to get
delay on aocoant of ihe nvmerous avocationa
^ the counsel so fleeted* Ihe circumstance^
flierefore, of that counsel's avo^tions, cannot
be listened lo as any excuse for asking
dMay ia ^preparing die infomitkni far the
panel.
Lord HcrmandL— I cannot distinguish be-
tween one counsel and another in doing his
duty.
Lot4 JvUk» Oark^-li this were Ae fim
lime of ordering informationt on the in^otment
yonr lordshipe would naturally give ibll and
competent time to prepare tliem. But this case
stands ▼ery particvlariy situated. We have
had most rail and able debates irpon the rele-
vancy; buty from the impertance of the casei
you thought it right to have the aognment.
stated in writing. The Court does not wish
more verbal discussion ; and, the oniyqaestion
is, now that the diet has arrited, 'What is a
competent time to give fcnr preparing' the in-
formation P Die panel has, again and again,
been brought here, from circumstances friiich
we could not help; and -we are not to allow
fhe case to be pratracted. Let the information
for the panel oe given in ten days hencci or
this day forlnight.
Mr. Coelcftum.— From Mr. Moncrieff'ii
situation, that b giving him no time at all.
He cannot begin before Wednesday, as he has
not seen the other parties* pleadings. Four
or five days must pass before he does so, and
tfien he has not four or five days to write.
Lord Bsnnanir— It is a very difierent thing,
after hearing these pleadinss, to write the infcv-
nation, from what it would have been had thew
not taken place.
LordJmHee Clarfe.— The former debate has
l^ten taken in short imod, and furmsbed to the
judges.
Lord GiUia4 — ^The shortest time p^blc
should be fixed qpon.
Lord Bemusuft-'I think Chat better far the
panel.
Lord GiUies. — ^We are to consider the in*
farmations this day fortnight. If we find that
inconvenient^ by a short minute, the conside-
ration can be delayed till the Wednesday fol-
lowing.
Mr. Coe^Ebam.— Is it to be this day fortnight
or three weeks r The trial might be poatponed
a week.
' Lord'&ittaes.-^Theeonifetion offhe'witaiestes
a(hkd jQiy should be oettsidered.
r
. Lord Jmtkc C2er/c»— 1 have no wish to pxess
]%y own .qpiiliOBy if any of f Ofir 4oBdihipa
differently.
Lord Jtefton. — ^I think ten days snAdent to
allow for the information ; but I have no ob-
jections to logger tisDC being gomted. I have
no objection to an indulgence to Wednesd^
fortnight on both sides.
IKTERLOCVTOB.
^ The Loid Justice Clerk and Lodb
(>auttissiQiiers of Justiciary^ esdain pw
ties procurators to give in informations
upon the relevancy of the indictment, to
the Clerk of Couit, in order tobe rei^HPd^;
the prosecutor to give in his iaifanDMlioft
on or before 'Biursday neict, and the pas-
curators far the panel to give in Jus iura^
mation on or before \S^ ninth d^«C
July next — Continue the diet against the
panel till Monday, ihe 14th day of the
said month of JiUy, and ordain all oon*
cemed to attend, eadi under die paios ef
law ; and the pand, in the mean Uaie, l»
be carried back to, the Castle of £diB>
burgh."
June 26, 1817.
INFORMATION
Fon
ALEXANDER MACONOCHI£, Eaq^^
Meadowbankf hk Mt^u^s AAwtate^
for Atf Mi^yt wiare^y
AGATK8T
ANDREW M'iUNLEY, pwienl JV-tmer w
the Cmtk of EdMmgh^VvaxX.
After hearing counsel a second thne *
on the relevancy of tike cbar^ against the
panel, tlie first argument m the case of
WiUiiUn Edgar hi^ng been equalfy ap-
plicable to the present, your tordships has
still expressed a vrish to have an oppoiw
tunity of considering a written plaawing
before delivering your opinions. It wis
then suggested, that it would be better to
serve the ponieliwith a new indictment^
before writing Ihe informations, in conse-.
quence of some veri)al objections to tiie *
indictment, then depending, wbsdt lad
occurred to -the Coort. fhe course
pointed out by your lordships bas
accordingly been followed. Tne ^iet
of the former indictment having 'been
deserted, another was immediately served; '
and an interiocutor, ordering informations,
was then pronounced f ; in obedience to
which, this paper is presented.
After the comdenUionr that ins. I^pi
already given io the case, the ptoseoator
cannot flatter himself with ihe hope iiC.>
staling any new views of Uie subject that
are likely to appear of mndi importance*
■ t ■ .... ■ *»»
* June 2, 1817. tJun€23^18U.
•731
fir AdmimiHrJHg wtibtmfii Oatlu.
A. D. ISlt.
[374
NcMier doeB he think ha would be jultified
by any indncemeat of noveltyy in aban-
doning those grounds on which he long
ag«> ibrmed Ihs opinion, that the charge
agmst the pand ought to peas 16 as
assiie; an opinion from which, as yet, he
has seen no cause to depart. He con-
eeiTCs, that he will best discharge his duty,
by pointing out those leading views
of the case on which he expects the de-
cision will ultimately rest ; and will not
Ihtigue your lordships or himself, by en-
tering upon the endless minutia of verbal
criticism, or expatiating on the boundless
field of general discussion, which the com-
bined efforts of so many learned men have
employed in prerenUng, or at least delaying
for a time, the trial of the offence charged
against the panel.
The statute libelled on is of recent
origin, and was intended to check a great
and alanning evil, which, of late Tears, has
led to many crimes and disoroersi and
even to insurrection and rebellion, in
different parts of Che united' kingdom.
Conspiracies against the lives and pro-
perty of others, and against the whole
Existing order of society, were continually
bredking out, which had all of them cer-
tain marked features of resemblance^ and
tdl ultimately tended to the same end.
Those conspiracies were dangerous, in
proportion as they were systematic;
and it was naturally thought that the
foundation of the evil would be re-
moved, if the bond of union could be
destroyed by which they were formed and
hM together. Accordingly, the legis-
lature declared it a capittd criihe to ad-
minister oaths of a particular description,
this being invarfilbly the Engine of mischief
by which tiie vicious and ignorant were
united in the prosecution of their own
ol^ecfs, or in the blind advancement of
Ihe more dangerous schemes of olhers.
Tor many years, the country has not been
altogettier free ftom such combinations ;
and, although dormant for a time^ they
have always been revived on the lecur-
tence of any general discontent or dis-
tress. In the circumstances of the present
time, they have found uifusUal encoutage-
ment ; and even the sober and <calculating
spirit of the people of this part of the
kmgdom has not saved them fW)m the
general delusion. An association of des-
perate men whs formed ; who entertained
sanguine expectations that Ihe timd was
come for a new order of things, when tliey
mi^t participate in the power and
pfifrileges erf* the higher order of the State,
and share tiie possMions of their wealthy
and more industrious neighbours. The
jiarticulars of the rise and progress of this
coiispiraey, it would not only be foreign
fioMi the pi^eseut purpose, but impfoper
4nd ineKpedieiit to detail ; and^ ta truth,
the description would have little to re-
cemnend it for interest or novelty. Con-
spirators of all ages and countries have a
striking resemblance to each other:
^ Bonis iovident, males extoUunt ; vetera
odere, nova exoptant ; odio suaram renim
matari omnia student; turlA atquie se*
ditionibus sine curft aluntur."
The proceedings of those persons were
perfectly well known to his majesty's go-
vernment ; and, in order to preserve the
tranquillity of die country, it at length
became necessary to interrupt their
labours, before their schemes burst fordi
into mature and active operations. The
contamination, however, had spread to a
considerable extent, and had struck deep
root in the hearts and affections of the
diseased part of the community; and
though checked for a time, by the disclo-
sure and'thefear of its consequences, there
was no doubt that, upon the first oppor-
tunity, the same, or a similar plan c'
operations would be resun^, with in-
creased viffour and activity.
Under these circumstances, it appeared
to his majesty's advocate, that the pro-
per course of his public duty was, td en-
force the provisions of the statute, which
was passed for the express purpose of
repressing such disorders. The panel
and another individual were accordingly
rndicted to stand trial for the statutory
offence of ** administering an oath, pur-
porting or intending to bind the persons
taking the same to commit treason.'^
[Comtruction of the oo/A.]— The first
question that naturally arises upon this
charge is, whether the oath alleged to
have been administered by the panel did
purport or intend to bind the persons to
whom he administered the same to com-
mit treason. The prosecutor is not bound
by the statute to set forth the terms of
the oath, but only the purport of it. And
it is not necessary that the oath should
bear, in express terms, the guilty purpose,
or should have any meaning at all, pro-
vided only it be intended and understood
by the persons administering and taking
ft to have that end in view. It is plain,
that a few letters of the alphabet, or any
words of an innocent or opposite meaning,
the oath of allegiance itself, might have
been so administered and taken, a3 to
constitute the statutory crime. The pro-
secutor is not, however, reduced to such
a narrow case as this, for he produces
the words of the oath itself; and under-
takes to satisfy your lordships, and every
reasonable person who reads it, that the
oath does expressly mean to bind tlae
persons taking the same to commit irea-
son. It therefore seems unnecessary to
say any ^ng on the construction put by
the panel on the phrase ^ intending to
%ind^' ky which he ascribed inte^Own to
875]
57 GEORGB.III.
IVial tfAadrM M'KinUy
[376
the oath,. and not to the penon; as if
there were any sense in personifyiQg an
oath, and giving it the powers of the un-
standing and the will.
Much . eloquence and ingenuity 'have
been displayed in perverting the plain
sense and meaning of the words oi the
oathy and endeavouring to construe out
of them a sense and meaning which they
are not calculated to convey, and which
never entered into the imaginations of
those who used them. The literal
construction of the oath vras not for a
moment insisted on, but a general decla-
mation was delivered upon the indulgence
that ought to be shown to persons accused
of crimes, in a favourable intetpretation
of every question of law, and of every
matter of ract, which is brought into dis-
cussion in a criminal trial. The prose-
cutor did not object to any rule of inter-
pretation, within the utmost bounds of
reason, that might be followed in the
construction of this oath ; but he thought
it his duty to protest against tlie whole
doctrine, as applicable to a question of
relevancy, when the very first act of the
mind of the judge, and of every person
engaged in the- discussion, is to assume
the truth of the whole facts as charged.
In this stage of the process, every thing
is presumed to be done vnckedly and
maliciously, as libelled. And the ques-
tion isy if all these things <are as stated by
the prosecutor, ought they to be followed
by punishment? So clear is this rule,
that things in themselves of the most
innocent description, if libelled to be
«done wickedly and maliciously, or for
the accomplisiiment of some illegal pur-
pose, ate daily found relevant to infer
the pains of law. It was therefore main-
tained, that, in construing this oath, the
purpose, for whicli it • was intended, and
the whole circumstances under which it
was administered, were to be taken into
view ; not that the prosecutor conceived
it necessary for the case, to search for
matter of relevancy beyond the words of
the oath itself, but because he thought
himself entitled and called upon to main-
tain the plain rule of law, as applicable
to every question of the kind.
Tlie words of the oath are already too
familiar to the Court, and are in your
lordships* hands in the indictment; so
that it IS unnecessary to quote them in this
place. Independent altogether of the
considerations above mentioned, it is
submitted, that it is impossible to construe
■out of the oath, standing by itself, the
reservation of illegality contended for by
the panel. It is an unambiguous obliga-
tion to use all moral and physical strength,
or force, that may; be neoessaxy for the
end in view ; and all r attempts to prove
Xbe contrary must appear hopeless to
L
every unbiassed mind. Forced oomtnic-
tions, fiinciful illustrations, and vague
analogies, will not avail against the -plain
meaning of the words, as they would be
understood in the ordinary afiairs of life.
It was justly observed, that grammatical
niceties were not to be employed in in-
terpreting the meaning of persons in
the lower orders of society; but it was
afterwards said, that " to sttpport endear
vourt** to obtain any thing is a solecism ;
because, to support endeavours is nothing
else than to endeavour. Now, this is to
apply one of the strictest rules of gram-
matical construction to the words of '^ these
ignoraill» people," as in the very next
sentence they were called ; and to apply
it to the effect of drawing the conclusion,
that, because they did not express them-
selves according to the correct rules of
chaste composition, their words cannot
bear the meaniug which they are ex-
pressly intended to convey, ft was ar-
gued, that the words ^ tke tmmP may be
die relative to several antecedents; and
that the panel is entitled to have his
choice, ana to select that antecedent whidi
is best calculated to convert the whole
oath into nonsense. The prosecutor would
feel ashamed, in any case, to enter into a
serious discussion of such *' unseemly
niceties,^ so little congenial to the Itberd
spirit of our criminal law. In the pre-
sent, nothing can be more trifling or more
useless, where it is so plain that there is but
one antecedent, viz. the ^ endeavours
'^ to obtain," to which, by every rule of
common sense and sound construction,
this relative can apply.
The next piece of violence that vras
done to the plain meaning of the oath,
was the attempt to make out that the
words *' physical strength*' are to be un-
derstood individually, , and not collec-
tively; an I a distinctioii was attempted to
be made between '* force*' and '* strength."
This argument is now iu a great measure
abolished by the introduction of both the
words into the new indictment: as, ac*
cording to the best information that has
been obtained, they were not only . used
synonymously, but promiscuously. . But
the truth is, that the observation never
had in itself either force or strength ; for
*' physical strength" is unhappily one of
the most £auniliar ideas and most common
expressions among the lower orders of
politicians, in speaking of the force and
power of numbers, when brought . into
open resistance to the ralii^ powers ; and
such common use of the expression is the
fairest rule by which it can ne interpreted
in the place where it stands. This ^ phy-
sical force'' is nothing else than the power
to be employed in subduing the oMtade
or contrary force by which universal
suffrage is' to be prevented ; that is to
3771
far ^dmmtUHiigiinUn^lXiatht.
A. sr. nvr.
m$
say, the open yiolence hf ^vluch this pub-
lic parpoa« is to be acoomplisbedy aod
the govenunent overtmned. It if tud
to say that physical strength may be ex-
erted lawfully, and to giye strange ex-
unples of its legal exercise. The ques-
tion is not what imry be the meaning of
any insulated words in the oath, but what
tf their meaning where they stand. Now,
it is plain, upon the face of the oath, that
the whole powers of body and mind of
the conspirators were intended to be
called forth, not only without limitation,
but with a distinctly announced gene-
rality, duLt was to admit of no exceptions
whatever. It was indeed attempted, on
the part of the panel, to construe out of
die oath a reservation of illegality, thau
which nothing could be more contrary to
the plain sense and meaning of the words.
The prosecutor apprehends that the
whole of this argument upon the mean-
ing of the oath received a aecisiTe answer
in the proposal to insert into it such un«
ambiguous words as would expressly con-
vey the meaning which it is attempted to
draw from the words as they stand. The
result of this, experiment plainly is, to
make the oath contradict itself, ^nd ap-
pear palpably absurd; whereas, if the
argument on the other side of the bar had
been well fi>onded, it should have recon-
ciled any apparent contradiction, and
made the whole consistent, distinct^ and
iaielligible.
It would be an easy matter to illustrate
the fair meaning of the oath at length,
and to expose the gross fallacy and Uti-
lity of every attempt to put any other
construction upon it than what it ex-
pressly bears; but the prosecutor cannot
doubt but such a task would appear as
useless to your lordships as it does to
himself. His wish is to have that mean-
ing put upon the words which every man
of common sense would put upon them in
the daily intercourse of tile ; and he has
no doubt that it is by this test alone that
your lordships will try them. Indeed, he
has been clearly of opinion from the be-
ginning, that all argument upon the mean-
ing of the oath, upon either side of the
bar, is totally useless, and will produce
no effect upon the mind of any impre*
ju^iced roan of common sense, who can
read the words before him.
If Uiis be the sound view of the case as
to the construction of the oath, standing
by itself, what must your lordships thinx
of it, when considered with reference to
all the circumstances of guilt under which
it is charged to have been administered
in this indictment ? It seems unnecessary
to do more, than shortly to adyert tathese
circumstances. They were all mentioned
in the debate ; and no answer was at-
tempted to be jnade to their relevancy in
the interpretation of the oath. The most
remarkable, perhaps , of the whole is the
administration of the oath at MCrei meeU
mgty which is no more consistent with
innocent intention, than the clause of se-
crecy at the conclusion of the oath, whidi
was expressly admitted to be of itself a
punishable offence. Secrecy is thus ad-
mitted to be an index of a guilty purpose;
and it is of little moment whether' it is
admitted or not, as its existence imder
such circumstance is irreconcileable wiUi
innocence. It will always be remembered
also, that the secrecy in this case was of
no ordinary description, as it was a stand-
ing rule of the society to inflict the pu-
nishment of death upon those who re-
vealed their secrets ;— an amiable feature
of the whole transaction, and whidi
affords a pleasant commentary on the
panegyric that was pronounced, at the
first debate, on the ** brotherhood of
** affection," in which it was said to be
so becoming that all the subjects of this
country should dwell together in unity !**
Indeed, it may be observed, by the way,
that it is impossible to find a better com-
mentary upon the whole oath than this
conclusion afibrds, or a better answer to
the pure motives that were attempted^
vrith so much ingenuity, to be extracted
from the beginning of it : —
>Ut turpiter atrum
Desinat in piscem mulier formosa
supeme.
The extensive nature of this '' brother-
hood " was totally forgotten in the argu-
ment as to the individual application of
the term ** physical strength ;" or rather,
this argument, like all the rest upon the
meaning of the oath, was founded on a
separate consideration of each member
and clause, indenendent of all the others.
Still less was it tnought necessary to take
the slightest notice of the important fact
stated in the libel, that the oath was
actually administered to several hundred
persons, whose point endeavours were of
course to be used for the promotion of the
common end. It will also be remembo^
ed, in the construction of the oath, that
it is libelled to have been administered
to several persons, who, conscious of their
Suilt in the premises, have absconded and
ed from justice.
The truth of all these facts must be
taken for granted in the question of rele-
vancy; and must, therefore, be taken into
view in this stage of the process in judg-
ing of the meaning of the oath. It will
also be kept in view, that the oath is
alleged to have been ** vrickedly and mali-
ciously administered,'* and did ** purport
or intend to bind the persons takm(|^ Uie
same ^ to. commit treason, by obtaining
atmual paiMamentf and univenat suffrage
4^
0799
57 «BOBGB III.
IBM
MwudUedf that if the words of the oath
ar» at all •usoe|>tible of the meaniag pat
upon them by the pfosecator, and mt^
bear that meuang, ytmr lordshipe are
bound to gire him ciedit for tiie tnth of
that conatfuetion which he pats upon
them. It is ^te a nastake to sajv that
he must show, in this question oc' rele-
▼ancy^ that the wotds mmi of mcettiiy
bear the eriminal meaning. If, indeed,
the criminal meaning be plainly a forced
censtractionf and one which they cannot
feasonably bear, yoar lordships might he-
sitate at to sending them to a juiy, vnless
it were alleged tlmt they hsre a hidden
€ft different meaning from what they ex-
pntfi. Bat if the meaning be neither
forced nor tmnatwal, or if it be at all a
leasenablet ^ o^^n possible constrnction,
the prosecutor is enftitled to the Tcrdict of
a juiy on the charge, and to demand the
assumption of the tmth of ereiy allega-
tion he makes in the preliminary stages
of the process.
[ThaiiheoMhmdtUr€ammittnaa$n.]---
But it is said, admitting the aiguoieat to
have ftdUdy that the oath is entirely inno-
cent^ it by no means follows^ hioweyer
dnagerous or mischierous it may be sup-
posed to be^ that it binds the persons
taldng the same to commit treason. It is
said, that it does not necessarily purport
any such engagement ; and the same line
of argument is had recourse td here, that
was prerionsly adopted, in order to per-
•oade your lordslups that the oath is
totrily innocent. It is unneoJBSssly to
recur to what has been said above. If
the panel has failed, as the prosecutor
cannot doubt he has, to persuade your
lordships to construe out of . this oath a
resertation of illegality ; and if the prose-
oulot be right in believing, that eveiy
man of oomtton sense, who has these
words placed before him on any ordinaiy
occasion, will at once say that they are
nothing else than an obligation to accom-
plish the eods in view by every means in
the power of the parties without reserva^
tion or qualification whatsoever, and es-
pecially by the whole moral or physical
h>ree in their power, or at least a» much
of it as might be necessary^— then the
Bimpleqaestion remains,-*- Sappodngthese
means to have been brought into action,
and pardcalarly sapposing their physical
force to have been brought into action for
acGomplishiikg the particular purposes in
view, would this nave amounted to the
erime of treason ? Now, upon this point,
it is submitted to be dear, that the ac-
complishing, or attempting to accomplish,
any^poby c poipose by foroe^ especially by
the ioroe of numbers, sueh as the aitera-
tioa* of any law» or ai^. branch of the con-
■titilioo, men partttularlj wfaev the
- altisratimi is efsoch a nature as infers the
destruction of the whole frame and tez«
turd of the government, is, by all the au-
thorities, high treason. Bat upon tfiis it
seems- unnecessaiy to enter ; and, indeed,
the prosecutor is onwilting, and feels it
aitogether nnneoessvy, to detain your
loidshipo with an^ remaiks of his upon a
subject upon which there are so many
great andiorities, all agreeing with ea^
other.
In quoting these authorities at length,
be is only following the example set be-
fore him by the English Judges on simi-
lar oecasions. ^ I am pecoKaily huppy,"
says lord Loughboteugb, in this aaoress
to the grand jury in the case of lord
Oeoige Gordon, ^ that I am enabled to
state the law on the sid>jeet, not from any
seasonings or deductions of my own,
which are liable to error, and in which a
change or inaecumcy of expresrion might
be productive of much mischief; but
from the 6TSt authority, from which my
month only will be employed in pro-
nouncing the lew. I shall state it to you
in the words of that great, able, and
lemed judge, Mr. Justice Foster, that true
friend to the liberties of his countiy.*^
The follovring are the passages, at
length, and in die order in which they
stand in the original, which lord Lough-
borough quotes ; and, it will be observed,
timt Mr. Justice Foster begins the chap-
ter with a dissent from some of the ex-
pressions of lord Hale, which were so
much dwelt upon at one period of the de-
bate, and l^e present application of which
has called forth so many panegyrics upon
this author in the course of these dis-
cussions. Your lordships were even told,
that» except Coke, lord Hale is the only
author allowed to be dted as an authority
in an English Court/' — a position too
extravagant to reqnire a commentary.
But it is a singular drcumstaace, that the
English judges, on such occasionsi do not
appear to rafer at all to this *' great fether
of the law of treasons,*' as he was termed
in the debate; and that the authority to
which they do refer commences with a dis-
sent from his opinions. Not that the pro-
secutor is ignorant of the great name and
venerable authority of that excellent per-
ion, bathe wishes to point out to your
lordships, that his opponents have been
somewtiat too extmvagant in their admira-
tion of his authority, as applicable Cb the
present case ; and that it is usual to look to
more recent expositions of the law, im-
posed in better times.
^^Lord Chief-Justice Hale,t speaking
of such onlawfol assemblies as may
amount to a levying of war within the 25
•W<M.
* at How. St. Tr. 490.
t Fostec^s Crown Law, p. 20Q.
9813
JbrdimmsUmig fmUaijfid Oaths.
A. D. 1M7.
£liKiMk, €• df taluBlh 0 difomon be-
tween tbose uuetrecUops mM^ hare
canied tlie apjpeannee of jui enajy fonn-
ed Wider leeden^ wad piwrided xrikh mi-
litvy weapens, and witji dminay eoioim,
&e, loid tboee other disovderiy tnauiltaous
aaaemblies^ which have been diaani to-
sethery and conducted to pwpoies mani-
festly imlawftd^ but vpitbont may «if the
«idiiiaiy ahew and appvaliis «f trar be-
ftme mentSoned.
" I do net thiak apy greal almi can
be teid ob that diatiaetioii. It m- tme
that, in case of levying of war, tiie indict-
menu geaeiaUy chaige, that the defend-
ents were anned and Mnml an a^war-
like manner; and, wfaene the oise wonld
adaut of it the «ther idrcumaianees of
asrordsy gunfl, dmmt, odonra, Soc. hare
been adiUd. Bat» I tbink, the meiits of
the case have never turned ainf^y on any
of thtfe cireumstancei.
''In the cases of Damaree and Pur-
chase which ase the last ftftnted cases
that have come in judgment x>n. 1he •point
of oonstracttve l^ing wax; there was
nothing given in eiidenee of the usual
pageantiy of ww;-^ne military W!ea|)ons
—no banners t>r dmms — nor amy regular
consultation previous to the rising. {And
jet the want of iboee ciroumatances
weighed nothing with the Gourty though
the prisoner's coitnset insisted much on
that matter. The number jof the inawgents
supplied the want -of military weapons;
and they were fnofided m^ aseiv-eK>ws,
and other tpola of. the like nature, psoper
Un the mischief they intended to eftct:
** Furor artna mkuitrat,^
^ Sect. 1. — ^Tbe true criterion, therefore,
in all these cases, is qm ammo did the
parties assemble? For, if the assembly
be upon aocount of some j^vate quarrel,
or 10 take revenge of pafticnlar pSneons,
the statute of treasons hal^ already de-
termined that point in favour of the sub-
let/'
* " Sect, 3<<— But in every insurrec-
tion which, in judgment of law, is in-
tended Against the person of .the king,
be it to dethrone or imprison - hinh-or
to oblige him to alter his measures of
•govenaient — or to remove evil counsellors
nom about him^-^these risings ail amount
to levying war within .the statute ; whether
, attended witti^e pomp and oinmmsHDoes
of .open war or no. And every eonsinracv
to levy war for these purposes, ttkough
not treason wUhin the clause of levying
wai^is yet an overt act ^wilbiu the "ether
ebuue of compassing the king's «death.
for these purpeees cannot beteSeeted by
ttomben andopen lorce.wsthout mmifest
danger jto bis peison.
• Foster's CrotmLaw, p.: 210.
'< Sect. 4.— •Insurmctienff iu epder to
throw <i^n all endesures, to aUer the
established law, isr chanf^ religiep, to
enhance the price of all labour, uir loiopen
aU prisons; aU risings inosder teened
theie jmovatiens, of a public and f^ttieral
concern, by an^trmed foroe, are, mcoD-
eMetion of law, high treason, withhi the
elanse of levying war. For, Ihougbthey
are not Jieeelled «t 4he person of the king,
tbey are ngninst his r^ynl mi^iesty ;• and^
tMsUes Ihey hnve a &mci tendeMy to
diasolve ell the bonds of society,; and
to destn^ all nsoperty, and all^govesoment
ipQ, by MimoeK, and an aaned lorce.
Insunedions likevrise fgor lednssing
national grieranees, oir for the eximlsion
of foreignets in general, or indeed any
siuf^ nation living bene under ^ pro-
taction of the king, air tat the leforumtion
lof realorknaginaiyevibfftffntfie lutfurs^
md in nohick the inam^ga^ Jme ne meckl
pUerut; risings to efieet theas ends by
foeoB •and numbers, aici ^by eonstrafetion
of law^ svithin the clanee of levying iwar ;
for they are levelled at Ihe king'e erown
and ,f 0^ dignity.^ »
* «UponthetrialofDamaree,thecasee
referred to-hefoie,:in>eeotioQS 4th and 6tb
were cited lat the bar; and ell the jndges
present were of opinion, that the prifoner
WHS guilty of the hi^h ^treason charged
upein him in the indictaicnt Eor-here
was a rising with an avowed ineentien to
demoliahaii meeting-houses in general;
and this intent they earried intoeutfutioa
es far as they wereable. If the AMCting-
bouses of the Protestant dissentemr had
been erected and supported in deianoe of
all law, a rising to destiey auch henees in
general, would have fallen under the rules
laid down in ReiHng, with regard to the
demolLsbingallbawfJhr-hoiises. But, since
the meeting<*houses of Protastaot dilsentere
ane, by the Toleration not, taken nnder the
protection of the law, the inaurvectieo, in
the present cese, was to be ceurideied as
41 public declaration bylhe^rabble against
that act, and .an attempt to sender it in-
efiectual by manbm* -md offmfini»*^ -
<*AooogdinglyI>emarsewasfound guilty,
and had judi^ent^deeUv as in cases of
high treason/'.
In the same esse of lord Oeoige
Gordon, lord Mansfield ezpiesaes himself
thus, in addressing the jwry. "^ These are
t«so kinds of lervying <war, ^ne.agaiest the
penon of the king, to imprison, fee* de-
throne, or to kin him, ot ie :tneke>him
change mesaures, orrremoue rcooneeftlors ;
the ethes, which it said to>beJe!nM.again8t
the mioesty of Ihe king, or,. iaiother wirds,
agsiqst him in hie soysl capnaty^ jm erhen
a mnltitude riseiaiidnssenble to 4illaSn by
feree end violence any object of a general
». ».•* «!. I <^^— 1^11^
A-MI
"* jFoaler's Crown JLs3es, p. Slft^
SgS] 57 GEORGE ifL
piaKllc nalnrey tlmt is, levying wti" against
the majesty of the king; and mosl
leasonaMy so held, because it tends to
dissolve all the bonds of society to destroy
pioperty, and to orertnni gdyernment, and
Ifif force of anus, to restrain the king from
reigning according to law.
** Insurrections, by force and violence, to
ndse the price of wages; to open aU
prisons; to destroy meeting-houses ; nay,
to destroy all brothels; to resist the
eKecution of militia laws ; to throw down
all enclosures; to aker the established
law; I to change religion; to redress
grievances real or pretended; have all
been held levying war. Many other in-
stances might be put. Lord Chief Justice
Holt, in Sir John Friend's case, says, —
' If pereons do assemble themselves, and
act with force, in opposition to some law
whidi they think inconvenient, and hope
thereby to get it repealed, this is levying
- war and treason.' In the present case,
it don't rest upon- an implication, that the^
hoped by opposition to a law Id get it
repealed; but the prosecution proceeds
upon the direct ground, that the object
vras by force and violence to compel the
legislature to repeal a law; and, therefore,
without any doubt, I tell you the joint
opinion of «6 all, that if this multitude
assembled with intent, by acts of force
•and- violence, ^o compel the legislature to
'tepOKl a law, it is high treason.
; Though the form of an indictment for
this species of treason mentions drums,
tranpets, arms, swords, fifes, and guns,
yet none of tiiese circumstances are
essential. The question always is, whether
the intent is, l^ force and violence, to
attain an object of a general and public
nature by any instruments, -or by aint of
their numbers." *
In like manner, Serjeant Hawkins f thus
expresses himself: '< Those also 'Vfhb
make an insurrection. In order to redress^
a public grievance, whether it be a real
-or pretended one, and of their own
•anthoriw attempt with force to redress it,
are said to levy war against the king,
although they have no directdesi^n against
his person, inasmuch as they insoitatly
invade his prerogative, by attempting to
do'that by private authority, which he bv
Cbtic justice ought to do, which mam-
itly tends to a downright rebellion ; as
vriiers great numbers by force attempt to
remove certain persons (tcm the Ung;
or to lay violent hands on a privy coun-
cillor ; or to revenge themselves against a
magiMrate for executing his -office ; or to
bring down the price of victuals ; or to
reform the law or religion ; or to pull
down all bawdy-houses, or to remove all
• 21 How. St. Tr. 644.
t fiaiduiufs Pieas4>f the Cioim, p. 37.
Triat qfj4ndrm M^Kinhy
r3S4
indosures in geneial, &c. But where a
number of men rise to remove a grievance
to their private interest, as to pull down a
particular enclosure, intrenching upon their
common, fcc. they are only rioters,"
Mr. Hume * most ably and accurately
sums up the doctrine ~of all the great
authorities in tha following terms : — ** In
the construction of law, the levying of
war against the king is not understood in
those insurrections only which have im-
mediate relation to the person ' of his
i^^ty, as if the object be to dethrone or
imprison him, or to drive him out of the
' realm, or to cause him alter his measures
or to remove evil counsellors fiom his
presence. It equally embraces all those
risings, which, though not aimed direody
. at the person of the king, are however
against nis royal majesty, Uiat is, against
his crown or royal dignity, s^inst his
preroffative, authority, or office. Under
this description, according to all autho-
rities, foils an insurrection for any of these
objects— to reform the estal>lished law,
relittion, or political constitution of the
land; or to obtain redress for national
frievances, whether real or imaginary,
or though they be real, the law and
government of the realm, as long as they
subsist, cannot know any thing of this
course of correcting them, nor make
account of it as any other than rebellion
against the king, who, as the head of the
state, is bound to prevent all such forcible
interference of private persons vrith his
own fonctions, or those of the legblative
- power."
It is impossible to add any thing to
these authorities, which combine the
names of some of the greatest men that
ever adorned the English bench, speaking
on cases actually before them, with those
of the best commentators on the law,
who were more deliberately composing
for posterity. The application or these
authorities to the present case is obvious;
and there can be no doubt that if the
public purpose in view had been carried
into effect, or attempted to be carried into
efiect, by force, it would have been high
treason.
[Objettion to want of dncripHoH of ire^
$em.\ — ^The next objection that was stated
was, that the prosecutor h^ not specified
the max^ier in which «the treason was to
have been committed, which ^t is libelled
that the panel administered an oath, por*-
porting or intending to bind the potions
taking the same to comn^H* Upon this,
and indeed other parts of the case, wher-
ever it suited the argument, it was broadly
assumed, on the other side of the bar,
that this is a charge of treason. Now^
the exposure of this obvious fallacy is the'
* Hume, vol. ii» p. 437.
385)
far Administering unlamfiil Oath*.
A. t, 1817.
Id8<»
plain answer to this objection. It is a
known rule of law, <* that such an account
of a criminal deed must be given^ as may
distinguish the particular charge from all
other instances of the same sort of
crime ;*** and if this had been a charge
of treason, unquestionably the prosecutor
would have been bound to give the speci-
fication called for by the panel. But the
hd is, that there is no treason charged,
nor any other crime libelled, in the major
pro|>o8]tion, except that whereof the
whole facts are detailed in the subsump-
tion. The crime is, the administering an
oath, purporting to bind the person taking
the same in a particular manner; and il
is believed the administering of this oath
is sufficiently distinguished from the ad-
ministering of every other oath, and from
every other act of administering the same
oath. The object which that oath con-
tained, or was intended to contain, an
obligation to accomplish, was never car-
ried into effect ; and if it had, it would
haye been a crime of a different descrip-
tion. Kow, what can the prosecutor set
forth of the purport or the intendment,
which is the essence of the crime, except
the terms of the oath itself, and 'such other
drcamstances as accompanied the admi-
nistration of it, as may throw light upon
the meaning of the administrators and
takers ? All this he ha* done, and more
he cannot do. He cannot state more of
the facts than he knows ; nor can he state
more than was actually perpetrated; and
the oath is the whole fact, and only source
of information. Still less can he be called
n|>on to draw an inference in law from
fiicts that have never existed. The minor
proposition is a detail of facts, and has
nottiing to' do with law; and if he had
drawn the inference required by the panel,
he would not have added one iota to the
relevancy. He has told your lordships
aH that vras done ; the whole facts of the
case; and it is the principal part of those
^Mts, that there was an obligation to commit
a crime. Tliat this crime, if committed,
woidd have been of a particular descrip-
tioo, and effected in a particular way, is
nothing to the purpose, as it is not the
hUended cnme^ but the obhgation to com-
mit it, that is the point of dittay.
The prosecutor has in fact aone touch
more than he is bound to do in this re-
spect; for he has specified the precise
objects and acts intended to be done,
which in many cases may not be within
his power. Suppose the parties adminis-
ter and tak^ an obligation, binding tocom-
JBit treason generally, or, in the words of
the act jtself, ^any treason,'^ or all thie
ten treasons enumerated at the debate, or
such treason as may be necessary for the
■ .-4..
* Hume, toI. d| p. 310.
VOL. xxmiL
accomplishment of a particular end, or
which they may be called upon \p commit,
by any individual or number of indivi-
duals, whose authority they bind them-
selves to obey ; b it to be said that tliere
is no relevancy, because the prosecutor
cannot specify the particular description
of the treason which it is intended to
commit? Or, suppose an obligation to
murder all those who stand in the way of
some particular end : the indrvidnals who
may stand in the way, and the manner of
their death, may be unknown both to the
prosecutor and the conspirators ; is it to
oe said that the statute libeUed no opera*
lion in such a case ?
Thtf prosecutor points out what was
actually done, and founds upon the law
by which it is punishable; and here he *
apprehends his duty is djscl^arged. He
has nothing to do with the manner of an
intended act, and fiir less with an infer-
ence in law from a fiict that never had
existence. He is bound to tell the panel
the facts he intends to prove against him,
and the law by which they are punishable,
in order that he may be prepared for his
defence ; but he does not know how it
can help the panel to shape his defence,
to tell nim what would have been tlie
legal consequence of an act of which he
is nat accused, and which he only intended
to commit. He might as well be required,
in a case of an indictment for an attempt
to poison, to specify the mode of death,
and the legal consequences of murder.
It is maintained, th^t this indictment
would have been perfectly relevant, if it
had merely libellea the wicked and mali-
cious administration of the oath charged,
without a syllable as to what its purport
or intendment is ; for, if the oath means
what the prosecutor alleges, the prose-
cutor's gloss upon it is mere surplusage.
If it did not mean any thing that comes
under the act, then to be sure it would be
necessaiy to hbel the hidden meaning and
purpose with which it is administered and
taken, otherwise there would be no rele-
yancy in the charge. But, if it openly
express the unlawful meaning, as in the
present case, it is itseff the minor pro-
position, the connectine link between the
major proposition and the conclusion ;
and the prosecutor *knows no addition
that can make the syllogism more perfect. .
Jftt^'. The administering an oatn of a
particular description^ is a. crime. JIfia.
Yon did administer the following oath :
iErgo, You ought to be punished.
It' the libel rests upon the meaning of
the oath itself, it is plain that the only
question here is, whether the oath libelled
' falls underthe particular description men^
tioned in the major proposition ; and, so
far as the case turns upon. the meaning of
the words of tiie oath, the Court will cer«
2 G
9S7]
57 GEORGE UI.
Trial /^ Andrtu M'KSnk^
C99»
uioly judge for thfiaueWes, without the
least regard to any argument or infecenee
of th^ prosecutor. In so far as the case
turns upon a meaning not expressly con-
veyed by the words, the allegations of the
prosecutor, as to the intendment, must
enter into the relevancy. But here he
maintains his charge upon the meaning
of the ^ords themselves; and, setting
aside all the rest of the qualities afiSrmed
of the oath as superfluous, he calls upon
your lordships to say whether it falls
under the statute or not ; and denies that
he is bound to set forth in the minor pro-
position any thing but what was actually
done, and the time, place, and manner
of the deed. He has accordingly de-^
scribed the time, and place, and a number
of thei circumstances under which the oath
was administered ; and, above all, he has
stated the names of the individuals to
whom it was administered, perhaps the
most useful circumstance of the whole, in
order to prepare tbe.panel for his defence.
,But, as to detailing tlie time, place, and
circumstances, of what existed in inten-
tion, it is obvious that such a specification
is beyond his power. The oath may be
administered before any part of the detail
of the execution of the treason is arranged,
— before any understanding among the
conspirators as to their particvlar plan of
operations — ^and, by its nature, the oath
is likely, in general, to be the preliminary'
to every thing else. Yet here he is asked,
not only to detail facts that have not hap-
pened, but to draw from them an infer-
ence in law. Now, he must say, that he
cannot coqceive any thing more foreign
from the nature of a minor proposition,
than the detail of a deed in contemplation,
unless perhaps it be an inference in law
from a . crime which never had an exist-
ence. In short, he has set forth the ad-
ministering an oath, purporting to bind,
as forbidden by the statute ; and he sub-
mits, that it is travelling out of tlie case
altogether, to ask any thing of him be-
yond the oath itself, and the time, place,
ai)d circumstances of the administration.
He can knpw nothing pf the guilty pur-
pose more than the parties told him in the
oath,
> The prosecutor has attentively recon-
sidered this part of the argument for the
]^el; and, fronj the beginning to the
end pf ity he has not been able to discover
a single piece of reasoning that directly
meets the point. ' The whple of it» with-
out exception, proceeds upon the errone-
ous assuinption, that it is a charge of
treason of which your lordshipt sure 'now
oalled upon to judge; and if this plain
distinction is kept in view, he will venture
to say, that the argument hft» not even the
vestige of plausibility.
{Jvhtther an offence against thit ad eon
he tried, being treoionJ] Another objectkm
to the relevancy of this indictment was
derived from a principle of theJBnglish
law, which it was attempted to apply to
this case, that all felony merges in tree-
sou ; from which ie was said to follow,
that if the facts set forth in the indictment
amount to treason, they cannot be tried
as an offence against the act libelled on.
The learned gentleman who maintained
that plea, was obliged to assume the
falUcy of all the ingenious arguments that
had gone before, to show that there is no
treason in the case, and to ebandoa the
whole of those rules of construction of the
oath and the indictment, for which so
great a struggle was made by the other
counsel for the panel. He assumed, that
treason was not only in the view o^T the
parties, and intended to be committed,
but that, by taking and administering the
oath, they were guilty of treason by the
act m the 36th of the king. It is neces-
sary, therefore, before you can pay any
attention to this alternative plea, , tha^
your lordships should come to be of the
prosecutor's opinion as to the relevancy
of the indictment on the meaning of the
oath ; for this part of the argument for the
panel is totally inconsistent with, and de-
structive of the other.
. One or two remarks were made, with
much diffidence, at the time, on the long
and learned argument by which this view
of the subject was supported; but the
prosecutor has since had the saiisfiM^tion
to find, from a consideration of the Eng-
lish writers, and from the best authorities
to which it was in his power to apply for
information, that those remarks were per*
fectly well founded. Indeed, he is now
totally at a loss to account for the respect
with which he listened to this argument
at the time when it was first delivered,,
upon any other ground than the impree*
sion op his mind, that what was prepared
with so much labour, and ipaintained
with so much confidenoe and paraif e of
learning, must have had sotnethiiig \o re-
commend it, which he was not able to
discover. He has now, however, eaoer-
tained, that there was no discovery to
make ; and has accordingly again to state
to ypur lordships* that the pnnci|de of
the common law of Eiigland founded on,
has no application to any trial ia this
Court according to the law of Scotland ;
and that, even in England, it has tx> a|>-
plication to a trial for an offence against
the s)(Ct of the 52nd of dbe king,
lit, It is understood to be « prindi^e
in BngUsH law> that if a mn W vifd W
an oftnce tt a iekmy^ mhk^ m fi^
amounts to treasoa, he inii^be acquitted,
and he may be tried over ^gain jht trea-
son. But there is no authority for sraag
that a man caiwot be tried for felony wneik
StKfi
Jbr Admhifdering unlaxqful Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
[390
bis offence tmounts to treason ; and it is
olmous that tKis could nerer be taw, be-
caizse the juiy alone can. judge nvhether
he has committed treason or not; and
nnTess they are satisfied, upon the evi.
dence, that he has committed treason, he
cannot be acquitted, on this ground, of
the felony. It is the law of England, that
% man acquitted on such grounds may be
tried again for the same fact under an-
other denomination of crime ; and the le-
gislature, in favour of offenders, have
thought tit to make a trial under this act,
an exception from the general rule ; and
have declared,* ** That any person who
shall be tried, and acquitted or convicted
of any offence against this act, shall not
be liable to be indicted, prosecuted, or
tried again, fbr the same offence or fact,
as high treason, or misprision of- high
treason." It is therefore submitted, that
this objection, derived from the law of
England, is one that Can only be judged
of by the jury, as the Court cannot try the
feet, and is an objection to a conviction,
and not to a trial, as the terms of the act
show'^which take for granted the possi-
bility of a trial for an offence under the
act, which offence may turn out to be
treason. If no person can be tried for an
offence against the act, which offence
nay at the same time be treason, this
clause implies an absurdity.
^Jidfyf But the meaning of the legis-
lature does not rest upon these words
alone. For, considering that the offences
against this act might often amount to
Iteason, it occurred that it might be argued
that this act, being the last declaration
of the will of the legislature as to such
offences, did, by appointing this mode of
prosecution, abrofi^ate all former laws
9gaihstthero ; and it was further enacted,t
" Tbat nothing in this act contained shall
be construed to extend to prohibit any
person guilty of any offence against this
act, and who shall not be tried for tbe
flame as an offence against this act, fl'om
1>eJng tried for the same as high treason,
or misprision of high treason, in the same
way as if this act had not been made.''
Uras plainly showing that it was fblly
under the view of those who passed this
lew, to mtke it occasionally appficable to
case^ of treason which it should not be
'diottght expedient to punish as such.
dd^. Hie act itself not only makes ex-
press provision for the trial of *' any
offetiee committed against this act,'' which
i^ course indodes cases that may amount
to treason, before this Court, but the
danse is expressed in such a manner, as
to demonstrate that the offences are to be
tHed in the ordinary way. *' XPtori^ed
also, and be it- farther enacted^ That any
' ' - • rm. " II
•^ Seei. Sb t Sect. 8^ t Sect. 7.
offence committed against this act on the
high seas, or out of this realm, or within
that part of Great Britain called Engfond,
shall and may be prosecuted, tried, and
determined, before any court of Oyer and
Terminer, or gaol delivery, for any county
in that part of Great Britain called Eng-
land, in such manner and form as if such
offence had been therein committed ; and,
if committed in that part of Great Britain
called Scotland, shall and may be prose-
cuted, tried; and determined, either be-
fore the Justiciary court at Edinburgh, or
in any of ibe circuit courts in that part of
the united kingdom/'
4thfy, The whole enactment would be
nugatory, as far as the binding to commit
treason goes, if this argument be well
founded ; for eveiy oath binding to com-
mit treason may be maintained to be
treason as well as the present. It may be
said, that no oath can be administered to
kill or to depose the king, or to overturn
the government, that would riot be an
overt act of treason, in compassing or
imagining the king's death. The treason
would be the imagination^ or intention,
and the oath the overt-act Vnanifesting it.
So, the adminbtering an oath to levy war
for a public purpose, might be said' to be
a conspiracy between the persons admi-
nistering knd taking; the same to levy war,
(though not treason as levying war); and
the oath or conspiracy might be said to be
an overt act of compassing the kitig's
death, or to be tredLson under \he S6th
of the king. In England, the oath of one
witness is sufficient proof of the statutory
offence, but two witnesses are necessary
for proof of treason; and suppose the
evidence of only one witness to be had,
if the offender could not be convicted of
the statutory offence, he could not be
convicted at all. Upon the statute, there-
fore, it is submitted to be quite clearly the
meaning of this law, to make the admi-
nistering or taking an oath, purporting
to bind (o commi; treason, triable accord-
ing to the ordinary course of justice,
whether it be treason or not.
What has been already said, is such an
answer as might be ma'de in an English
court to this objection; but though the
preceding view of the subject be of itself
quite conclusive and satisfactory, the pro-
secutor can by no means admit that it is
necessary to have recourse to any part of
it in the present case. For be niaintains,
that the statement formerly made is per-
fectly correct; that the principle of the
law of England, as to the merging of
felony in treason, has no application what-
ever to trials befbre the criminal courts of
Scotland. It will not do to say generally,
that the whole doctrines of tne English
law, as to tfeasbn, have been introduced
into Scotland. Lei us attend for a mo-
391 J ^7 GEORGE til.
Trial ofAmbtta M^Kinky
rsoa
nteoi totbe expressions of tlit act of qiwen
Anne, and we shall distinctly see what
the legislature did. In the first place^
they enact,'* that all crimes and offences
which are treason in England, shall be
treason in Scotland ; and that no other
crimes or ofiences shall be treason in
Scotland. Does this compel the prose-
cution of any crime as treason, whicn may
be tried under another and lower denomi-
nation? Certainly not. It is an esta-
blished maxim of our criminal law, that a
man may be tried for a crime under any
•denomination of which it is susceptible ;
and, particularly, that a prosecutor pan-
not be compelled to charge it by its
highest denomination.f If an act be
fassed, declaring a particular offence to
e henceforth one of a higher description
than it has formerly been, the proseoutor
is only empowered, not coo^Ued, to tTy
it under its newly acquired character.
Examples of this doctrine need not be
given ; they occur in daily practice. If^
instead of declaring their meaning ex-
pressly, the legislature make reference to
any particular law of England, or of any
foreign country, which is quite the same
thing, and declare, that what is a crime
1^ ^at foreign law, in that foreign
•couqtry, shall thenceforth be a crime here,
and pw^shable in the sfune ^ray, this iiirill
not abrogate the previously existing com-
mon law of the land, by which the same
offence is punishable as a Jower'or dif-
ferent description of crii^e. The great
principles of our common law, sanctioned
Dy the experience of ages, and founded on
the immutable basis of reason and tnuh,
are not lo be taken away by implication.
Your lordships hare acknowleaged this
doctrine in a hundred instances, to which
it is needless to refer; as, for example, in
the remedy of suspension, which has been
most properly held not to be taken away^
€Ten Dy a clause declaring the judgment
of an inferior court final to all intents and
purposes. But here there is no such im-
plication of any interference with the rules
of our common law. It is said, that spch
and such offences shall be treason ; but it
is neither said nor implied that they shall
always be tried as suqh whenever they
occur, notwithstanding any rule of law to
the contrary. The law of treason, intro-
duced by toe act of queen Anne, is en-
tirely statutory, and has nothing to do
with the common law of England, of
which every subject, and every lawyer,
in this part of the kingdom, is presumed
and entitled to be in total ignoranee.
In the next place, the act of queen
Anne appoints % trials for high treason in
tnoe appoiDis 4. inais lor n;
* 7 Anne, c. 21, sect. 1.
t Hume, vol, iii. p. 276.
^ Sect 3.
Scotland to be conducted ^ in the same
manner*' as in England. And certainly
it can as little be mldntained to be a con-
sequence of this part of the statute as of
the other, that the general principle of the
common law of Scotland, shall be abolished,
^y which a man may be competently tried
for an offence by a lower than the highest
denomination of which it is susceptible
and that a eeneral principle or the
common law of England, not peculiar to
the law of treason, shall be substituted in its
room. And who does not see that in thu,
AS in other insb^ices, our practice is the
most &vourable to the accused, as our
law fixes only a maaamm in the scale of
legal responsibility, and leaves the rest to
the prosecutor? Declaring, however,
that of whatever form of charge he shall
make his choice, the offence or fact which
shall once have been submitted to the in-
vestigation of a jury, can never again, in
any shape, or under any description, be
made the subject of trial, whatever may be
the result. Now, this circumstance at
once explains the origin of the maxim of
English law above-mentioned, and its
totd inapplicability to our criminal code,
that whereas, in the English practice, a
xnxa may be tried over again for the same
'fact, under a different description of. the
^rime, it therefore becomes essential to
the ends of justice that he should bc^ ac«
quitted of the first charge, that he may
not be twice convicted and twice puniabed
for the same offence. In our practice, on
the other hand, if the aocusea shall have
once tholed an assize for a crimimd deed,
by whatever wmenjurk it may be defined
in his indictment, whether acquitted or
convicted, he has made his atonement to
the law, and is for ever free firom all
criminal prosecution on that account.
The plain meaning of the act of aueen
Anne is, to make the same criminal aeede
treason in both parts of the united king-
dom, and to have them tried in the same
manner; and if would have been going
much further to have altered the law of
Scotland, so as to make it imperative to
try for treason, what, by a general prin-
ciple of that law, might be less severely
punished, and to prevent the trial of a
mau for a less offence, whose acts might
amount to a greater.
In the present case, too, it will always
be kept in remembrance, that the argu-
ment IS not merely that Uie act of queen
Anne has abolished a general principle of
our common law, and introduced a general
principle of tlie Enfflbh common law, but
that it has such rorce and validity, as
to destroy the express words of the sob*
sequently declared will of the legislatare
in the 52nd of the king.
It is impossible to dispute that, in th^ .
legal defioitioi^ of the crime of
3fl0l
Jor-jUmm^trimg UHtaufitl Oatkt.
A. D. 1817.
C394
in th« n0d« and ftMm^ pnctiBBhy wliich
it is to be tiied — ^in the rales of evidence
by which it is to be established — in the
laode and effect of ooDTiction and pnnish-
nent — in short, in the whole process,
from the oonuaencement to the tennina-
tioo, the law of England is transferred to
Scotland. Bat, at this point, the trans-
ference of the English law, and the
innovation upon the Scotch law, stopt
short. If this, therefore^ had been a
1>ro8e0ntion for the crime of treasmi, your
ordships most have looked to the ndes of
the law of England.
But, as has been already observed, the
proposition upon which the counsel of
the panel rest, is of a totally diffsrent de-
scription. This is the fint occasion, it is
believed, on which it has ever been hinted
at or maintained by any lawyer in either
kingdom; and it is impossible to con*
template the effecU of it without the
deepest alarm. The proposition is, that,
by the articles of Union, a general prin-
ciple of the English criminal law has been
introduced into Scodand. It is a quality
in the definition of felony — ^It is a defence
against a charj^e of felony, that the fects
from which it is inferred ooostitnte the
higher crime of treason. Nay, more, it is
likewiM aqnality in the'definition of every
inferior crime, and is not pretended to be
peculiar to felony. It must be admitted
•to be a principle inherent in, and diffused
over, the whole common law of England
relating to crimes. If the principle
mauntained by die counsel for the panel
be correct, then murder, robbery, theft,
assanl^ mobbing, or sedition, cannot be
tried, if the &cts from which (liese crimes
are deduced can, by any construction,
however forced, be proved to infer the
crime of treason. The privilege of the
Snblic prosecutor in Scotland, by which
e is entitled to prosecute for the lowest
denomination of crime which the criminal
act infers, would be destroyed by the in-
troduction of this strange principle, and
without anv conceivable advantsge. For,
in England, private individuals being the
prosecutors, they might occasionally be
induced to favour the party, accused, by
trying them upon a charge inferring too
low a punishment ; but here the invaluable
institution of a public prosecutor prevents
such a risk.
On the whole, the answer to this plea
is clear and , ^r^tible ; namely, that
although, th/b la^ of treason, as that crime
IS prosecuted, defined, and pjoved in
England, was by the articles of the na<*
tioottl union, traiuforred to Scotland ; yet
every other part of our criminal code was,
is all the pnriQr and simplicity of its
systenuLtic principles, secured inviolate.
It woula be an easy task to point out
0ik oljjections to this part of the argu*
ment, and to expose various errors, both
in the law and general reasoning by
which it was supported ; but enough Iha
been said already to satisfy your lordships,
that of all the reasonings which the con-
sultations of the eigki learned gentlemen
of Counsel for the panel have produced,
^is is that which is least deserving of
your serious attention.
It shall only be observed farther, be-
fore quitting this subject, thatjin several
of the cases of sedition which occurred
some years ago, it was expressly stated,
both at the bar and on the bench, that
certain acts charged amounted to treason,
and might have been so libelled ;* and
yet no objection occurred on that ground
to their relevancy.
The prosecutor trusts that he has now
sufficiently answered all the objectiops to
the relevancy of the indictment that are
likelv to appear deserving of any attention.
At the same .time as this indictment differs
in some.verbal alterations from the last,
it is more than probable that it may sua-
gest to the ingenuity of hh learned mends
some verbal criticisms, of which he is not
aware. Of such he shall only say in go-*
neral, that it is i^ot for the purpose of
affording an opportunity of oiscovering
objections of this description that panels
are served with copies of their indictments
fifteen days before their trial, but in order
to make them acquainted with the nature
of the facts to be proved against them,
that thev may be ade<^uatelv prepared for
their detence. If a ftur and canoid, state-
ment has been given to the panel of the
.crime with which he is charged, so as he
may know it from al) other instances ** of
the same sort of crime,'' this is the essence
of the relevancy; and the humane indnl*
gence, in the previous service of the indict*
ment, in which our practice differs from that
of England, renders that critical and punc-
tilious accuracy cjuite unnecessary- here,
which it is the genius of the English prao-
tice to observe, in] slight and immaterial
modifications of names and expressions.
** I cannot find," says Mr. Hume, speak-
ing of this peculiarity of the English prac-
tice, ^* that in this respect we have ever
been disposed to follow their example,
but rather, and I think with as sound a
judgment, to disregard such criticisms as
unseemly niceties, which serve only to
dimpoint the courN of justice, and bring
the law iUelC into contempt.'' It cannot,
however, be denied, that attempts have of
late been made to encroach upon the |;o-
neral principles of sound reason, by which
our criminal law in such mattery faAS.been
in time past admiiustefed, and to substi-
tute in their room a minute criticism, and
technical construction of certain words
See the cas^s cited jn the note>p 942* tmu.
i»i\
SI GEOKOE III.
Trkt^Andrkf
tsm
fbr nw TMnteetiiMi of iiuio«mic«v but cer-
tmnly tettdiug to facilitate ft$f <Moa9iN>Dal
•scafie cf tbe giv&ity. Oof bcfst and abltst
coanntntalor has tAuymrt diaeh anxiety to
fcai^ ag»ut ttaU tril in wmay passages
id Ms adoable worky* and, oa^aeslion-
9Mfr nniess ike law is protecied from its
growth by the wisdmn d- tbe Coan^ it
wittr tend lo degrade a liberal sdence to a
iwecianfeal art; snd^ in tiine, to produce
affwta upeo our erinmial code, not very
dissimilar to what would follow from such
a setasgrade MMveiiient in philosophy, as
would tessare to its empire the logic of
the tehoolft,
ifr. Hume, ia the passaga above
quoted, probably had in view the beauti-
M and iitipresslve language of lord Hale f
on this subject ;— <«a autfaMo-ity which can-
nea fail to meet with respecc on the other
silk of the bar. ** In ftrnmr of Hie great
atiictnaas has been, in all times, required
iispoiartsofindietmenta; andthatnitihis,
tiM it: iv grown tv be a fatemisli and in-
aottveuienoy in the law and the adminis-
tmtian tHerecrf. Mom oflbnders etoape
hf ike over easy ear given to eieeptions
ksioiictnentBy tkatt by tiieiv own inno-
eanea;^ and manjr times gross murders^
lavgiasies^ foU>eriesy and other heinous
sflsd evyiiig' ofVsuees, escape by these un-
aaemVf aioetiesi to the reproach of the
law^tQ die shame of the i^venHnenr> and
im 4m enoonragement sf villany, and to
the dtshononr of God ; and it weie very
flty that by some law, this overgrown
«iiriioBi^and nicety were mfovmed, which
i» new beoeme the disease of the "biw;
and will, t fear„ in time gtvw mortal,
withoof some- timely ramedv." Tbe editor
sridsj in a>note t " l^i» advine of our author
iiwild, if eempiied with, be of excellent
nee;: fbr ifr wonUi> not emly prevent the
gililiyifromeseapiog, but woM likewise be
agaavdHiointiocenee; fbr thersby would be
lamevad the only pratenoe upon which
«s«asil i» denied theprUKmer in cases of
ffttoay;^ fcfr if n« exceptiom wera Uf be
aUawvdfbulwharwent tk^-tihemerhs^ttiere
WMki thMv be' m>i Aasm to- deny that
assiiaaneei hi easts where lifeiaKrOncemed,
wMsh yei^is allowed itf every petit t^s-
pMtt" In49(K>tland, wl»a ariminali'have,
iaiever^Fatage-of the process, theaasistance
fd' ootnselv aadf the ashamtages of being
mrmi mHk eopies of timir indiotments
Mae» daye befbtw trial,* and ef bsATing
«May^poi«eef lawtdisimsBed before tliey
mm^ sena xm » jwy,. josiki sequirn no
ftroor sa^olijeetiotts' that do^ not eater into
dUrMerlto of' the ease.
Aeaovding to thfe prosecn^t's- notion of
■>w^^>*«ti»ii mm i»>«tmii 4» ttwH "*!■ ■■ < wi
^ HauNV vok fmreihwikn^ p. 44^ rsX.4, p.
^tV; Sap; n, 269; etaHbrpakm:
^HaWII^R.CrtoL S^prt9K
bit pnbthi duty, it wonld be impoifeible
Imt him to do any thing more inconsistent
with it, than to admit that, in this or any
caher case, any technical words or phrases
ai^ essential to the relevancy of the minor
proposition of an indiotment. It is ea*
tabluhedlarwy that, ^although tbe sub-
sumptitfn must be suitable in substance to
the outset of the libel, it is not necessary
in <mr practice, to employ and repeal the
precise same technical terms in the one
aa in the other member of the charge. It
iasuficient that foots are relate in the
subsumption, which amount to the crime
whereof, in tbe outset, the libel professes
to aecttse.'^* He has no de»re, however,
to shelter himself under tias rale from any
but frivolous and captious objections. He
has* endeavoured to express himself in as
precise terms as possible ; and he is con*
ndent he has expressed himself widi more
pkwdsion and accuracy than the received
praetiee of the law requires. He has even
yielded to the' clamour horn the other side
ef the bar fbr the insertion of the word
Jti&momh^ because it appeared to him at
least a harmless, and certainly not an
inappropriate expression, in libelling
ttpon a Briti^ statute, where the offence,
or crime is designated by the term
**^ Mony,'' though felony has no technical
meaning iix the law of Scotland ; and it
has been repeatedly decided, on the
soundest piinciples, that the want of this
epithet is no <ri)}ection whatever to the
ndevancy of any ohaige f*
At all events, whatever special objec-
tions may be taken to any exnressions in
the subsumption, your loroships will
always remember, that if the diarge of
art and part be correctly stated in terms
of the aet of parliament, it is impossible
that anv ** exception or objection take
awaie t&Ht part of the libel/' 1593, cap.
158.
On tliese grounds, the prosecutor sub-
aits^ the indictment ought to be fieund
relevant to infer die pains of law.
Inrapeeiwhert<^Sft%
H. Hotf s D»viiiiOV».
My 10, 1817.
rirFORMATION
FOB
m tl^ CtuiU tf Edinburgh,
▲OAIKST
ALBXAmSEB, maconochu; Af. ^
Mitubufbtmkf hit Miijiuisf^t AdwKoU,
Jot hU Maf6$t^$' itUetut.
On the Sf2hd' df^: of Pebraary last, tha
** Hiniia^ vi»L 3^ p. 3641
t JHhima^ fi^U 3,«p. 4991 and- Sap; p. MT.
1^
aoTi
for Admitiatrmg uak^ CMh*.
A. a 1S17.
[
MBfontenft, Andrew Jilliiilef . v«f tp-
pmhended on a wamat by tbe sheriff of
Lanaiicsliire, on a change of being engaged
in e. '* ireMonable plot or oonepiraey,'' in-
tended to ^accomplish tbe subversion
and overturn of the present constitution
and government 6f this kmgdom," &c. ;
aad also of having taken and ndaunistei«d
oathsy contrary to the statute of the 52nd
Geo. 3y c. 104. Tbe spplication also
stated, ^That iretmmable correspondencey
by letter and otherwise,- had heen held
with other districts of this ooontry, and
of England ; and that arms, mmmmitionf
and aghunt veaponif hope betn prepared
and coUeeiedf or are oidered, and in process
cf being made, prepared, and eolleeted."
On that wanant he was brought before
thesheriff for examination; nnd thereafter
be was committed to the gaol of Olasgow,
till liberated in due course of law, by a
wlarrant of the sheriff, on diarges of a
similar import
Of this date,* a pctitioii was presented
to yonr lordships, in the name of his ma-
jes^s advocate, which set forth, ** That
your petitioner dhaiges Andrew M'Kinley
and Wyiiam Edgar, present prisoners in
the tolboDth of Glasgow, with high treamm,
and with m trtamnmt cmuifiraqf to obtain
annnalf»arliaBient8,lmd universal suffrage,
by physical force, and paitiovlarly with
takmg^and odmimttering oaths, binding
themselves, under pain of death, lo the
aecoirplishnient of those purposes; the
ndminalcring of which oaths is a capital
felony, by the statute of the 52nd or the
king, in that case made and provided, c.
904.; which crimes the said persons are
chaqred with having oommitM," Ice. It
prayed year lordships ^ to grant warrant
to any of the macers of Court to transmit
the said Andiww M'Kinley and William
Edgar, under a sure guard, till they are
broBght to, and innatcerate for the said
nflbmes in the Castle of Edinburgh, till
liberate therefrom in due course or law."
On this application, your lordships granted
wanant nocoidingly,t ^ delivering, re-
caving, and transmitting the informant
and WiUiam Edgar, ** till they are btnught
to, and in^aroeiate within, the Castle of
Edinbnvgh, therein to be detained, till
thenee liberated in dne course of law,'* he.
As te infomuoit dms stood eommitted t
espnssly for the erinm of high tvsason,
as well as for another offenee of an in-
feriev denomination, he was advised that
it would be in vain for him to apply for
lattam of intiasatton, nnder the statute
1701, e. 6, in nvder to limit 4be possible
dnratien Jif bk
because the
tianait af tiM ^flh Aam^ is, ftl, having
IbIMhimsb fha wnoM law w IBngtand in
^f^f^m
"f^mm
^r^m*
m^
* M aieb 17, Mt7.
t Maich^7> 1817,
mgnrd to tbe taid of thecvma nf tnason,
wm intimation la his m^ynty's aduncate
could in that case be compateossoeamnel
either the oommeaoemeai er the cancla*
iioo of the trial.
Bat, aeon after the anforaaant had been
4hus imprisoned, ha was served with an
indiclsBent, ohargtag bias, not onith the
crime of mason, but with Iha crime of
felony, under the statute «f the 6%aA Geo.
ftffd, whieh provides, that any nniaon who
shall '^adnnnister, or cause to oe adminis-
tered, or he aiding or aariating at tbe ad-
ministering of nay oath or engagement,
purporting, or engaging to bind the per-
son taking the same to ooaamit ear tvtason
or murder, or any felony pnnishahle by
law with death, Aall, on conviction Ihere-
ai, be adindged gniltjr of felony,*' &o.
And, at the aaam tiaw that thisindielment
was sMvad on the informant, a similar
indictment wns esoouled against William
Edgar.
Tbe informant was advised by bis aonn-
§tA that this indictment wua in many re-
spects irmlevant, both in its form «nd in
itejubstanoe. In the minor fMoposition
it stated, That the informant was guilty
of the said crimes, in so far as he, having
*' wickedly, maUciaosly, and traHemoify
amapkredamdagraed^tBik other aaUdiaptaed
panom^ to break and distuib the public
peece, to cAsnge, snfoeN, and ossri/wwe the
fovermmetUf nd to ascHe^ mow, and retir,
tufarretlisn end refe/ton; and especially
to hold and attend secrat meeting^ for
the purpoee of obtaining annanl parlia«
ments, and nnivefsal saftage, by uiuavrfol
and violent means, did then and diere,
wickedly, malicioniriy, and tfoSttarentiy ad*
ministei', or canse to be administered, or
did aid or assist in the adnmiisteriag, to
a great nuad>er of penons, an oath or
engagement, or an obligation in the nature
of an oath, in the following terais, or to
the following purport.** It Ihen est forth
an oath in oortain specified terms, beariog
ia the bodjr of it diese particniar words,
^and,thst I will support the same to the
utmost of my power, either by moml or
p|)ysiealstreagtb,as the case May require.*^
And it subsumed, whieh oath or obKgation
did thus porpoTt, or intend, to bi^ the
persons taking the same to commit -trea-
nBTStsn ^ the ettMehed gmtemmani, Isiof,
and eamfi^ation ef tide kingdom,
William Sdgar was first brought mp for
nrial on tbe 9th April, lfil7. On that
ooeasion, his eoansel stated varSenaob-
jaotions tothovelevancy of thelndietment.
1it| That the facto averred In the minor
ptopeaition, Idking 'diem «s they ^•'V
ilated, did net ^anoant to tiM erimo
elMwgid in the majors and in parienlar,
that the oath set forth did not purport ot
intend to bind^thaparttetlaking the same
3993 ^ GEORGB III.
Trial ^Andrm M*Kinley
[400
to Qommit any treason: 2ndl]r, That the
chaige in the minor propodtion was not saf-
fidently specific ; and, in particular, that
it did not state the particnhr treason^ to
the conunission of which the oath was
aUeged to purport or intend to bind the
parlies taking ibe same. Brdly, That, in
so fax as there was any attempt at speci-
fication, the libel was irreleyant, in so far
as it averred that to be a treason, which
is not a treason of any known denomina-
tion. 4thly, That the statement in the
beginning of the minor proposition, which
diaiged directly a treasonable conspiracy,
was not competent or admssiable, being
in flMt an attempt to prore the crime of
treason against me panel, under an indict-
ment which did not charge treason in the
major proposition, and in a form of trial
not competent in that case. Objections,
having tnese general characters, were ar-
gued at considerable lengdi ; and it was
particularly observed, that the prosecutor,
alter quoting the oath, in which the words,
^ either hw moral or physical itrengtk ^
were used, had, in his own commentaiy,
fiMud it necessary to dumgs ike term^ and
to state that the oath bcmnd the parties
to coomiit '' treason, by effecting by phy-
sical/aros the subversion," &c.
mien that debate was concluded, your
lordships ddivered your opinions, and
veiy grave and serious douoto were ex-
Eressed concerning the relevancy of the
bel. Considering the case to be of
great importance, your lordships ordered
llie parties to lodge informations on the
points which had been argued. On the
same day, the diet against the infiDrmant,
M'Kinky, had been Ajoumed to the 10th
of April ; but the diet against Edgar was
adjourned till the 19th May.
Soon after this adjournment, his ma-
jesty's advocate, feeling undoubtedly the
weight of the objections whidi had been
argCNi against the libel as it stood^ deter-
mined to abandon these indictments, both
against Edgar, and against the informant.
And accoidingly, of this date,* new in-
dictments were served.
On the 19th of May, Bdgar was put to
the bar, and was required to plead to the
new indictment But as the diet had not
been deserted on the former indictment
bv BDj interlocutor of vour lordships, an
objecuon on this ground was stated ; and
yonr lordships deeming it necessary to
appoint a search for precedents in the
records of the Court, th^ diet was ad-
journed till the 26th May. On that day,
your lordships determined that the^new
indictment was well served, but that the
panel was not bound to plead to it, until
an interlocutor deserting the diet on the
Ssimer indictment should be pronounced by
? April 10, 1817.
* your lordships. Such an interlocutor
having been accordingly pronounced,
Edgar pleaded not gudty to the second
indictment, and your loidshipi continued
all the dieu of Court tiU the Snd of
June.
On the 3nd of June, the informant,
Andrew M'Kinley, was brought up for
trial on the teeand indictmenL After a
aimihur inteilocutor as in the case of
Edgar, deserting the diet on the first in-
dictment, had been pronounced, the in-
formant pleaded not fftHty^ and his coun-
sel then stated various objections to the re-
levancy of this second indictment. It was
stated, that it was still liable substantially
to all the same objecdons which had been
urged against the former indictment.
The prosecutor had indeed thrown out
the direct allegation of a traitorous con-
spiracy; but he bad still libelled, thai
' the panel did ^ wickedly, malidously, and
frot^oroitf/v administer, or cause to be ad-
ministered,'' Ice. whereby there was still
a direct attempt to prove treason under
this indictment for a fdony only. The
oath was redted in the precise same terms
as in the former indictment ; and then
the libel proceeded, ''which oatb, or en-
gagement, or obligation, to the fsregoing
purport, ^d bind, or did puiport or intend
• to biad, the persons taking the same tocom-
mit treason, by effecting^ bvpbysical fbroe»
the subversion of the established govern-
ment, laws, and constitution of this king-
dom, and espedaUy by obtaining annual
Eirlkments and universal sufirage by un-
wfiil and violent means."
The argument on the general relevancy
was resumed at great length, and new
eondderations were suggested, shewing
that this indictment was, if possible, more
irrelevant than the former. Your lord-
ships at the samo time called the atten-
tion of the counsel to a particular objection
to the form of the mmor propodtion, in
stating the particular oocadons on which
the alleged oath or obligation had been
administered, where it was described as
an oath not fntrporiiMg or tnlewliw to
bind. Ice. but ** hmdmg the persons tuing
the same to commit treason, as said is."
Your lordships wished to receive infor-
mations on the whole general poihts
which had been aigued. But you ex-
pressed dedded opinions, that the indict-
ment was bad in the point last mentioned,
and also bad in the use of the word froi-
iarcnttkf instead of fehmousfy.
In consequence of the opinions thus
intimated, his majesty's advocate moved
your lordships to desert the diet on this
second indictment pro ioco et temportf re-'
serving to him to raise a new indictment
for the samft offence. Your lonlahips ao»
cordingly pronounced such an inteilo-
cutor.
'4m]
Jiir AdmadiUmg tnkmftd Oatht.
A.D. r8|7»
r4Q3
Thereafter, in the same day, a petition
was presented by the lonl advocate,
which stated, ^' That your lordships have
this day been pleased to desert the diet
against Anebnew M^KmUy^ present psson-
er in the Castle of Edinburgh, accused as
fn the indictment, the diet whereof has
this day been deserted, and who stood
committed as fialty of the crimef ef high
tttammj and yoUha tretuonahU cofupracy to
obtain annual parliaments and universal
suffrage bv physical force, and admkmUr'
mg unlawful 6aths, hmimg hmuelf, under
pain of death, to the aocomplishmient of
these purposes, the admrnktaruig of which
oaths IS a capital felony by the statute of
the 52nd of toe King, c. 104., which crime$
the said person is chaurged iriik having com-
mitted at Glasgow, and in the vicinity
thereof in the months of November and
December, 181d, and January and Feb-
ruary, 1817, wkkh tktrefore makes this
apphcation necessary for a new warrant,'^
Ice. And it prayed your lordships "to
grant warrant to commit the said Andrew
M 'Kinley to the Castle of Edinburgh ac-
cordingly." Yonr lordship did' then
grant warrant to apprehend tae informant,
''and to commit him prisoner to the
Castle of Edinburgh, therein to be detain-
ed till thence liberated in due course of
law.** The informant does not at present
stop to take notice of the extraordinaty
terms of tins last application. It is quo-
ted, only that your lordships may be
aware, that the informant still stands
committed for treiason, and for a treason-
able conspiracy, as well as for the crime
of administering unlawful oaths under the
statute.
Of this date*, a third indictment
was executed against the informant;
and, on the 23^ of June, he was
brought to the bar, and pleaded not
guilty. His counsel were prepared to
axgue the same general objections which
had been stated to both the former in-
dictments, and to maintain, that this last
was, if possible, the worst of them all.
But it being understood that your lord-
ships were to orfier informations, it was
thought unnecessary to occupy Uie time
of the Court vrith any debate ; and your
lordships pronounced the following order :
''Ordain parties procurators to give in
iflffermations upon the relevancy of the
indictment, to the clerk of Court, in
order to be recorded; the prosecutor to
Slve in his informations on or oeforeThurs-
ay next, and Uie procurators for the
panel to give in his information on or
Before the 9th day of July next : Con-
tinue the diet against the panel till Mon-
day the 14th day of the said month of
Jufy, and ordain all concerned then to
• Jiine'r,16ir.
VOL. xxxm.
attend, each under tlie pains o£ law,
and the panel in the mean time to be
carried back to the Castle of Edinburgh.''
The prosecutor's information was accord-
ingly lodged on the 26th June; and the
informant is' now to enter into the con-
sideration of the relevancy of this third
indictment. •
The prosecutor states, that he has na
hope of suggesting any new views of the
ease, and that he will not think himself
justified, by the inducement of novelty,
in abandoning those grounds on which he
has always been of opinion that the in-
dictment ought to pass to the knowledge
of an assize. It must be admitted, that
the learned prosecutor has been sufficient-
ly steady in adliering to rami of his
own ideas on this matter, and that he has
not furnished your lordships with, many
new lights on the most important ques-
tions which arise. Yet neither his in-
dictment, nor his information, ia. alto-
. gether destitute of novelty. Tliere are
propositions maintained sa very new and
remarkable, that, though they were in-
deed suggested in a viva txHrr pleading,
the informant scarcely expected that they
would have been deliberately put on
the record of the Court ; and after having
twice indicted the informant, founding on
an oath of the terms or purport specially
set forth, he has found out, that one ol>-
jection to the relevancy of those indict-
ments is at once removed by the siinple
expedient of chanffng the faet, "The
argument is now in a ^reat measure
abolished by the introduHion (^ both the
words inta the new indictment." In the
middle of the oath alleged to have been
administered, the woids are changed,
and instead of the terms, '^ either by
moral or physical strength,'' your lord-
ships have now these words, '^ either by
moral or physical strength, <]or /orce .'">
What may be the effect of this addition,
the informant may perhaps afterwards
inquire. But the prosecutor has at least
the merit of some novelty in this expe-
dient for curing an objection of rele-
vancy, by adapting the foot to his own
argument, though he had not ventured so
to state it in any of the former indict
ments.
But the informant is much more anxious
to satisfy your lordships on the veiy im-
portant questions which occur in this
case, than to analvse minutely the line of
aigument adopted by the prosecutor. He
will have occasion to advert to some of
the extraordinary positions maintained^
and, with great submission, they appear to
him in a great measure to reduce the
plea which they are found necessary to
support taan absurdity in law.
jlo your lordships, who are so well
. acquainted with the subject, it might
2 D
409}
57 GIOVGE ni.
TfidtfAninmM^MUky
t
seem to be a^ery miDecessai^ snlgect of
inqairy, to consider what is the real
meaning of a question on the relevancy
of an indictment. Bat the manner in
which the case has been treated by the
prosecutor renders this indisptnsablei as
the basis of the whole discussion; for
he appears to have entirely lost sight
of the ftodamental principles of a Scotch
indictment, as well as of the powers
and duties of your h>idships in consider-
iogit.
The indictment is in the form of a
8ylk>gism. The am^ot proposition lays
doifrn the general nature of the crime
in the abstraet, with its qualities and
aggriTaiions. The wm&t proposition de-
fines the partiaAa^ apeaa of that crime
with which th^ panel is charged^ and
detaib the fach from which his guilt
is to be infemd. The condmcm ig^ that^
the charge being proved, the punish-
ment fizc^ by the law shall be inflicted.
Every indictment most shew $n Ms
fiee of it z plain relevancy, otherwise it
cannot be sent to- trial at all. Your
Lordships must be enabled to judge,
whether the specific charge, meant to
be made agafnst the panel,, will amount
to the crime charged in the major propo-
sition; and you must be enabled Uy
judge, whether the particular facts
alleged are of such a nature as to amount
to mat specific charge. The panel has
a right to be informed, in me minor
propoeitioii, of the precise aooosation
that is made against him, and also of
the leseling focts on which it is founded.
But it is not merely for the paneTs in-
fonnation diat the specification in the
minor proposition is required. It arises
from the verv principle of such an in-
dictment, and the rules which govern the
trial of crimes in this Court. The re-
levancy of the charge belongs to vour
lofdships, and not to the iury ; and the
prosecutor has it not in nis power to
take the coffnizafice of this relevancy out
of the hands of the Court.
There is, in this respect,, a distinction
between the practice of this Court,^ and
the practice of the criminal courts in
England, which it seems to be of some
importance to remember. In England^
the indictment is drawn compamtively in
ft very general form ; and it is com|]teient,
even after the verdict of a jury findmg the
prisoner guilty to make a motion in arrest
of judgment, on the ground of errors, or
of general irrelevancy, in the indictment
in point of law. This is the usual
form of trying questions of relevancy ;
and, accordingly, wUh few ezeeptidns, it
is scarcely ever the practice to object
to the indictment tn Ihnme,
Your lordship know that the practice
U esseutiiOly different in this Court. The
interlocutor of tricTancy pvenomced by
the Court determines the general law
of it ; and thouj^ the panel is generally
permitted to use whatever aiguoMnts he
I. thinks fit to induce the jury to acquit
haor he can never afterwards plead to*
the Court any objcKttons to the iel«Faiiey
of the indictment. ▲ «eniie« of gmliy
id if the
the case for ever; and
panel, so cenvieted, still thinks
m any way aggrieved, kefaas no lemedy
but in the mercy of the sovereign.
This being nndeniafoly the rule of the
law of Scotland,, it must be evidenty that
it creates an. absolate necessity, not only
for the utmost precision and aocnmey in-
the statement of the chaige in the in-
dictment, but for the considerable ounute-
ness of detail in setting forth die fittts^
en whick thedmrge is founded* It must
be so stated,, that not only the panel
may be awsre of the precise nature of
die charge against vniich he has to
defi^' hinmel^ but the Conrt may be
enabled to form a correct opinion on
the relevancy of the whole accusation.
It will not do to wait for the disdo-
sure ef the case in evidence. The
Court must, in the Bret inatance, see
,« by ft mtinct exposition of the
speofic nalwe e^ the ehaigi^ aa4 ef the
fending fitfts.
It is certainly of no importance^ what
opinion dudl be fovmed on the respective
merits of these two modes of pioeeduxe.
Your hudships will probaby be inclined
to think that the advantages of your
own nde are sanctioned by a long oourae
of experience, and that the inhahstants of
this country have every reason; to be
satisfied with a ^stem^ which se efiect-
naUy secures them against being put in
hazard bT irrelevant aceusatiene, er by-
charges, me precise natme of which they
do not know.
But it is self-evident, that the whole
principle of this eoume of trial absolutely
requires a great degree of precision in
the minor proposition of the iadieement.
And aocosdangly, no matter of law ever
was more ctoariy had down, or more
rigidly adhered to,, than the rule which
imposes this necessity on all prosecutors
has been in the laws of Scotland. Trite
though the subfect may be, the informant
considers it to be indiapensahie to lay
before your lordships seme part of Mr.
Rumens statement on this matter ^
After explaining the introduotion of
the minor propoeitton^ which simply as-
serts thai the panel kl ^ guilty aeter, or
art and part, or the fonaaaid crime,'' Mr.
Hume goes on tt» observe^* '* The second
part of thecfattige, or subsumptiod, as.it
* Harney rDL3> p. 301.
4Ml
Jbf Adrnhmlmitg unlmfid Oaihs.
A. D. 18iY.
UQB
w OHwdf ' is ' tntradsood wi(h ' llie words
'^ la 00 fiM- u ;' and «oasists, to describe
it fenerally, ef a namdve of Ihe alleged
crkDiaal aet, with ike due specification of
tiM time,' plaoe^ and maDiier of doing it,
so as to jiuify tke ptecedmg MmuHon of
ike pmef$ paH, ami 4k&gmih likewite
tki» partknUr tkarge Jrmn all oTHsas of
MB SAKS sraciBB, and bring the |Mnel to
the bar, siHfieieBtly ioibnned of that
wheveof he is aecosed.
^ I say, in Ihe first plaee, that this part
ef die libel mast give such a hittoiy of
the daed that hM been done, at »kali wot-
mmC <#as pmxdatg anratahan ff^ikc panel $
gitUt of tke crime wkkk k $tated m tke
ftf^OTf and is now referred to ia the sub-
ramptioa of the miDor proposition.^ The
aalbor then goes on, at oonsiderable
length, to explain this point of law, that
the fad tomtit ametud 4o tke crime ckarged
m the Major propesiftion ; and among
otfier examples of the rale, he gives this:
*^ On sodh a groimd, among others, the
Lords tBsmissed a libel for pemry, which
set forth Ihe seversl articles of the panel's
deposition, and aSraied that they were
contraiy to the troth, but omitted to say,
tfmt ttie panel swore these tilings, * hum-
tag tke tame to he fabe.' ^ The infermaot
shall presently itkt die libertv ef quoting
some other passages ia a di^rent part of
Mr. Hume's woriL, on ttiis Tery material
caae <ff trial fotperfwy.
But after eipuamng this bmnch of the
rule, he goes on to Ae other : f*^ I have
said in the second place, that a libel is not
good, * ufliess it give tmeh on aecotuU of
tke a'kaimil deed at suy disttwo'uish
VnS PABTICtTLAE CHAEOB FKOM ALL
otiBft xvstahces op tbb same soar of
euME, and dius bring die panel to the
^bar, sufficiently infonned of that whereof
be is accused. Otherwise the purpose
would not beMfiRed which the law en-
tertains, tn ordering the panel to be
eehred with a copy of fris libel, and allow-
ing him so manr days to mi^e prepara-
tion for his ilefonce."' Afterwards he
says, * And indeai, so undeniable is the
equity of this nsaxim, that H seems to hare
been uniformly obsenrsd in the trial even
of crimes against tiie state, and in the
limes the least remaHEaUe for mild or im-
partid decisions in ^t class of cases."
Then Mfows a detsoled illustration of the
poittt. The -infoimant can only select a
few pasnges :{ ^ It is matter of substan-
tial justice, and has been unifoimly ob-
served in the practice of later times, that
the piosectttoT shaH not be held sufficiently
•o have explained himself in diarging the
tag ikat htf fAe paady did commtt or wot
* Hmae, vol. 3, p. 802.
t IW. p. aiO, 811. i hid. p. 816, 317.
gmUjf of tkat crime against 'SUch a perton,
at such a time, and ptaoe ; He tkall further
be obliged to support aadjuttify tkit affirma-
tioHf mtk an accourd ef the particular fact ;
an account which takes notice of those
leading and peculiar circumstances of the
deed, tokiek terve to distiaguitk it from
^ather deedt cf the tame dattf and of which
any spectator would natundlv make men-
tion, in relating what he had seen. In a
case of oMirder, for instance, the libel
shall not be good thus : * Yet true it is and
of verity, that you, the said A. B. panel,
are guilty actor, or art and part, of the
said crime of sMRrder, in so laf as, upon
Hie loth day of April, 1797, yi^did kiU
and murder C. D, merchant tn Edinhurghf
wilhiu bis own dwelling-house, situated
in the High Street of the said citv of
Edifibuigh^ and so conclude, wittiout
coBomuaicstinK either to the judge or the
panel any further particulars of the stonr.
The reason is obvious : A murder might
be committed on the person of C. D. at
tbe tiflse and plaoe Kbelled, in manv van*
«us ways, as by shooting, stabbing,
strangling, poisoniDg, and so forth ; and,
according at it ii intended to prove one or
amMer qfihete madm afaUaighter^ tke pond
mtuf have to take a different courte totoardt
kit dtfenet and exctUpaiion.'*
Afterwards, ^ I may add, that Ihe pro-
secutor is obliged to enter into such a de-
ttd\y''for ikitJkrAer and equally tubttantial
MBOKM, ikai * HB MUST OTBEBWISB BE
'VBSTBD IV BFFCCT WITB THE EKTIBB
^OGBIZAVCE Of THE BSLEVAVCT OF HIS
own uscL, a matter wludi helongetk not
to hiaty nor even to tke jary, but to the
covBT Atx)iiB: and that be might thus
force on tbe trial of such a charge, toAicA,
to be ditmiued at inept or irrelevantt needt
only to be opened ap and eaplained. For
under these getieraf terms ot murder^ rob^
tteal, and tke likcy the prosecutor may con-
ceal some nice and disputable, or peihaps
some laatastical and extravagant notions
of his own, such as are unknown to the
law and practice of the land, loc.'* Now,
if the prosecutor be allowed filas towrtq^
up kit cote in myttery, and keep the fact
lo hisHelf, which is the foundation of his
charge, he, for certain, gmns bis object of
h»riDg %is libel remitted to an assize:
with whom, tf ke can preoaU to adopt kit
opitaomontheaubfeetfkinofalteanderrone-
out toever tkey be, he may obtain a fiivour-
■able venMct, aiid tkm camtrain the judge
to pau aetttence on the joritoner^ contrary to
tke Ima 4ndjuttice of the cote.
**'Aad if this be true of such crimes as
theft and nnurdcrr, much more doet the tame
hM good of many other crimet, which are of
a more eompUx or atore tubtile natwCf and
wilh respect to which, unless elucidated
* Hume, vol. 3, p. 818.
4071
57 G£ORG£ III.
Trid %fA»iftm VhRde^
[406
witk a full detail of tbt circtuniCaiices of
ibe UsXj no notioo can well be formed
vrhether tbe charge be pertinent or not.
Take, for instancey the crime of bribery."
Amongotherexamples under this head, the
Autbor states the case of jKy^fMyy. ^ The like
dificuasion took place in the case of Law-
son of Westertown,* on that article of his
i ndictment for the crime of peijury, wherein
he was charged with swearing falsely, that
his title as a freeholder, was not nomuial
or JictUious, nor created for the purpose of
enabling him to Tote for a member to
seiTO in parliament For, on this head,
folding it advisable to be more reserved and
eautiout than on the other artieUi of the
charge, the prosecutor had failed to set
fortli any such detail of facts and circum-
stances, from which it could be gathered,
either what meaning he himself attached
to ibis mystical and litigioits j^rase of a no-
minal and ficHticm titJey or which might
emMe thejvdge to discern^ whether he were
correct or not in his notions on that sub-
ject. In consequence, this part of the
libel, and this alone, was found not to be
* so qualified as to import a relevant
/charge of peijury, upon which the panel
may or can be remitted lo the knowledge
of assize.'^'
The author concludes the whole of this
matter with obsenrin^,t ** The truth is,
that the best confirmation of the rule, next
to the obvious justice of the thing itself, tf
tJie wUform.obserwmoe t^ it in the maice
of la^ timesp which has fainderea many
controversies of this sort from arising in
Court, and is itself a daily testimony to
the tenor of the law.'''
Now^ though it is Uue that there are
some exceptions from the strictneis of this
nile, arising from the necessity of the
case, and though there are also limiu
to the rule, so that an unreasonable
degree of minuteness shall not be re-
quired, the rule itself is fixed and pe-
remptory, and the principles on which it
depends are both clear in themselves, and
such as demonstrate the necessity of it
to the substantial justice of every trial in
this Court. The informant hardly thinks
it necessary to make any apology for the
fulness of his statement on the subject,
because he apprehends that it is substan-
tially denied ^hough indeed admitted in
words) thcoughout the information of tbe
prosecutor.
The major proposition of this indictF-
ment consists entirely in a recitation
of the clauses of the statute of the
37tli of the king. The material part
is in these words, " that every person
who shall, in any manner or form what-
soever, administer, or cause to be ad-
ministered, or be aiding and assisting
Hume, vol. 3, p^ 319. f Ibid, p. 320.
ftt 4he administeriiig of any otih or en-
gagement ; patpartingf oi^intendmg to bmd
the person taking the same to conunit aht
treason or murder^ or Avrfelat^ punishable
by law with death, shad, on conviction
thereof by due course of law, be adiudged
Sihy of felony, an<L suffer death as a
on, without MnefitAf der^."
The general crime here raised into the
rank of a felony, consists in the adminis-
tration of an oath. But the quality of tbe
oath in whidi the essence of the crime
consists, admits of the great vaiietieBy and
is described in the statute by a reference
to certain other general denominatioos of
crimes. It must be an oath pmporting or
intending to bind the party taking it to cer-
tain things ; 1st, Purporting or intending
to bind him to commit ai^ treason ; 2iid,
Purporting or intending to bind him lo
commit murder; 3rd, Purporting or in-
tendinis to bind him to commit anyfdomf.
The crmie of the statute is not demied to
any ooe of these obligations, nor does it
require them all to make up the statutoiT
offence. Each is a separate sort of o^
fonoe of its own character, all under the
same enactment of the statute, and sM
.consisting in the administration of tbe
^oMh.
But there are many sorts of treason;
there are many hundreds of different felo-
nies ; there are murders which amount to
petty treason, and murders of a different
tort; but though the statute mentions
murder, merely according to the unifonn
practice in all such English statutes, it
does not speak of any murder as in the
other cases. The statute does not distin-
guish the varieties of treasons and fdonies.
It provides, that the administration of an
oath, purporting or intending to bind to
coipmit aity treason or at^ miony, shall
be felony ; and it leaves the precise defi-
nition of the particular crime to be settled
according to the fact in each case. If tha
oath purports or intends to bind to com-
mit burglary, that is the crime in that case ;
or to commit repe ; and so of all the nu-
merous y^^oniei existing in the law. In
the same manner, if it purports or intends
to bind to conmas the kings death, the ad-
ministration of the oath having this pur-
port or intendment is the statutory crime
in that case. If it imports or intends to
bind to levy war, that is the essence of the
crime in that case. If it Durports or in-
tends to bind to counterfeit the king's
coin, that is the treason in that case, &e
obligation to commit which is the basis
of the offence. And so of all the other
eight treasons which exist in the law.
It may be known to your lordships,
that the three great genera of crimes in
the law of England are 'Dneason, Felams,
and MisdemMnour. Every thing foils
undtr,<«e or other of these denomiaatiofu.
400]
Jbf MmhtUiHMt mtkmflit Oaikt.
A. D. laiT.
uio
Tbcit sn inferior claww; and MOMtimet
the plms of the eiown are atatod lepa^
nMjf as in thii staente wmtdtt is put as
dbtingttisbed fromfekmjy the inrarmant
belieres, acooidiag to tho constant prac-
tice in sodi Boglish acts, and periiaps in
this case, with some view to the case of
those mnrdeis which are petty tnaaon. Bat,
in general, tr0aioR^^s&my,and MMdbiiMwwr,
are the geaers, and comprehend CTCiy
iihing.
The same feet, whidi is properly a
-treason, may be sko a felonr. Bat at a
^reasoiiy it is not comprdienaed under the
•denomination c^fdimf. The same feet
may be at the same time treason and
felony ; for example, to murder the king
is an overt act of compassing the king's
death, and so trtuon^ and idso fdony in
the ewrdfip. But the crime of high trea-
son is an entirely distinct dass ; and your
lordsbipe will hereafter hare to consider
whether, in the case of the same feet in-
volving both crimes, the felony does not
necessarily meige in the treason; With
this point the informant does not at pre-
sent interfere. In the mean time, it is
4dear, that trtaton is used constantly
throoii^ut the English books as agenenc
term just in the same manner as the term
yUbny, and one of the plainest illustiations
is to be found in this statute, and in the
▼eiy words founded on, where it speaks
of amf treason, or amf felony, precisely on
the same principle, referring to any one
of the numerous treasons, or the still more
namerous felonies, which exist in the
4aw.
The informant shall venture, hereafter,
to enter a little more feUyinto the sub-
ject of the4reason law. But at present,
iieiuaybe allowed to observe, that the
separation ef the different sorts- of trea-
son, or gather of the MattU tretnam, is
so clear, that the Taluable statute of king
William * for regulating trials of trea-
son, fee. lays down a rule now in strict
observance, that no person shall be in-
dicted, tried, or attainted of high treason,
but upon the oaths vS two lawfel wit-
nesses, either both to the some avert
dctf or one of them to one, and the other
of them to another, overt act of thb bams
iremmu' And Sir Michael Foster f in
<pioting the statute, prints the words ** tke
eame tftatan'* in italics, lo mark his clear
understanding, that it must be two vrit-
nesses to sepante overt acts of the same
medes of treason as s diaimet erme. In
the same manner,' it is provided, hj the
fourth section of •>the same statute, that if
** two or more diotmct iroooeme^ of dmsrt
kmde^ be alleged in one indictment, one
wit^Ma.'Iprodaced to prove *^ ome if tko
■W^l»i»
« 7th WUliam 3id; c. 8.
t Foster's Grim* Law^ 893.
*^ and another witness predooed
10 prore another, shall not be deoned two
witnesses ** to tbb same treammJ*
The statute of the Sad and 3fd Anne, c.
20, makes it high fnaaioa for aay offioer or
soldier to hold correspondence with any
rebel oi^nemy, or to give adrice, fee. to
the king's enemies ; and it makes it Jelm^
to raise mutiny or sedition in the army,
fee. fee. And, by the 36th section of that
act, it is provided, that the Iressont and
felomee beifore mentioned may be iaauired
of, fee. in the manner there pointea out.
The treaaons and the felonies are con*
stantljf spoken of in the nfens/ number, as
genenc descriptions jot two dsMes of
crimes.
The statute of the 7th Anne, c. Sl,^ $ 8,
the Tery act which extends the treason
law of England to Scotland, speaks
throughout of Iranonf in the plural num-
ber; and it spedally provides, that Uie
justice-court dull inquire of ali high truh
S0Ri, fee.
In general, therefore, there cannot be
the- smallest doubt, that, in the phrase-
ology of the English law and statutes,
treimm is. a generic term, descriptive of a
dass of crimes ; and that, when the legis-
lature speaks of a treason, or ony treason,
it means a pmHadar tort or deeenptum of
treason^ or miy om of dl the particular
spades of the general crime.
. But the plainest illustration for the
present question is to be found in the
other branch of the si^e dause of this
statute, '* or any felony punishable by law
with death;'' which, m this statute, is
put ex&ctly on a footing vrith ** say trea-
son." There are some hundreds of felo-
nies in the law of England, and there are
▼eiy many fdonies punishable with death
in the law of Scouand. But it is im«
posnble for any Court to imaginsu that,
when this statute speaks of any jfefeny, it
means any thing more than to describe
generdly the nature of the offence, the
administration of, the oath bindins to
commit which shall be deemed fdony,
assuming that the particular felony, or
particular spades of the crime meditated,
shall be defined in the indictment on which
the diarge proceeds.
Thus, the major propodtion of this
indictment libels a crime, eonsistinfl in the
administration of an oaUi, binding the
party taking the same to commit certdn
generic crimes, of which there are a great
Turietyofspedes. Theessence of the sta-
tutory offence must always be resdved
into the thing, which the eath adminis-
tered purports or intends, or at least is
alleged formalfy to fiarport, or infen^ to
bind the party taking it to do. It is in
that only that the criminality does or can
lie; and it is quite apparent, that the
Statute if so.veiy.gefeieru init9 '
4111 57GEOmGSni.
trial ^Awimm MUCm%
M*
Uoor of thaEt ^mg or oIAmi^ maik wMipre-
httiids so maAjr pariioiHar oatcs, vid par-
ticalar descriptions of crimes, fbat'it of
Dooessity supposes a partioulanlj of state-
ment to be %v9fHk in the iadMtasent in
each oase.
The pioseoator has thovgftl fit to pass
oyer this part of the caae afiogetber with-
ool notice. Bnt jrottr lordsliips, after
amending to the tme nature ef the sta-
tute, whkk fonnsthe whole uaior pro-
posttioD of this indietment, wiU have no
difficahy in pefoeiving tiie foil Ibroe of it
in relation to the material questions which
remain on the minor proposition.
The informant is here immedialely led
into the several important queftioBS, on
irhioh the relevancy of this indictment
depends. If the reasoning of the pro-
•ecutor is well fiounded, it woold be very
unnecessary to enter on any such inquiry.
For, as mr as the informant under-
stands the statement in the tnibMiation,
it is, according to him, quite imneeessaiy
to give your lordships an cppoftnni^ of
judging of the relerancy or the indicts
sent «t«ll. He gives your lordships his
theory in a short compam. ^ The pro-
•ecuftor knows no addition that emi make
the syllogism more perfect. Mi)f. The
administering an oath of a particular
description is a crime. Iftn. You did
administer <AeJb0owNWiMieA ; £^, You
ought to be punirfied^^ And elsewhere f
the piosecutor says, that ^ in this tftage
of the process, every thing is Meumed
to be ooae awfeectfy and Mottaoarf^, as
Kbelied. And the question is, i f all these
things are as staled by the^ prosecutor,
ought they to be followed by ponish-
mentf So dear is this rule, Uiat lAmgi
•I lAonssftMSo^Me smmI maocsnldbermfioii,
iflibelied to be done mchtdfy, and melici-
oail|f, or for the accomplishroent of some
illegal puipose, are daily found irelevaiit
to infer Hw paiasof Umt." Widi ift de-
ference, the informaot must be ^Uowed
lo say, that, in las humble appnhension,
a OKRe complete coafusioa or legal ideas
has been larelY eipreseed in the eame
number of words. Aceevding to -^ pro-
saootor'e dialecticks, this would be a com-
plete legal syllogism, whidh your loidahips
must ofnecessitjf remit to a jaiy. ^ Joo*
jot^ The admimsteiiag of an e«ii, pur-
foking or inteading to bind to commit
iaay treaiOB or. Ihlony, is Moay. JMKnor,
Yondidwfafcsdy and wwdfeisMiiy administer
mi oathcf the fbllowiagpa«port,irilii<li pur-
port is, thsilhe party takhsglhe same shall
wsElk oae aiile overv moraiBg. £r»9.
You fluost be mmished with deadi.* The
oroioctttor piaialy aisames, that your
lordships are notto jiid^ of the Mtevaocy
of the minor propeeitioa. 'i( be shall
« Pwpeeutor't laf: p. 3M. t Id£ p. 375.
[«1S
cnly be pieasad to slaie, that that which
iie asserts to have been done was*done
widfMf and sm/isisasjy, your kadshipe
aaust take it for grimed that it asMMRte to
ikt crwm tUmHed in the a^ior jpropooition,
q^biee^ aim asBst leave it to the jmy to de-
taimine whether the ptosocutor shsll prove
aay preeioechminalaetornot. Ifthein*
Ibnaaat has aay oompreheosion of this,
it is precisely a plea, directed to the ob-
<Mi^ attof the ktmdi ^ & Ctmi. It is
jast that case atirtad by Jir. Hwae, where
the prosecutor wraps his caae up in
myaleiy, in hopes of getting it passed
to an assiae; and thea, if ho can pre-
vail on theai, nghtly or wiiuagly, to give
him a verdict, compels year kedshipe
to proaoanoe semteace against law and
jaatica.
But an indictmaat under this statute
osBMMt be fraamd on this principle. Your
losdshipe mast have the means of judging
of the vdevaacyof the minor proposition :
aad jon cannot eeod it to tiial, on any
sach raadom aasumptioa of what wtmj by
possibility turn oat, as the proseentor is
pleased 4opveeeot to yoa. It is perfectly
true, that, ia the <|ueslioii of rdevaiu^,
the feots averred sn the indiotment ought
eo be tdBoa as tsue. But 4ie mere aver-
meat of ajielsaisaf inCsaliim will not eiake
cekaanq^, if thefeot stated is oither not
in itself relenwt, or nstf a^fkimUy mcyk^
U eae6lf yottt lordd^ t^jtiige ^fia ro-
In order to sift more carefully the ques-
<aoa codceming the laiwaacy of the mi-
nor proposition ia 4his case, it is now
oeeessary to caasider the particular ob-
jeotioas which thewerasal of it ioHnedi-
otely presoats. And the iafowsaat shall
here take the libeity of invevtiagthe order
adopted by the pmeeeutor, ami of con-
sidering, 1, Whether the preeeculor was
bound to state Us aariioahr Maam,
whioh he means to allege drnt^w oath
liheHed on fmpmied or mlsaMto bind
the parties taking it to parpetraiOi 3.
WlMther then is any avanneat in this
maMr ptoposition, tAich can inlaw be
takaa as aa swetmeatthat the panel did
admiabter an oadi, purporting or intend-
ing to biad the partim to eoamwt any
fwationUirtreaioa; aad, t, Whether ike
aM Mkellei ea, is aa oath pa^por^ingor m-
iradpy to bind the party ukmg it lo
ceaHSit trsasoa* The informant adopts
Ihisanangament, for veastms which will
praseatly be ae^ evident to your tord-
ehips. Ferhe appseheods, ihst the ob-
{eeboa io the rdomttcy cC this iadidment
maot totihjectioiiof merelbrm, but an
objection which enters into the substance
of the whole charge. The prosecutor
himoif thalhedoie aetsttita bis indict-
4181
for AdmimMerk^ mUnsfid OtUh*
It aeeoidiBf to -eoneet priaciyks of
relevancy, witboat shewing at one* that,
m tke mbtimce <f it, it camol be main-
taiaed. If he did not know this, it wcmld be
the eacieet thing iai^able lo frwae a re-
levant indktmenC, as the inlbrmani will
presenilj sbew^ But the prosecutor is
now eiriviag lor the vety objpel whieh has
been nniferaily Teprobailcd in die history
of the Gowty 10 take the relevancy out of
the hands of yonr lordships, and lo obtain
the dunce of a veidict firom a jniy^ on
errmmm naUBmqfthemim'e eftketHi^ey
and fwifpM infecences froai fiscts. that are
totally inapplicaibie to it. The qnsstion
eonoeniing the purport of the eiih is a
qoeation ^ g^reat imponance; and if the
infonnant does not mistake, the prose-
cnior has ha»rded propoaitiona on the
snlijeot of the uMist nntemdde and eitravap-
Snt nature. But it seems to Uaa to be
St of all material, tosee^ what it was ne-
cessiiy for the prosecutor to stale, io
Older to ipialifr wl define the charge and
aUegaiioB of fact in the minor proposi-
tion; and how laiv independenl or the
tetms irf the oatth, he has compliod with
the Riles of law in that patticular.
1. The infeimaat hnmUy maiatains,
that it waa incumbent on tfif prDseeutor,
in the minor nroposition of die indictment
to specify ana define Jkepartkwimt Uemm
to which he alleges the oath said to hare
been administered; purported or intended
to bind the party taking it.
M the intormant oeosiders this to be a
flhtid obfection to- the indictment, and an
objection which, though already twice
Mtinct^ esplained, the :pvosecQlor has
found himself nnaUe, by any amendment,
la semove consistently, it sMst her pre-
sumed, with his knowkdge of the facts of
the case, the infonoant must beg th$ in-
dulgence of Tonr loidafaips is explailKng it
at considemble length.
If the foundation of this proseontion
were the administration of an oatb^rileged
to purport or imended to biad die party
taking it to commit • /«lofiy> theinfiMmant
presumes that even the prosecutor would
scarcely dispute that the partiodar felony
must be specified in the radictment.' He
has indeea ventured to put Uie case of an
oatlv ^ biiiding to commit Ireaioe gaie*
fu%^ or, hi the words of the act itself,
^ mny tnamm i* and has boldly maintained
that it wufuld be a snfficieot libelfing to
state that fact. And he has also said a
great deal about the imposaftility of
stming httt whidi were only in tiitention,
and never took place. These doctrines
the iofonaant snaU presently oonsider.
B«l. ikt proscontor has entiiely avoided
the ease of the oath allegsd to purport to
bind to. comtut a fdom^y and hni not
attempted an aosfpetf to die iirealstible
lUuelntiMs snggcsttod in Ihe.heariig on
A. D. \%Vt.
[414
this point > and to diis, in the.fittt place
the informant requests Ifae attention of
yonr lordships*
Suppoeing,then, that an oalh had been
adminialered, which the proeeeutor thought
purported to bind die party to oommit e
fikmy : How must he • lav this in the
minor proposition of the inaictmenir? 1.
If he were to lay it as the proseeutor sug-
gests, in the words of the statute, would
it not be manifosdy no eharge at all?
^ In 80 fiur as yen did on die day of
te. ndsainister an oath, pur-
porting, or intending to bind the party
tiddng it to commit miyfdamf punisfaabie
with death.'' B^ysucii a charge^ the panel
would be left to conjecture, wAkA ttffioc
kminifihlKk^ he was accused of having
bound the petty to commit; and it ia
quite nnneeessaxy to say, that it would be
utterly irrelevant. 2*. If the prosecutor
libelled, that tim oath puq>orted to bind
«to coBimit ye&ni|r," or *^ 9 fdmtyf* or
^ asBis folony f the indictment wovAd in
aU these caaes he plaitdy bad, as in foot
centaining no- allegation of the panel
having administered an oath, pniportnig to*
bind to the eomnlissien ef my ipegHk or
eNoum emne.
When this '» stated in* m geneiui view,,
ike truth of die propositioB cannot pos-
sibly be denied. No prosecutor would
have the face to present such an indict*
meat to the Court.. But the sort of
reasoning wfaidi die prosecutor hero
applies to the case of treason, Ott|fht Xq
tJord him en equidly good plea, in the
ease of e& oath alleged to bind to commit
folony; and the informant does not know
that he win not maintain it. Hemaybe
supposed to state, that, besides alleging
that die oath purported to bitid to commit
foloay, he had recited the purport cf the
oadi its^ and diat from that purport, or
the meditated ads implied in it, the par-
doular felony intended nicgA^ lypdsalWtffy
he eoUeeted; and that it is the province of
die jurjr to determine, whether it Is ait
oadi. binding to commit folony or not*
The informant firmly beliefus, diat suck
reasoning, if applied to the case of felony,
would only require to be stated to shew
dm impottibility of maintaining it. But
the iflformant shall take the liber^ of ob-
serving, that, even if the precise/rc^ whicb
the osSh Was alleged to bind the party to
commit were set fordi, the indictment
would be cleMrljrbad, if it did not state
Mrfiefisnr tf the fdmy, the obligation to
commit which waa to be proved by the
ootttemfiBdon el the fiMst, to the per-
fimnance of which the oath purported to
hind* Hie act trhidi consdmtes, ojr
aflbtdrthe evidence of a felony, irnot the
folony itaelf. There may be many
qmdities in te same act, which essentially
' vm^ the maldeveiiioadon either erime
41ft] 57GEaRGB HI.
arising out of it. The wme act ittay be
evidence of many different feloniet • And
of this no better illustration can be giren,
than that which was suggested in the de-
bate. Suppose the prosecutor had libelled
that the panel had administered an oath,
gurporting to bind the partr to commit a
tlony, aikl that he had explained this, by
stating^ that he had administeced an oath,
purporting to bind the 'party to carry
awify a certain quantity of com from the
place where it was deposited, and deliver
It to a certain shipmaster : When the
panel objected to the relevancy of such an
nidietnient, the prosecutor might answer
as he does here — ^I have libelled thefiu^t
which took place, that the oath was ad-
ministered, and I have libelled that it was
done wickedly and feloniously : Let me
go to the jury, and I vrill satisfy them
,tliat the ftct which the party was bound
** to do by the oath was an act of some /e^oiiy
OP mother. If the Court permitted this,
the panel might come into Court; be-
lieving that the prosecutor meant to say
that tibe obligation intended was to steal
the com, and might come prepared to
prove that it was Ms own property. He
might then find, that the prosecutor did
not intend to allege thefts but frmiMaU
htmknfftejf. Suppose the panel were even
preparad for this charge, and ready to
prove that he was not banlurupt ; he might
then find, that the prosecutor meant to
allege an engagement ibr abstracting the
com from a storehouse, and so to commit
felony,* under the statute of lltfa Geo.
3rd. He might be prepared for this also,
- and able to shew that the case was not
within the statute. But, though prepared
for all theee felonies, he might find the
intention of the prosecutor to ,be, to prove
that the oath purported or intended to
bind the party to deliver the grain to a
shipmaster who had been residing six
months in France, and so to commit felony
by holding intercourse with a person in
that situation, contrary to the non-inter-
cottfM act of the Geo. 3id.
fiut this is only an example of what
runs through the whole law. . The
statutory felonies in England amount to
many hundreds, and have been constantly
increasing. Many of them are distin-
guished from one aaother by the nicest
shades of difference, though consisting in
the same direct act. But, unless the pro-
secntor were bound to state, what de-
nomination of crime he alleged the oath
to bind the party taking it to commit, he
might jnst as wA be permitted* to say in
Snerali that it bound tim to commit
jony in the abstract, or enjr fdofn^^
' according to the ingenious supposition of
< the prosecutor. The prisoner could only
gness at die nature of me Ghargeintended,
and could only grope in the oarit for the
Tfki qfAndren M^KwIetf
L416
ciraumstanees most material for his de-
fence.
The ease of felony is indeed so veiy
dear, that the prosecutor has not ventured
to touch it. An indictment never could
be sustained, which did not specify the
particular species of felony which the
prosecutor alleged the oath to bind the
party to commit. The informant readily
admits, that the prosecutor is entitled to
assume the troth of Xhtfaett especially set
forth. He only says, that the indictment
must be sufficient wfoint ofaoerment^ and
that, first of all, there must be a distinct
oBegtOion that the oath did purport or
intend to bind to the commission of a
MptaficfiAmf. To say, that it bound to the
commission of folony in the abstract^
would be altogether nugatory, and could
not be sent to a jury under ai^ eiicuin-
stances.
But the prosecutor directs himself
solely to the case of treasonr; and, because
it is more a matter of common language
to speak of treason as a particular offence
than to use the same expression as to
felony, he presses ^our lordships to the
adoption or a ralr m the enforoement of
this statute, in tbe case of an oath alleged
to bind to the- commission of a treason,
which would be totally inadmissible in
the case of an oath alleged to bind to
the commission- of a felony. But this
is a very unsatisfactoiy way of resolving
either the legal principle, or the sub*
stantial justice or this question. The
statute here speaks of ** amf treason,'* and
of ** amf folony,^ by phraseology identically
tlie same: In both, it uses technical
legal terms : And the efiect of it must
be resolved, not by any false -impressions
arising ftom the practice of fimnliar dis-
course, but by the true legal diaracters of
the denominations employed. And when-
ever your lordships come to consider what
treason really is in the contemplation of
law, mid what the legislature means, when
it speaks iir a statute of an obygation U>
commit amf treaean, the informant believes
it will be found, tiiat it is by for the
dearest case of the two ; and tlmt, if the
prosecutor would be bound to specify tke
fdony, to the commission of whidi he
alleged an oath to bind, it is still more
necessary, that he should be required to
spedfy the particular treason, to which he
alleges the oalh in this case purports to
bind those to whom it is said to have been
administered.
Here the informant finds himself in a
very unexpected difficulty. The law of
treason is matter of English law. ^ It de-
Sends on statates, and on the dfeta and
edsions of the judges and lawyers who
have written and sfmen on the subject.
And the great body of tfiis law of treasoa
lies in the woik of afar Matthew Bale,
my
for ^Afbl^Ulorin§f Uttla}/^ (kdh$.
A. D. 1817,
[4It
nM^ Itqui il9 tist i^ppearao^ to the
IMMfBol nMNM9t» )iu be^ looked VP to
tilfcejppidfftioB jof creiy thing alf^ thftt
1^ imr ben writteo or s^d on this most
JMresliqg braaeh of teir. Ait, to the
AAffpoiie of the infomiiAt't oouayel^ and
Afj lieUeTe as wi^ to the surprise of
gpour lordships, the authority of |)ij|l great
j^idge and laiwver, equMljr preiouad in
4ke ImmiDg of his pvofBMiont iooornipt
ip the tferoaa of his pnhlic fiin^ons,
And inoat esedlent in evBiy Diirate quality
^Mcb can add dipntyeAdTalae to the
bikhtest taleatSv has be^ at oncp cast
^SMM bgr te leaned peosecntMr, as ^ no
5V»lght in acnestiottof tiiason; u dia-
mgiiAid by the judges of Engiaad, and
m itt 4nee pnc dovn by the snnposed
atenoe of lora Loiighhoiieqtfi» ana by a
Htffw passages selected from the woifcs of
sir Kiiteel Foster, serj^ant Hawkins, aod
Mx^ Hnine. The infonnant never heaid,
that the naaoe of lord Longhboiough could
Iw motioned in a aueaUon of law, in
oppositioo to that or lord Ilale. The
treatise of sir Michael Foster is un-
doubtedly of the hi^esi authority. But,
though on some few particular points, that
giaai judge differs from the statemeau of
hml Hale, the truth is, that bis disooorse
is nothing more than n short commeoury
on the detailed law of treason, as laid
down by sir Matthew Hale, which is
tbtongfaont vetoRod to, as the basis on
which every snooeeding writer must build
whatever additione or changes the progress
of lime has suggested.
Jndge Foster was a gveat loyer of the
S«volnti<l» Mtablishment ; and he has
told nsy in ^ pfeface to his first edition,
that he attiibutad ai^ mbtakes ifito which
teid Hale had fidlen, chiefly to the oppo-
site prejudices which he had early re*
miwaw ow that subject. But he never
aptale tf him but with tks most profound
i«^oot and veneration. *^Why, there-
fiMS^ mas^ not a sood sulj^ect, be it in
SWson or oat of siiasoo, (eaotioo the
younger port of the professioo agaiiist the
pv^judaces whioh tbe nhme of lofd«chief-
JQstioe Hale, • noais snsr himciiiBr$d and
ftimmei, may otherwise beget; in them?
I> for my ^pait, make no ajmlogy for the
freedom I Ittve taken with the sentiments
of an anther, wtos memory Jcen love ami
Aoooar, without adopting any of his mis-
takes upon the subject of gcvenmiaU, It
cannet be denied, and I see no reason for
making a pecret of it, that the learned
judge hath, in bis writfag^ paid no regard
to the frimMn 199m vAoh 4he rmtoluthn
' aadprueai Mpipjy stfaWi^wtfrf aHjmnded.
The psevailing opinions 'of the tames in
which he received his first^impressions,
. might mislead him.''— '< lie was nndoubi-
e^ .foeof grai tn hit pr^/biion; alid,
which raiseth even a great ehanwter in-
VOL. XXXIU.
fiai^ely higher ip point of real merit and
esteem, he was, ,in every relation of life,
^a good ^an; though the reotitqde of his
intentions, ^ile under the strong bias of
early prqodices, might sometimes betray
him into great mistakes.'^ In another
part of his work,* he has said expressly,
in allusion to Hawkinp, *^ This has been
urged with some advantage by a good
moderii writer on the crown law. Hie heet
we kam Bzcsrr Ha lb.'' Thus plainly
settiig Hale at the hefid of allthewntera
on the crown law.
Bnt the infonnant has said too nraeh
on this subject. The lepntatioa o^ sir
Matthew Hale as a lawyer, and his aa-
diority on the law pf treason^ will proba-
bly survive the cases of Edgar and
M^Kinley. Bat it is worthy of remailc,
that the tendency of the prdndiofs to
vrhich Foster alludesy was a tendencjjr, not
in favour of the persons accused of trea-
son, but against them, and in support of
prerogative ; and the only passage whidi
the prosecutor has condescended to quote
from Hale, is a passage which, whether
just or not, is certainly of this tendency.
The prosecutor will hardly obtain inudh
benept in this view, by applying to ur
Michael Fmter to aet aside the authority
of Hale.
It is, however, of more importance to
tttke notice, that in truth, the most mate-
rial point in which Foster's statement of
the law of treason differs from that of
Hale, is preciselv that point to which the
passages quoted from Foster by the pio-
eeeutor relate; and it is remarkable, mat,
in that disputed question. Hale and Foster
each took the side which was likely io ha
the result of his own ruling opinions.
The point itself, so far as it is here ma*
teriaf, shall be presently attended to.
It is known to your lordships, that,
previous to the statute of the 25th £dw.
3rd, the law of treason was extremely un-
certain, $0 that, by means of the con-
structive treasons which were every day
invented, or applied to particular ^ases,
there was scarcely any breach of law or
oflfenoe towards the government, which
the spirit of party or of tyranny could
not convert into a chaige of high treason.
Hale, after giving some examples, says,"*
''3v these, {Old the like instances that
might bo given^ it appearp how uncertain
and arbitrary the enme of treason was
before the statpte of 2tfth Edward 3rd,
wber^by it came to pass, that every ofence
tbat was, or seemed to b^, a breach of the
feith and allegianoe due to the king, was,
by construetioQ, and consequence, and
interpretation, raised into the offence of
high treason, ^od we need no greater
2 £
♦ Foster, p. 20r.
t Hale» P. C. p. a2y 83.
4id]
57 GEORGE III.
Trial ^Andrem M'Kmky
[430
instance of this maltiplication of con-
structive treasons, than the troublesome
reign of king Richard 2ndy which, though
it were after the limitation of treasons by
the statute of 25th Edward 3rd, yet things
were so carried by factions and parties in
this king's reign, that this statute was
little observed, but as this and the other
party prevailed, so the crima of high
treason were in a manner arbitrarily im-
posed, and adjudged to the 4iMdvantage
of that party which was intended to be
suppressed/^ &c.
Hale states a most remaikable example
of ^is, which he undeniably eives as an
instance of direct violation of the statute
of Edward 3rd. In the 10th Richard*2nd,
a commission far the redress of {grievances
veas granted by the king, /)n the impor-
tunitv of some of the great Lords and of
the Commons, to the archbishop of Can-
terbury and others, which was thought
prejud icial to the king's prerogative. After
this, the king call^ together the two
^hief justices, Tresilian and Thiriinge,
and other judges, and put various ques-
tions to them ; among others this : ^ Qua-
lem pcenam mereatur, qui compulertmf
five actanmt regctn ad cotaentkndwn confeo"
fiom dictarum tUUuti, ordinationis, et com-
missionis ? Ad quam questionem, unani-
mit^r responderunt^^uMf stmt utproditoret
m&ith pumendi.*^ lliere were eight odier
questions put to these judges, to which it
is unnecessary to refer. It will be ob-
served, that the crime attributed in the
above question to the persons alluded to,
was that of compelling or forcing the
king to consent \o a certain statute; and
there could be no doubt, that that act was
an overt Mt of high treason. But these
judges took it upon them to say, Azi it
was in iiielf^ a ireaton. And your lord-
ships will now see, what Hale states oon-
ceming the result of these opinioiit.
^ This extravagant, as well as extrajudi-
cial declaration of treason by these judges,
gave presently an universal offence to the
kingdom ; for presently it brought a great
insecurity to all persons, and the next
parliament cnutino purifkatUmis '11th
Richard 2nd, there were divers appeals of
treasons by certain lords appellors, where-
in many were convict of high treason
under general toordi of accroicJdng'rfnfal
power, SUBVERTI190 THE REALM, &c. and
imong the rest, thoie very judges, that had
thus liberally and arhUrarily expounded
treason in answer to the kinf^s qvestions,
vere ^or that very cause ai^ged guilty of
treaiony and had judgment to be nanged,
dra^wn, and quartered, though the exe-
cution was spared ; and they having led
the way by an arbitrary construction of
treason not within the statute, they fell
* Hale, P. C. 84.
under the same hie by the like aiMtrary
construction of the crime of treason.^
Accordingly, all these judges were ba-
nished to Ireland, except Tresilian,* who
ufos eseaiUd acoorHmg to the jud^gment.
Hale states, that the tide again turned,
and by the 21st Richard 2nd, the stat^ of
the matter was reversed ; yet that act was
afterwards repealed bj the Ist.Heniy 4th;
and Hale adds, f'* Though the statutes
of Ist, Edward 6th, and 1st Mary, have
taken away those treasons, which either
the statute of 11th Richard 2nd, or 1st
Henry 4tb, had introduced, more than
were in the statute of 25th Edward 3rd,
yet it hath not taken away the efficafcy of
'the parliaments of 11th Richard 2ndi and
3rd )ienry 4th, as to their delarations^ that
the extrqfLdicial opimons of those judges tocre
filse and erroneous; but m that respedt the
parliaments of 1st Henry 4th, and 11th
Richard 2nd, are offoroe^ as to the damv-
IMO OP THOSE EXTRAVAGANT AND UN-
WARRAMTABLE opsnums and dedarationsJ*^
In concluding the chapter on ^ Treasons
at the common law, and their uncertainty,''
Hale, referring to those examples in the
reign of Richard 2nd, says; X that, from
such instances it appears, * ** How danger-
ous it is to depart from the letter of thai
statute, and to multiply and enhance
crimes into treason by amhiguous andgene^
ral words f as accroaching rf royal power,
SUBVBRTTIIG of FUKDAlf EVTAL LAWS, WSd
the like; and how dangerous it is to
depart from the letter of Uiat statute, and
by construction and analogy to make trea-
sons, where the letter of the law has not
done it : for such a method admits of no
limits or bounds, but runs as far as the
wit and inyention of accusers, and the
odiottsness and detestation of . persons
aocnsed, will cany men."
The statute of Bdward 3rd, settled the
law on this sabject, by dedaring all the
treasons ander defined and tedmical de-
nominations; and lord Hale aanounces
them in the following tertts : || ** The se-
▼eral high treasons hereby declared are
these: 1st, The compassing of the death
of the king, queen, or prince, and declar-
ing the same by an overt act ; 2od, The
violation or carnal knowledge of the
king's cpnsort, the king's eldest daughter
unmarried, or the prince's wife ; Srd, The
levying of war against the king ; 4th, The
adhering to the king's enemies, withia
the land or vrithbut, and declaring the
same by some overt act ; 5th, The coan-
terfeiting of the great seal or privv seal ;
6th, The counterfeiting of the kings coin,
or bringing counterfeit coin into this
realm ; 7th, The killing of the chancellor,
•l St. Tr. 13,14; 1 How. St.Tr. 117.
+ Hale, P. C. 266. t Ibid. 86.
II Ibid. 91.
431]
for Administering unlamjfitl Oaths,
A. D. 1817.
L4d2
tretswer, justices of the one bench or the
•Iher, justices ia eyre, justices of assize,
. justices of oyer and ternuoer, in their
places, doing their ofltos."
Four other treasons have been intro-
t doced, 1st, With regard to papists ; 2nd,
In relation to impairing' the coin ; 3rd ,
Any attempt to 'Obstruct the protestant
soceession, &c.; and 4lb, By the 36th
Geoige 3rd, c. 37, it is made treason to
amiptast WMigflw, Mwen/, ^c. to levy war, in
' order to compel the king to clmnge his
measnres or counsels, or to put him under
constraint, &c. Bat your lordships will
observe, thai this last treason does not
consist in any conspiracy jfor obtmmnf an
akenOtm ef tke tisa, bat expressly in a
c<mamw^ to Itwf war tor that puipoee.
fiat the importaot peiDt is, that by the
.« U^, as established by ^ act of Edward
3rd, and acknowledged ever since, what-
ever additional treasons may be intro-
duced, tWe is a complete separation of
the differeiit existing (fvosims, or speckt
of the generic crime. There is a defined
certainty in the denomination which
belongs to each ; and nothing whatever
can be described as a treason, which is
not one or other of the treasons thus
established in the law. In short, the
separation of all dte treasons from one
another is as complete by the statute,
and has been as anxiously insisted on
by every writer, and by every judge, who
deserves to be quoted on the subject, as
the sepaiation of the different species of
felony.
Now,, one of the most important con-
sequences of tins accurate definition of
the various treasons existing in the law,
. i8> that there is an essential distinction
between tvery treason iMfy and the overt
act J or actSy which will be sufficient to
support or to prooc the charge of it. Lord
Hide goes ^M^gh all the treasons which
had been declared in his time, and ex-
plains separately, what that particular
treason consists in, and what overt acts
shall be sufficient to sustain the charge.
Por example, treating of treason in com-
passing the death of the king, oueen. Ice.
M considers separately*, ''3, whaitthaU
he said a compassing or imamuing if eny of
tkeir dentksr and, <'4, What sh^l be
evidence^ or an overt act, to prove such
imasijuiig." Under the first of these
heads, he saysf-, that the words compMs
orjnw^tne ''remr to the purpose or design
of the mind or will, thougn the purpose
Or design take not effect.*' Ahtr explain-
ing this, he adds, I '' Compasnng the death
ef the king, is hi|^ treason, though it he
not effected; but because the compassing
is'only an act of the mind, and cannot of
*Bal^P.C.9l,93. imA.lW. t Ibid. 108.
I
itself be tried without some ooeri act to
evidence it, such an overt act is requisite
to make such compassing or imagination
high treason. De quo ia/raJ'* And in a
note it is said, *' In so much that where
the Jcing is aatualfy murdered,, it is the
coomassing Ids death .tsMch is the treason,
SM not the kilting, which is onfy an overt
act.— -Keling, 8." This was in the case
of the regicides; and no more plain il-
lustration can be found of the distinction
between that which is treason in law, and
that which is an overt act to prove it.
The treason by levying war, establish-
ed .by the 2/»th. Bdward drd, is also ex-
plained at great length ; and lord Hale*,
alluding to the clause of the. statute,
speaks of it as "this obscwe clause of
levying wfer against the king." Accord-
iogly^ this obscurity produced a contro-
versy, which is the subject of the passa-
. ges so anxiously quoted by the prosecutor
from sir Michael Foster. The difference
was just this. Lord Hale saysf, tliat
<< to make a treason within the clause of
this statute, there must be three things
concurring; 1, It must be a levying of
war; 2, It must be a levying of war
smiinst tke king;. 3, It must be a levying
. of war against the king in Alt reo^.'' On
the first of these points, he sayst» that
it is a question of fact requiring many
circumstances which it is difficult to
enumerate or define, '* and commonly is
expressed by the words, more guerrino
arraiati. As, where people are assem-
bled in great numbers, armed with
weapons offensive, or weapons of war,
if they march thus armed in a body ; if
they have chosen commanders or officers;
if they march cum vextillit espUcatis, o|
with drums or trumpets, and the like;
whether the greatness of their numbers,
and their continuance together doing
these acts, may not amount to more
guerrino arraiati, may be considerable.''
After stating that a hare conspiracy to
levy war and provide weapons, &c.
. though it may in some cases be an overt
act ^ composting the king*i death, .is not
treason under the head of the statute of
Ism^warva a substantive tr^«^on ; he
adds, '' Again, the actual assembling of
many rioters in great numbers, to do
unlawful acts, if it be not mode guerrino,
or tfi tpecie belli, as if they have no military
arms, nor march or contipue together
in the posture of war, may make a
great riot, yet doth not aUoayt amount to
SiUmpng of war, — Vide Statute 3rd and
4th Kdward 6th, cap. 5 ; 1 Mar. c. 83."
. This last is the point on which Foster
differs. He says, that the true criterion
is, quo ammo did the parties assemble ?"
That is, whether for a purpose, of a
.♦ Hale, 148. t Ibid. 130. J Ibid. 131.
M»]
57 GfiOROE IIL
Trka ifAnJr^ M*Kh^
pritrale or particolar Batumi ^ for a
porpose of genenl concem? and he
says, ^ ** But every imunrdum whichy
in judgaent of law, is intended against
Ibtf person of tiie king, be it to
defhrome or imprison him, or to
oblige him to alter his measores of
government, or to remove evil counsel-
lor! from about him— these ritjpift all
amo«M to levyinff vrar within the srtatute,
whether attended with te P<Mttp vad
circumstances of open war or not. And
every eompiraa^ to levy war for these
purposes, thn^ not treason within the
clause of levying, wtfi is yet an overt ■
met within the ether danse^ of eompattmg
the hMi death.'* And then he explains,
what shall be deemed a Ivryvig m war
in this sense, " m coiutructian of law^
ae distinguished from the direct levving
^ war against the king himself; and to
maik the distinction between these, he
adds, t^hat is also a dear matter of law
(independent nt least of the aet of the
80th Geo. 3rd,); ** But a bare oatigpirat^
for eifecting a rising for Ms putpotee
menthmd in the iioo preceSng tectums
md «i the next^ is not an overt act of
compassing the king's dewA. Nos vrill
it eome under otap species of treason
vnthin the. 35th Bdward 8id, fmAst the
rising he efeeted. And in that case, the
conspirators, as vrell as the actonr^ will
all b* equslff guilty ; for in high treason
of an kinds, all the fartkipes erimmU are
frindpaAs.'' And, mr all tlAi doetrine,
oster refers particularly to the cases of
Oamaree and Purchase in the i^n of
qaeen Anne.
Now, there is perhaps so very great
diifereuce, after alt, between the doctrine
of Hale and that of Foster. For, in the
passage above quoted hath Hate, he only
says, that the assembling of rioters for
muawfol acts, without thd apparatus of
war> *'doth npt srfioeys amomt toa levy-
Im of war;'' and though he does geneN
9XL9 reqttire tiie assembling mon SelU as
a distinetive qnality of the levying war.
it k verY dottbcftil, whether he vroold
Ikaye dHKred at all fnm the Mg meat
in the case of DaomiM and nithase.
Hie obfeet in that ceie was, the de-
Mruetion of e0 meetiug-honset of the
dlBseoten; and though the peieotts aa-
iembled had not the regular accoutre-
ments of an army, they were provided
with implemer^ts proper for the purpose
intended, such as **ac#, crows, and other
foob, of the like natuire f end Purchase
vrtis taken when aetuAlly assaulting the
military vrith A dntuji^ swo^
But it IS uhnecessaty to puriu^ this
inquiry. The informimt cehn()t tee, in
Whkt Way it aids the pleik df the prosecutor,
* l^ost^, pi 210> 3tl. t ttid. p. 213.
C4M
to fchew tkk difletepBe beilraea Hsleand
FoMer, unless^ indeed, his meawMg be,
to throw aside the anttiority of Hide alto-
gether, on odMT points^ in- which he is not
eontradieled, but eoafirasiad, by Foster.
If the proseenlotf cMild have shewn,
that, in the eases of Damaree and Pur-
chase, it had been held not to he ms^usmj^
to mt forth that was wAs iMVta»mmntt
thekM, but only tcr state tbs mn^Sct of
assembling to putt down all meuing-
houses, the infonaant conld uadentand
the obiect of these quotatioaa fiwm Fos-
ter. But Foeter himself* sIMii timt in
those eves, '<The iAdiotmei^ ehimd,
that the prisonem, witideawiiif udr
allegiaaDe, foe. and coiOBpiiing te^ hMend-
iag to distort) tie pnUio pease and tnn-
quilli^ of &• kingdom^ dsd taitorously
compass, imagine, and intend, to leey
end rake war, rebellion, and* insoitMBtion,
against the queen, withirt iMue kingdom ;
and that, in order to eomplfete and effect
these their traiteioQS intentiona and im-
aginations, they, on the ^y of
at with a makltude of
people, to the nnmbev of 90^^ mined and
arreted in m warlike iadnii», &c. then and
thete traitorously assembled, dU iraitot'
oni^ ordain^ prepere, AKn exyt wae
a^emst the qmen, against tile d«ty of
their allegiance," foc« The diflbrence
of o|Hnion, therefore, such ae it is,
does not at all alfoct the dhtiaut
eeparation of alithe treaaom, aslafd down
by the statute, and by lord Hale. Foster
does not make any thing to be tt^asoa
in law, which Hale did not hoM to be
so; and the tndictmeou in the ipwes of
Damaree and Purchase were laid on the
express allegation that todr had been
aelsttdfy MaL The whole dtfibrtnee is,
on the nature of ^e avcftaet whidi shall
be sufficient to prove a levying of vrar :
But, unless it be avened that Witf vr«s
levied, by whntnver acts it it to be pitwed,
it is dear, oh «very anthoiHy, that there
ii no allegation of a Ihmisii rnamitted.
Another iltaaMtfon of the diflbreiion
between a treawm Ittalf, and tfeg overt
act by whidt it Is piwted) oMMil in a
pdttt inddentally sttfeed in HM ^oot»»
fiOQs above gt?ren. Bufoee th4i act of
the 36fo of tb« king, a wm^ aWHfiiimt.j
to levy wnr was m no oae$ t^ommL Tins
is stattod expresdy both by fial« neid hf
Poster. Yei i, <A>nMyiltgr to Hf9f wnr
itM«f% qgtffoir the mg, U Md h¥ them
both to be $n&oertact of oempoisnifc the
kiog^s deatli ; whii* both «liO dgM^ thnt,
in the cMie of M coitmmtto$ ot ^muptm
taaoB levytag «f wek*, wMsh tiki Mbt aa
miidi against tlw ktdff A pMtafti fts Ifaiiiat
fait gov«ftiift4Rit) a bfldtl rtHfi-^jF W levy
war of thai kind ia as^
• FOIMr,pi
m§i
Jcr ^HmlM0i»iwt mla^tfil|^ Oaihs.
•f tanftwiag tbe kui|^9 ^IwHi. Your
lordildps.Mdy thaiefof^ thai ia Uia one
case, a oonspiracy to do tktit nAiekf if
damtf wmM MmUm^ iretaom^ is declared
mi to h^ tieafoa^ and yet to be an
cwert mt 4d eonprtf^ag the king's death,
^hkhtrlreBaon; and in the other case,
the mete euwydruty to do that which
ipoidd bt ti^enony m levying war against
the govenmeAt^ and so caiuirueiiveh
ngMaei tbe fclnf^ ia neither tnaeon itself,
not efveh an overt 9i<Hk of eoapawing the
hing^e deafhi
Keeping theae poinia in view, the in-
formant most now come a little closer to
tbn pneise poin* of difference between
Inm mA the pfodncolor in this casf • The
pTQMonlor nmintaios, that he is not
&onnd to set fenb in the indictaMnt the
ri6t treason, which be means to allege
oMh adniinislered bound the party
to 0OBMut« For if he ia bound to set
Ibrth thii epecific treason, it wiil be an
oa^ matter to shew^ that he has not
dene aob lie is oUiged to admiti that if
this wnre .in inditlment for treason,
it wonld be bni, if it did not expressly
ati^n what paErticdnr treason, under
the slilntesf the pnsener Waa charged
At least, the informant pre-
that diis mnai bo admitted;
hecanna, if it is nol^ the contrary position
wMd jiasft bo a remal of all the con-
flhKwtivo tffcaapna# and all the uncertain^
existed befotn the stainte of Ed-
9id. It most be admltted> that
the oaem statemtet of an net^ which
Inight bo an owert mU of iome known
♦r<aaan» wonld *oi be snffieieiK tUlegntion
of tto. orioM of treason, nnAess the
spclsftu tfftaaon woee in the fint place
Bta%pd| tel is^ mt^ eompasdmg the
king's daatby §r kvying War, or ad-
bonby to the king's etaeminy filo* But
the pweocBitor sajSy tfiat this is not an
for tioaaon^ but an indiettnent
a certain onthi and
that hois not bdnod to slale any thing
nMO llian Iho nrtimi pnrpoK of tbat oath,
nnd is entilisd to infer thoeeitpon^ that
it is Ctt omh binding 4he party to 4mmmi
This plea soams tn bo answavad, the
iMemont it is sadnoedto the flOBMnon sense
of Ihn tinng. Tho pioeoontir eonid not
WiOt a man for 019 «reaosii» without
ipouifjing lis iKOsen* Ho QoaU not
indial a man for nay fofon3% without
spocifoiuglifcefotoiqp. Hie letfiatatwm has
paotide^- tbna foe foot of ninwiiscering
i, fnH^tiig to bind tho pafty to
o^ Uinasy» or on^ fotey, shall
folony. Now, what is it -tiiat tiM
oft this ataaatory oflinee oonsists
in ! Xt is nsf in the mere ndministnition
of an onth, nor inoemi^t meetings, wUr in
an obligation ^ socrotfy, foe. It coniists
. fo. jy. k»n. [4««
ssfojp n tho engagememt undertaken by the
ontb^ to commit a tntmn or o fdom^. ■
And vbaC, then, is « treason or a felony
in lav? The general terms trtoum and
fihw indicate no legal idea, except by
refennce to the numerous specific treasons
and 'eloaies which are established in the
law, The crime here charged, therefore,
Ues n the engagement to commit ont or
alAe' of those fpeet/!c and known felonies
or feisons. to say, that it was an en-
gagtment to commit treason or felony,
witicut specification, is to make an affirm-
atioo which has no meaning in law. If
the prosecutor could not have chaiged the
tnU u the same manner, if it had been
eoimiUedf it is, with submission, impossi-
ble 10 make sense of the plea, that he is
enttled here to charge the imposition of
the mgogemeiU to do it as the crime of
thii statute. Tho crime is in the imposi-
tioi of .an engagement to commit a trea-
soi. But the prosecutor could not havo
chirged a treason as actually committed,
by stating the veiy same things as ctone,
whch he here says the party was hoimd to
4» Andp therefore, it follows, with sub-
mssioB, as clearly as any conclusion in
fiidid, that this is not a legal charge,
tbit an oath was administered, binding
thijarijf to eommU a truuon,
Aie prosecutor says more than once,
thit he cannot state or prove the manner
aid circumstances of an act which never
WIS committed. But this is an entire mis*
a^diansion of the pointy tho informant
is not requiring him to state the manner
aol circumstances of any act. What he
auires is this: The prosecutor avers,
I must avor, that the informant admi-
natered an oath, pur|K>rting or intending
t^bind the party takii^ it to commit a
tnaton. The informant requires him to
stne^ wM tfecjfic treason the oath did
pnnpprt to bind the party to commit ? If
neinas a oase at all, he innt^ know what
tietton he means to say to ike jmy tho
oati bonad the party to eommiL If ho
oantot state that it bound to the cooh
misdoa of o tp4eifie treason^ he has no
rightio try the informant upon this Ij^tute ;
and ir be does know his own meaning, ho
.is boiiid to state it for 0ie information of
the paael» and of the Court; and at any
rate, without it then is no alleigation of
an oath to commit treason at all.
Bo^ in truth, the prosecutor is ready
enoo^ to state what he nails tiie ocf^
thau^ only in contemplation. He baa
in aU his indictments atated it nearly in
the same way ; and here be states it, by
describing the oath to be an nath'^pur-
portiog, or intending to bind the persona
taking the same to commit treason, by
obtaiimg mrnual parUaments tmd u^ioenal
SH^wi^ *y phynpal Mrengtk or >ra, and
thirtky ^fiuimg Tua H^nvBASflOQi «M^ ths
437] ffl GEORGE IIL
TVmTa
M*tBiJig
tis»
ESTABLISHCD OOVBENMENT, Um^ mid COn"
itittUion of this kingdom, Iw miaurfki and
violent means," lliis is indeed an aver-
ment of an act said to have bet) in con-
templation in the administratftn of the
oath. It is an averment of an ac intended,
which, if done, might have been an overt
act of some treason. Bnt it U not an
Hverment of that as intended, y/hih if dene,
would have been itsdf a treason. On the
contrary, it is precisely sach aa iverment
as all the authorities hat e repnbated as
a charge of treason, and for the tatemant
of wUch, as treason, the jcdges of
B^cbard the second suffered so sfvereW.
It has been shown, th«i the mm% ncl
may be an overt act of manj different
felonies. But the same is true '<»f treason.
The same act may be an act of compass-
ing the king's death, of conspiriQ( to levy
war, of adhering to the king's inemies,
or an act of treason under the no^inter-
course acts during the late war; and an
oath blinding to commit such an set must
be precisely in the same prediMmaent,
and must be characterised in tie very
same manner that is necessary ii regard
to the act itself. Suppose a penon ad-
ministers an oath to another, bmdng him
to deliver certain goods or momy to a
person in France. Allowio^ the prose-
cutor for the present to take his ovn views
as to the meaning of the statute, ifhen it
speaks of the purport or intendmefik of the
oath, it is obvious, that, supposing a trear
sonable intention, the act may be m overt
act of many treasons. 1, The objict may
be, to bribe a person to come to Bigland
to murder the king. 2, It may be to
raise troops, or purchase arms, in lirther-
ance of a cofnspiracy to levy war, 3, It
may be to give md to the kuufs memies ;
or, 4, It may be treasoniinaer ^e non-
intercourse acts, by binding to the ex-
^ portation of goods not japanned.
fiut can it possibly be maintamed, that,
the prosecutor, in soch a case, would be
entitled to lay simply fAe/acr, thtt an oath
was administered, binding the* party to
commit treason, by delivering;tbe goods
in the manner engaged for, wiftout aped-
iying the particular treason/ whiA he
alleged to be thereby engaged for f > Un-
doubtedly the prosecutor here maintains
that he would. The panel so accused
might come prepared to shew, that there
was no compassing the hinges death; that
there was no conqriracy to leey war; and
that there was no oikarence to the kmg*s
enemies; and he might be catched in a
capital felony, because the prosecutor
proved the goods not to be japmrned, and
adduced circumstances to infer that the
exportation of such roods was the object
of the oath ; although, if ihe prisoner had
known what the treason inuSnded woe, he
could perhaps have proved,, either that
the goods were japanned, orthathehad
reasonable ground to heUece them to be-
japanned. . '
If it is clear, therefore, that, in aUeging-
treason directly, it is- quite inssfficient to-
allege an act which may be an oveft act
to prove a treason r it seems to be at-
least equally clear, tiiat, in an indictment
for administering an oath alleged to bind <
to the commission of a treason, it cannot
be enough to state the engagement to d»<
an act,, which, if done^ woald be an overt
act of some treasom In < both caaes^ the
speoimt tMison intanded must be set
forth.
The prosecutor seems to-svppoaa* that
the circumstance of the present qoeatioD-
relating to an engagement, or an intent
tioB^ one step removed tom the actoai
ease of treason, is to have the efiect of
doing away all the rules of the law of
treason, and ' admitting all the loosenesa-
of construction which has been so often,,
and so much condemned. But the infor-
mant shall put a case, where the very same-
thing must have existed, and yet where
the attempt to stale <the overt act in place
of the specific treaaon, could not be
maintain^ for a moment. Supoose that
before the act of the 36tli of the king,,
tlwre had been an indietment groandra
on the fact of coMpMky to levy war to
depose the king. As already explmned,.
evidence of snd^ a conspiracy would have
been evidence of an overt act ofcomp&smng
the king's death, although the bare con-
spiracy, not carried into actual effect,,
would not have been treason itself. Now,
if the mdKctment had laid merely theyoc^,
would it have been ^ any answer to the
objection of irrelevan(^ founded on the
omission to lay compasssng theTcin^s death,
to say, that the overt act had bean laid,
and that it belonged to the jury to infer
the specific treason 1 The answer would
have been, that it was not an allegation of
i0iy treason. Certainly, it could not have
been listened to for a moment.
But there is another case, actmUy de-
cided, and of a far stronger import than
the pteseiit argument requires,, which
seems to the informant to be quite deci-
sive 6f this whole matter. He refers to
the ease of Rex varmf Kendal and Roe,,
decided by lord-chief-justice Holt in the
reign of kiiHs William.* Kendal and Boe
Were committed prisonen to Newgate, bv
a warrant of the secretary of stale, which
authorised the keoper to reoove them,.
<' they being ehargea tsM high treamm, in
being prnw to and amsiing ihe escape of
sir James Montgomery, out of the custody
« Rex V. Kendal and Roe ; 7 William 3rd.;
Raymond's Reports, vol. 1, p. 65, 66, 67;
Salkeld, vol. 1, p. 346 ; State Trials^ ft^ 554
to 562; 12 How. St. Tr. 1299.
48»t
Jot AdmnidmHg wdm^l Oatkt.
A. D. 1817.
[430
of W&lliam Svtioo, one of has malest^r's
messengen in oidiiuffj, and ekatgfd unih
ki^ treaum. You are to keep them in
safe and doie custody, until thiy ahall be
debreied bjr due eoune of law/' A writ
of BabMe.Corpus having bean obtained,
by which the prisonen demanded to be
admitlad to bail, a question aioae, whe-
ther this was a good commilinent for
treason; and difeent exceptions were
taken to the warrant. ! The only one that
is material is thus. stated by lord Ray-
mood: << LoiCZjr, Th« di6fendant*s counsel
took exception to the retom, diat the
imaumfor wlmkurJamei MimigBmiry toot
tommUted^ wot not tptofisd m ikt wmrmU
2' tommUmeut. For perhaps sir James
ontgomeiy's treason might be sneh as
that &e accessory to it should not be
guilty of high tieasoa. And if a man
teceiTe a counterfeiter of the great seal,
knowing that he is a countemiter, &c.
it u not treason^ 12. Co. 81. ReceiTing
of a coiner, knowing th$it he is such, is
but misprision of treason. But Holt,
chief-justice, said, that there was no au-
thority, ^at a man who breaks prison, and
lets out a coiner, is not a traitor. Bid he
mid all the Court loere of cpmum, thtd wp'
jmmg the crime to be high treaaon^ two
tkingi should kdne hun tpeafied in thevntr-
rmd of oomoatmenir 1, For -what treason
nr James Montgomery vm committed; for
he who breaks the prison is guilty 4»^ the
ePBOiFic treason, 2, It o^t to have
been srerred, that sir James MDntgomery
committed the fact ; because the breaking
of the prison is affected with the same
offence. And therefoie, for this defect,
the prisoners were bailed." SalkeldsUtes
the jfointshortly thus-: Holt, chie^justice,
held, ^ 3rdlv, That sir James Montgoifiery's
treason oa^ to hane been inserted in the
warmUy with an allegation that sir James
did thelact; because the defendants, by
breaking the prison, are gtiil^ of-iht bams
SPMCiFic Ireesofiand oifenee; and for thk
cmne tk^ were iaUed:' In the State
Trials, the case is reported at length; and
lord-chicf-justiee Holt states this point in
the fdlowittg manner: <'But Mr. At*
toroey, the question is, whether yon ought
not to have specked these two thina inyour
wammtSf'Jor what treason sir James was
committed? And my reason is, because
the escape wouldhe the tame spbgies of
treason toith thai for which the party rescued
was committed; and ^ndly, That he had
done a treason, that sir James was guilty.
But Mr. Attorney, will you further con-
sider of it, though I think we must bail
them in the mean time, an Bdbeas Corpus
being a feslinum remedium; but I would
hear my brothers* opinions." "The .other
judges, Rokeby and Byre, concurred in
this point, and the parties were bailed.
The informant cannot help adt^rting
to one of tlearguments of the Attorn^
and SolicftohGeneral of that day, whidi
his msyes^ Advocate seems to have
borrowed ic the present case. ^'Then
Mr. Attomo^eneral and Mr. Solicitor
insisted, thathe rescue of one in custody
on smpMaoBOf treason was treason, that
the seUingfmh the ooert act urns more for
the adoantagkof thenrisoner than Uardv
aBepng tke pedes of treason,"* Le. Hu
m^ty's ad%;ate seems to have adopted
the same opion against all the law of
treason. B^ Lord Chief Justice Holt
held a very dferent doctrine %iid decided
accordingly.
It is eyidei, that the case of a warrant
of oommitmet is a for stronger case than
that^ofan inietment. Even if it could
have been hcl| that the warrant of com-
mitment for iding the escape would be
good, withoi^ specifying tne particular
treason ; it yvald be qnite impossible to
state, that sjkvlietment for that as treason
woidd be gid without specifying the
treason for inch the party, who escaped
had stood conitted. But that is jtst a
case of the sae nature with the present.
The treason here lay MMtedia^ in the
act of aiding le escape, just as the felony
lies here inmiiiately in the act of admin«
isteringthe (th. But in the one case,
the essence dhe crime lay in the treason
committed Y sir James Montgomery,
and in the her, it lies in the treason
which the ot bound the party to com-
mit. In neitkr is it possible to state et^
crime as eomltted, without alleging the
tpecyie treasodsns in the one case, and
tmdert4dcen tod done in the other.
If your lor^nps will now look back to
the statementof Mr. Hume in the pas-
sage ' formerl' quoted, concerning the
necessiw of recision, accuracy, and a
reasonable d^ee of mintitenesi^ in the
statement of e-iiatttre of the cham, and
of the thingoaeant to be esublished
against the p4oner, the informant pre-
sumes you wisee the application which
he intends to lAe of all the detail with
which he hhs Ire trooMed you, In some
matters of me technical expression, the
rules of the la^of England may be more
strict even in lictments, than the rules
of the .law oScotland. But in every
consideration laterial in the present
question, notl)^ can be more certain
than that the ity principle of a Scotch
indictment neosanly requires more pre-
cision, more acnacy, and more- minute-
ness, than everrfts required ,in any Eng-
lish indictment' And yet the learned
prosecutor willperbaps tell uS in this
case, that it -i one of tlie '^unseemly
niceties" to whit he is so fond of alluding,
that^a man shad ' desire to ktiow what
the crime is olvrhich he is accuseid, or
that your Ibrdsfais should desire to see,
4gt2 57 GBORGB ill.
Trial ^jitidum M'Kui^
<tet Umk Is a cwae tit mmmui wmtUf^
befom yM «Jtow an UiiolaMBt to put
to die knowMgeof waMnt. TW i»-
Ibmaai takes the Vtmty of ai^iog,
^thoat the fear e€ fesoaafale oontta-
aiotiooy that, without «a amaiein^ a
spaoiitt tiaauPy as adaitakMi \ff the
ywywt wd intandsBPt of the oath,
tjheia if no stateoMt of any orima
whrnever. Hieia ianaitBlwnat of ^ the
criminal daed,'' aoah %** mt^ 4i$tit^mA
m»fmiMm'9kmwtfimdlttkm'm0mwu
AfAtmrnwH^crm}' This is giving
Aa prsBSsator ^gMijht leaNj intand-
ittg to state a treason i sama soit. Bat
tinly ttKM is no awaiient of « orine at
ail; the stalanMnt bev mnij't that a
man administered anmh, porpaitibgto
bind to oertain aoiSy iMi aia lotaftv a»*
Jhiinsi mtkelmtf Imam' as dasofiptira
of «i|^ iwiiipw ; and, t the eontrnvfi ab-
oafolely deoidad by ^paalad Judginents,
both of the CooHs od of pariianent,
not fo be any known laeies of tvoMDn.
UnteeSy then, yoo leidshina are to
■eject the pvkiciple ofie law of Seodand,
-diat the praseontor «at put it in the
power of yonr loids^ to see whether
he has a talonnt as bofsie yon will
asquire the panel to<o npon his trial ;
jand aidess it ean Soield thgt the pro-
■ecntor is entitled ionithhold from the
panel a knowledge «n of the criaae —
the particular feionjor the particular
tseasoiip*fin whieh thwhole nerita of the
ohargo against him oonsls; itseematobe
^my dear, that, wiihct going any farther,
t^ofo is«ot oran thoopeafanoe of rele-
▼ancjr io Iha preseBl motaiant.
II. Tfaa seooi^fiai whiah the infbr-
nsnt fiivposes to coniar iwHl not saquire
along dioeussioo. is, that thia indict-
anentdoea not 10* it contain nay state-
ment .of the paitidd areason, sphuh the
nmafeutar aHe^mthsnthto pnrpaitorin-
haid -to Innd the paitaking it io cammit.
' And yet the infonnt most be aUowed
ao obsorva, that en heva, tbongh the
pamacutor does notretend to naikitain
ihatthaindietment d» stpttethe particu-
lar tmaaoD, be stiUabouTB under a Tery
important mistake ao the real stale of the
qoastion. He says, wt he is not bound
iomake anystatennft whatever, eacept
M mere recital of a faot, or a simple
allegatioD of the pport, of the oath. —
dLn^jrpotiiasis mDrmconsistant witii the
pmotieal rales of la Taw of Scotland
onanot be canpdri. But supposing it
waia so, yonr lordsps will ba pleased to
ebsetae, that the ."aseoailor has wot in
tins instance ftAteod that aonna. He
im mado his mven^t quite distinally, of
tUht whiah he is laasad to stats to be
<Ae trvosim, whichba oath administered
bound the party toammit And, with
mboiisnohi Mtfaif.cui be dearer in the
C4M
oriauflal law, than thafty^evHi whan a party
is it^ taaitf to make an aaamMat on a
partianlar point, if he dait amke il in a
nwnnar that 19 ifsalaraat, the whal» in-
dictment ftUs to piaoBSy on BfifnHm<f thia
iirtlavaney. in the premnt ease, tha
whole ralaaaMy on t|ie anbalaamaif tha
•oath dapands on tl^ qnettion, wihaiher it
did pmpoK to bi«d the party to aammit
traaaan f Tha psomculor aaya^ hn was
Mftbpnnd to nudw miynvamiant «rhat-
efm on lUs anhfaot, and might ham
aimply atatad, that siMh an oath mm ad-
aahiisiaiad, namating tha pvpoM. Hie
infaiapmit simtt cansMar &is. Bat, in
tha ftfst flam, thp paaaaentor has, an tha
indJetnsanr, atpitad what he bald to Ibe the
pm poi t api iinandww! iit of tha aatfi. And
«ml;r, if your loidships were rid of OTory
oiiar qnastion, ^ wo^dd ha voder the
nampity of daafing, whether that state-
is a raiarant attaMtagn of
Mow,whntiBtiwallagMionJ It ta^ that
thaaath banarf to coaMnit treases^'*< by
obtHHia^ annual pmKamonts, and nni-
wnaal saflkaga, by pineal atmngth or
dbrce, md rtenriy ^jMmg ike sPBvtmsion
•V TacaanLBf.isnai>oovi&iiicBaT, i^aws,
0Hi mmtik^H qftki$ kingdom^ by o^aw.
IhtaKim^ln^nNans.^ Thane is a^danying
that ikm is m^ant laba a statement of an
^oaA Uadinf Ibe fortr to connmi tsaason.
Bjit onlam uie law of treason, in^taid of
biang the most oertain of all laws, is re-^
d^iied again into the unoeitatDtrof the
twrnam of fiidhaid the aaoond^s time,
it is impossible to maintain, that this ia
an allegation in noiat of Jaw af any
•obiigntion to esmarnt a treason.
llainformaut shall not heretapeai what
he has alvaadyiidly detaoSad, cpna*ning
the raank af 4he attempt, in tha thne <m
&hjhaad tbeaaaond, to dafeskt the net of
Mwwd die thiid. But the words of lord
IMe oira certainly va ly striking, and
appaaantly prophetic, wheae he aaya^ that
these proceedings shew ^ how danacrona
it is to deiNHt from die letter or that
statute, and to multiply and enhance
crimes into :traeson, by omU^uom and
gmmi wnids, as aeeromkmg cf royal
jwmr, BUBVBwrivo or vuvDAiniNTAip
LAWS, and Ms jifte/' Thecamof safaer^
mg fimdamenial iaws, reprasentad as n
treason by Richard's judges, is the toit
ease which the proseoulor has here adopted,
and obstinately permrerad in maiataining,
in three indictments. But if this was not
an aUegatron of txeason in lord Hale*a
tiaM, and was still iess admitted by Foo-
ter, the praaeeutor will find itdiAcuIt to
J produce even the Teadge of an anthority
br so violent a revulsion to tiie teneta
of one of the most arbitrary leigns that
ean be aaleotad jn the eattierhiatoiy of
Bagiafid.
43d]
far Admnisltiring uhla^ofid Oatht.
A. D. 1817.
[434
;
It it remaikabley however^ that even
th« discussions and the statutes produced
by these attempts in the time of Richard,
the second^ to disturb the statute of
Edward, are not without, the support of
express authority in a taier period. The
act of rcTetsion of the attainder of the
earlof Staraflbrd, is a decisive ooofinaation
of it. In those violent times, the veiV
same thing was sucoessfnUy practised^
The biU of attainder * bears, that the
commons of England " impeached Iho^
mas earl of Strafford^ of high treason,^
tMdtaooming to subvert tbb AVcrBHt
AKD vrKDAMBXTAL LAWS ttw/ govemmoU
cfkuM^ffeti^i reabnt ofEtiglami tuid Ire^
fmd, and to introduce an arbitrary and
tyrannical government, against law^ in the
said kingdoms ; tmdfar exereiting a tyrw^
flottf imd txmhUant fofuaer over and cganui
th€ lam of the soitf AaL^donrf, and tk6 iatSrIlef ,
citotec, andhvet of ms M<^CMty*i irifects.*'
There were other charges ; but this was
the leading one; and on that bill, lord
Strafford was attainted and executed, as .
all the world knows. Now the act f re^
venhtg this attainder begins in the follow-
ing terms : ^ Whereas 'Diomas late earl of
Strafford^ was impeached of high treason^
f^pOB prHenet o^xhdeavoubing to sub-
vert THE rUVDAMEKTAL LAWS^ and
called to a public and solemn arraignment
and trial before the peers in parhamenti
whei^ he made a particular defence to
eveiv article oljected against him; insos-
rouch that the turbulent party, then seeing
no hopes to effect their unjust designs by
any orainaiy way and method of proceed-
ings, did at last resolve to effect the de-
struction and attainder of the said eairl^
by an act of parliament to be therefore
fnrpottbf madef to condemn Mm ufon ac-^
CUMULATrVB TBEASOIT, VOHB of the pn^
teadedcrimei (eiitf tbbasoit apart, «fitf td
tpM not be in Se vjhok^ tf th^ had been
provedy as they were not; ana also ad*
fidged him guiHy rf constructive treason
(that is, of levying war against the king),"
kc. On these and other reasons^ the sta-
tute bears, ** for all which causes, be it
declared aiid enacted, fisc. that the said
act of attainder is now hereby repealed^
revoked, and reversed.''
Nothing can be more precisely descrip*
live of the prosecutor's notidn of a treasoni
than the veijr words, both of the bill of
attainder^ and of the act of reversal, in
that veiy celebrated case* And whatevef
other merits mig^t be invobred in lord
Strafford's conduct,the informant helievesi
that no lawyer in better times ever doubts
ed that in this poini the reversal declared
' the law eorrectfy. It is in precise con-
* trial of earl Strafford, p. 756. See also
State Trials, 1641 [3 Ubw. St. tr. 1518.]
t 1770.
VOL. XXXIIl
formitv to the very words afterwards em-
ployed by lord Hale, as well as to those
of the statutes which condemned the
judgment of Tresilian and the other un^
fortunate judges, who were weak enough
to surrender Uie liberties of their country
' to the influence of the prejudices, or of
the interests of the moment. .
His majesty's advocate has had the
merit of asserting in the present day, that
« man had engaged to commit treatdny who
according to his lordship's own averment,
was under an engagement simply to do
the very things expressed by the tame toordi,
which Tresilian and the other judges lost
their lives or liberties by declaring to be
treason^ and which the paHiament ot
England long after declared not to he
treason^ by reversing the attainder of the
eari of Strafford. And, with the full
leave of the informant, he may take the
ftirther merit of maintaining that to be an
averment of treason, which lord Hale has
bestowed many anxious pages to prove
to be merely one of those pretences ot
treason, by which, in bad times, the best
principles of the constitution had been
endangered, and the real interests of th^
country betrayed.
It seems) then^ to be past all possibi-*
iity of dispute^ 1* That the ptofeecutor
has not stated what the treason i% which
the oath libelled on purported to bind the
pirty taking it to commit; 3. That he
nas in fact stated that to be treason which
is not treason; and the allegation of
which, as treason, lutt been invttriably
condemned in all fha best tiiAto of the
law. And the informant believes that h^
has proved, 3. That en indictment imM
this statute^ which dees not state the spe-
cific treason referred to, cannot be re'
levant or competent to be sent to * jury»
Illk The third part ohhis cause remains*
Your lordships have to consider, whether
the oatli, the pur^rt, if not the terms, o^
which, is set forth in the indictments is
an oath purporting or intending to bind
the party taking it to commit any treason
in terms of the statute.
But, before entering on the considera-
- tion of the words set forth in this libel, it
is impossible not to take notice of the ir-
tesistible inference concerning the prose-
ciitor's own knowledge of the fact, arising
from the whole circumstances already de-
tailed. It is here maintained, that the
prosecutor is not bound to set forth the
words of the oath at all, but only the pur-
port which be ascribes to it.— ^f this' pre<>
sently. But the prosecutor has set forth,
in all the indictments, specific words,
which he states as th^ purport of the oath
said to have been adraiaistered ; -and
which words, of course, he is bound to
knew to b^ as nearly its possible the words
435J
57 OBOBGB HI.
TVa/ afAndreti M'Kbdiey
C4a6
of which fun means to sMeinpt a proof.
But, before looking into the nature of the
oath so expressly libelled on, it is quite
impossible to ^ overlook the circnmstances
ander whieh your lordships are desired to
consider the eflfeet of it.
In the information of his majesty's ad-
▼ocate, there is an appearance of taking
tiiis case to be attends with no difficulty.
BnC, considering that this is the third jn-
dietment which nas been raised, and that
on it yoor lordships have reqmred infor*
mations, te informant is at least entitled
to say, that, in the way the indictments
of the prosecutOT have bean managed, they
are 'involved in the most serious difficulties
ift point of relevancy. In saying this, the
informant imputes no blame to the pro-
secutor, except that of an insufficient con-
sideration of the^ease, before raising the
ihrst indictment, and too mnch perse-
verance in an untenable ease; for he can
draw no other inference fnmr the whole
course of these proceedings, but that
really the prosecutlir is not <Me t6 state,
til foixt ojfacty a case that would be re&-
vtoit under this statute. If he could have
done so, it is, with submission, quite in-
conceivable that, after all the discussion
that hstf ^en place^ he should have ex-
hibited this last indictment, exposed to
every one of the objections, in point of
subitknce) which lay against the two for-
itier libels. It is impossible to infer any
thing f^om this perseverance in a wrong
l!onree, exOept this, that tiie prosecutor
knows, that if he were oftoe to lay the
indictment as it ought to lie, it would
either be iiypareut that it was irrelevant,
en accownt of a plain fbcongmity between
Ae averment and the purport of the oath
set forth ; or, if the relevancy of it should
be made out by strfrng averment, it would
totally fail upon the evidence. Notwith-
standing the very extraoitlinary charge on
the words of the oath ih this indictment,
Hie informant vives the prosecutor credit
fbt rejecting «bis last course. He does
^ot believe, that the prosecutor would
attempt to obtain an interlocutor of rele-
vancy, by framing his indictment in a
manner which he knew to be exposed to
k necessary failure upon the evidence.
And he must colifess, that he attributes
the whole fulure in these indictments to
this cause. The reality is, that the at-
tempt to try Uie prisoners upon this
statute has been begun without a die con-
sideration of the nature of the case, and
of the crime which the statute has created ;
and the prosecutor now finds, that he
cannot, consistently with the fsttts of the
tase, libel the indictment in tht only tvay
in which a relevant indictment can be laid
under this act of parliament.
The informant cannot otherwi^, after
ail the.disewSleB which hat takett place,
account for ibe' fbnft of the pitesent in-
dictnent. In fhe discussion on the second
Indictment, it was very distinctly stated,
by the coudsel fbr the crown, tluit the
treason which he meant so allege, as in-
volved in the oath, was that of hnjimgwar.
Now, wkat dMcukyetMtimre be mttatmg
iM$intkemSktmeuthtpl&ikto9riU^ Hie
minor vropCBition would just ht9e run
thtn : ** In so fisr as yen did wickedly and
feloniomly administer, or Cadse to be ad-
ministered, Hn oatb> purporting or intend-
ing to bind the patty taking the sane, u>
commit a treason fylevyii^wti^4maiHtttk^
king; whieh oath waa in the ttdlowing
terms, or of the fbHowing purport." Sup-
posing the purport of the oath siC forth
to mtj^ort <!Ait itaiemeni^ the informant sees
at present no oljection to the relevancy
of it» as an averment to satisfy the terms
of the statute; except) indeed, the ob-
jection of the felony m^fging in the trea-
son. And why is it that the prosecutor
will not make that avvrmcnt ? OoAsider-
ing the difficulties which your lDfdship»
have fielt on this evliject^ it is quite im-
possible to imagitie, that the prasecutor
would avoid so very obvious a method of
removing the first difficulty, afler ithad
been twice deafly pointed out, if be had
not solid reasons, in the substatme t>f the
casC) for refusing to make the averment.
Hie informant confesses he cannot account
fot- t!he proceeding on any other hypothesis.
But if the panmer cannot make the
aveftnent in tdtmbik in the indictment,
which he has already topitessed in debate,,
can any otheb ih^tenee be drawn, but
that (he indiclment amiM be irrelevant f
Be says, he weanft to phjm i» Ate jmy^
that the ^th Mrporttd to bind the party
m iMf iMr.«^ THen> why aot ae in the in-
dictment? No i«aion en earth ean be
given, butonetff threfe t eiHier, M, The
p^osetuter ha^ tsien up a boImm of his
own about this indictmdbt^ againtt all law
and aiMhbtfty, «nd !^ wiH not depMt from
It; Of) adfy, he knows that if he made
ttie averment of levying war^ the puport
of the oath^ which h6 must set forth,
would Show a plain itvelevancy t ov, 3dly»
If he got the indietilient passed to aa
assize, the fact would not aappert the
averteent, and "die juvy could net fail to
see U with perfbet elearneSs. l%e in-
ftHWiatit e^tM^dete lh« fiiat su^MSifiott to
be out of Hie '<{u«stibl^ and m by no
meahs imagines \L Bet the tw« other
explanatieas of the pA>aeediag, he eannot
but think to be the real truth it the case ^
beeaese^ b^i)sidel4if die dear lorthority
that is ageftntt dh^ prosecutor in his pre-
sent firm of4ibelling, it is imeenceiyable,
why he should not have removed the ob-
jection by so very simpU a course of pro-
ceeding.
If the prosecutor diovgh^ thkl by ^os*
'4fff\
JifrJtMltHttriig utia^lOaOtt.
A.©, 18lt.
[496
flibilily tiM f»ctt #f ttie caift atighi r,esolve
into lotne otfusr t^eaion thim that of ao
eofl^eoMtit io ^e«y wary ^e in6>rj»ant is
w>t umqe Aat !>« voiiU b« tied down to
this. If -the indictBMiit wtce in England,
be loiglilJay it under upanste cmmUi as
mn enga^emeeit to /ay tcwr ; an esgage-
ment to cvwqwif /J^ Iw^s dco^A ; or an en-
gaganwat to eowpire ^ isiy hiop, &e« ; and
I)M tfifoanaAt is npt at present advised of
ajDjY oljiieotion that could be made to an
inaictmentin this «oiiit, which laid the
case aUurmttivel^ as an oath binding to
«oinfkass the hinges death ; sr otherwise an
4)ath binding to levy war; or etkerwise an
oath binding to conspire to levy war, &c.
In other cases, as many alternatives may
he taken. In a case of rgfe^ k way be
laid altenatively, rap$; or a»$aiidi with
itUaU to eontmU rope ; oisinifle otsauU; or
nooimdifig under loid EUenborough's act.
And other iUnstrationa might be given.
Why the pjcoeecutor has not adopted
-nome siich.oonifeas this* is quite incon-
ceivable pn any other supposition than
-that he kaoiivs the case coqM npt be sus-
tained ii he were eo to atate it. And thus
your locdflhipe enter on the consideration
of the pQi]KM3t And inVendment of the oath,
with real evidence beloie you, Abi^t the
rpsosecotor dare not atate, that the oath
4oes purport or intend to bind to the
eommisiion of any specific treaaon. When
your loidahips look unto the oath set forth,
and weigh the terms of it, you cannot be
much sorpnsed at the existence of this
imnramioB.
lit iM impeeeibie to aux a wcrd concern-
ang the cooatructiop to ne put on the oath,
aa^tate^ in the indiotqient, without first
talong aome notice of the Tery.eiajBavagant
4ootno^ »bi«h ate maintained in ttie in-
ibimation forihis majest/s advocate
It in totmaimtnined, that the prosecutor
is not bonnd'to int forth the srord9.of the ,
nath at aU, but only the purport; and
-that any natfa, kame^Hr tanocna/, if it were
ffoted to be intended to signify an en- .
gagement to commit treasoi^ might be
a televant^raond.of charge. The mfonn-
ant humbW denies this to be at all the
meaaing^i thisatatttte. He apprehends ,
that the aiQida -^'purporting or intend- •
ing,'' wace purposely employed , instead '
of thoaa of the ibcmer statute, '* purport-
iag or intend^'' in order to exclude this ^
oonatmctian. But, supposing it were
^thannae, it would not avail the
paeaecttlor. For even if it were admis-
attda to 4Nt ioith the oath of allegiance,
or any other oath, however innocent in
ate pumact or :inlwdmant> and then to
pi)ova4Batihe actaal intention wasdifferent
from vlipit appeased on the face of the
oalh, it« appiahanded that nothing in
the votld o<Mild be clearer, than that,
•fiQai4iDf.iOLj^lha pnc|ieo of yourtloid-
ship, 4ha pro^ecotor must set forth spe-
4uficaUy the facts, frqm which he^eant
• to draiw t|ie inference pf an int^ention
diferent from, or stronger than, the pur-
port an4 inta«4meat of the oatli libelled.
M 4ha^ case* the indictment would be
had £»r want of specifijcation-
But, ^nore generally, the informant
mnet obiierve, that 1^ knows pf no. prin-
ciple, on which the prosecutor can be
ffxfti^pted kfm setting forth tlte oath
alleged to haye been administered. . It is
true, that, by the fourth section of the
statute, ix is provided, ihat he shall not
be hound to state the very wqrds pf the
o^, hut only the piirport oi it. But he
is stiU ifot/nd fo Ubel the furpoft; and if
the purport io libelled does not support
the allegation of an oath, purporting or
mtendisiig to bind the eonuoiffion^' a treaton,
the iofi>rmant can discover no auM^ority
on this atatute, fojr alleging, on any other
ground^ that alelony has been committed.
Tbe^e are swny analogous cases iwhich
Ui9y be suggested. The informant un-
deia4^ds, that, in the law of England,
it is ^uile settled, A&t in an indictment
for ^ndiifg a threatenu^ letter^ the terms
of the lettar must h^ set forth ; and that,
in like manner, in an indictment for ob-
tfuning money on false pretences, the
false pretence wust be stated. So also,
in an indictment on the statute d9th Geo.
ard. c. U)6^ against agreements among
workmen Jcr co^Uroulag their masters,
the words of the agreement alleged must
.be libell^ <^n. But the infonnant cannot
4eaira i^iy cm more analogous thau one
4vbich is distinctly laid down in our own
law, that of au indictment for p/ffj^ry^
where, aa the question jturns precisely on
itbe terms of an oath, ^ rule has a direct
applicatioa to the present case. And
the ini^mant shall return to that ciipe, as
soon as he has adverted to another very
ex^raoirdiniuy doctrine of the prosecutor.
It if maintained in this .ca^e» it is
believed for the very first time in a crim-
inal Gourty that there is no presumption
in fiivour pf innocence, or at least none
which can w^igh with your lordships in
4his question of relevancy. When thjc
|)rosecutor says merely, that, in a question
of relevancy, the first act of the mind of
a judge is ^o assume the trqtb of all
the jfacts chai]gcd, the informant un-
derstands what he mnans; and though
the statement h^s no tendency to prove
:the relevancy of an indictment, in vrhich
there is no cdlegation even that fmy spe-
cific came wa^ committed, and far less
any specification of jbfiiA to suppprt it,
4be itwormaut has no occasion to. dispute
thej^eneral proposition. But the prose-
cutor has gone a ^reat deal further. The
^question ^joncermng the purport or ini-
tendment of .ihia oath> is a question of
4391
57 GEORGE III.
Trial ofAmdrem M*kMiif
copstiiiotion and relevancy by itself;
and whether it belong! to the judge or to
the jury to consider it, there must be
some rule of judgment to turn the scale,
on the supposition tfkat any doubt hangs
over it. The informant's counsel took
the liberty of suggesting the very obvious
and common-place rule of law, that in all
trials for crimes, there is a presumption
in favour of innocence, whtcfa runs
tfirough the whole proceedings, and is
applied to Uie indictment-*to the proof—
to the verdict; and he remaiked the
peculiar importanoe^f giving full effect
|o it, in acase where the whole charge turns
on the import of words which may admit
of various meanings, and may be under>t
stood by different personsin very different
senses. It seemea to him, that the prin-
eipie of judgment in sudi a case must
necessarily be, that, if the words alleged
are at aU nacqMk cf a metmmg comuicni
with mnoeenee, the accusedt vrho stands
on the peril of life and death, roust have
^ the benefit of that constmction; and
" tiiat it could net be % oood allegation of
administer^ttg an oaia, purporting to
fiinid to commit a treason, where the oath
averred is of a purport which ma^ eitker
be reconciled With the supposition of
Krfect innocence, or at least with some
d or even criminal purpose of a much
lower denomination. He did not mean
that, by far-fetched and extravagant con-
ceptions, some colour of possibility
could be raised. He only maintained,
that if, upon fidr and just construction,
the oath set forth did not neoe$mrify pur-
port an obligation to commit a treason,
he was entitled, by the established pre-
sumption of law, to take the more fiavour-
able or less criminal construction, and to
object to the allegation, as not a relevant
statement of an oath purporting to bind
to the commission of any treasota. '^
All this appeared to be so very trite
and clear, that an apology vras even
thought necessary for insisting on it. But
the prosecutor has here a case of that
unmanageable nature, that he is obliged
to reject even the most established max-
ims of law, and to invert the plainest
rules of justice. In his information,* he
has told your lordships explicitly, that
^* it is submitted, that if the woMs of the
oath Bxe at aU tiuc^tibk of the meaning
nut tqxm them by the pnneaUor^ and nu^
near that meaning, your lordships are
bound to give him oiiditfor the truth of
that cowstRitCTioif tMch he putg toon
them. It is quite a mistake to say, tnat
he must shew, in this question 6i rele-
vancy, that . the words mugt mT necestity
bear the criminal meaning. If, indeed,
the criminal meaning be j^amfy a forced
• Inf. p. 379.
t440
tonOfwitMm^ and one which they cannot
reasonably bear, your lordships might
hesitate as to sending them to a jury,
unless it were alleged that they have a
hidden or different meaning fimn what
they express. But if the meaning be
neither forced nor unnatural, or t^ t^ 6c
at oil a reammMe^ oa etbn ▲ PoasiBLc
oonifmctiofi, the pnmeader i» enOtied ta
the verdict of a jmy on tike charge, and
10 demand the assumption of the truth
of every aUegaiion he makes in the pre-
liminary stage of the process." If your
lordships are prepared to admit this
statement of law, it will be in vain to
object to the relevancy of any indictment.
But the informant must remind the
prosecutor, that the allegation of a co»-
etruction is not the allegation of a fact ;
and, what is still more remarkable, that
the prosecutor has not, in factj made any
proper allegation in this indictment, of
the construction which be puts on the
oadi ; and is actually maintaininff, that he
is not bound to do so. But ia it really
true, that, if the words set forth by a
prosecutor, os his averment of facts,,
which is the same thing, are at alltmc^-
ihle of a criminal meaningi or can, by anyt
jMSttUs eomtrvctionf be nude to bear it,^
the indictment must be held relevant?
This is an inversion of all the rules of
criminal law. What ie a question of re-,
levancy ? It is, whether the facts averred,^
if proved as stated, amount to, or legtdly^
prove the crime 4Jiarged. But do they
prove it, if it is merely that, by any votn-
Ue construction, they nuy admit ot the
criminal meaning ? Is not the rule just
the contrary, that, supposing all the nets
proved, if thev do not neceisgrily, or
according to ndr neeeaary c<mclnsion,
prove or amount to the crime charged,
there is no case made out, and the pre-
sumption of innocence prevails? The
question of relevancy, before proof, is
just the same to the court, on the as-
sumption of the foots averred, as the
question of euiUy or not ia to the jury,
on the actual state of the prorf. If a jucy
could not legally convict on an adnumon
of all the yac/s* averred, but not of the
prosecutor's comtructiom, the court cannot
ind the libel relevant. The question is
just the same in both cases, and the pre*
sumptions in favour of innocence must
have at least the same weight, in con-
sidering the prosecutor^s averments before
proof, which they confessedly have in
the construction of his proof after it ia
led.
When the proiecutor was pn»onnding
this new prmet|^ of crimmal justice,
the case of a trial for perfmy might have
occurred to him ; and he might have asked
himself this question—* Is an indictment
for perjury good, though the thing alleged
4411
•
Jilt Admiiulerii^ laUamfiit Oatkt.
A. D. t817.
t44ft
to have been sworn, is verftOhf rtamdk'
akie with innoeeneey ir, by amf pombU
amttrmOiony it mt^ bear tbe supposition
•of wilful ftdsehood? The informant shall
answer the question in the words of
Mr. Hume* ''Tlie substance of the
crime, and that which all the other par-
ticulars in the description of it only
modify and limit is, that a plain fiilsehood
be explicitly and wiUuUy affirmed. For,
if eiMer thert u avt ooubt a6oiir the
true ttaie of ike factf or about thb seuse
in WHICH THE PAXIL'S WORDS AEB TO
BZ UBDBB8TOOO; OB IF THBT CAB IB
ABY BEA80BABLE WAY BE BECOBCILBD
WITH THE TB17TH, OB WITH AK IHBOCEBT
ufTBBTiOB, or, m general, if ii i$ not
mamfeit and obwWj but matter of tikeU*
boodonfyy and of mferenee and eompariton
of many partiailarty tbai he had a faUe
and eom^ meanings thu MU moe him
Jrmn the aeauation of perfwy. Indeed it
wcmld be very dangerom to commit any
me ypon tueh comtntctioe mundt; con'
mdering the imferfcetion of tanguagey and
the iMl more imperjeet uie whach m many
pemm hone of t/, and how uneoud thenr
degreee of inteliigenee in the effwrt of Itfe,
end even their degree$ ^capacity for the
akervation of facte,** The learned author
<|votes cases in support of this statement,
in which libels for perjury were found
irrdevanty precisely De»use the oaths
as averred did not ** absolutely eidude"
the supposition of innocence. And he
thus proceeds :t '^For the same reasons
which suggested these decisions,- it is
more emeaalfy rtqmutey that in all pro^
cesses for peijurv, the prosecutor he not
aikmed to lay Mb Ubef genemUy, or in
ambigaous terms ; pnee otherunaehe woidd
take the eognKumee of the relevant of the
charge to Mmidfy oat of the handi of the
Courty to vAom of r^M t^ belongt. He
has to eiplain, therefore, wherein it is,
that the nlsehood lies, and must support
(or as we say, qnal^) his charge with
such a statement of the circumstances of
the hcty as justifies his aYerment of a
ialse oadi haYing been taken, and shall
ground a clear inierence (if they be
proYCd) concerning the situation of the
panel's conscience on the occasion. It
was, aoeordingly, for want t>f such a
detail and explanation, that one part of
Che libel was found irrelerant in the
noted ease of Lawson of Westertown.''
The informant presumes he has said
enough on this singular doctrine of the
pfoseculor, and thiu, whateYOr opinion
your lordships may form on the purport
of this oath, m point of relerancy, ne may
at least rely on your lordships giving to
him, in this case of capital arraignment
founded 6tt worda alone, all the benefit of
I > I I.I
Hnne^YoL L p. 127. f ibid. 129.
those presumi^ons of law and reason^
which protect innocence even against trial
on loose and doubtful allegations.
In taking notice of the remarks made
by the informant's counsel, on the terms
of the oath, the prosecutor has been
pleased to allude to the obligation of
secrecy, and in connexion with it to add,^
^An amiable feature of the whole trana-
action, and which affords a pleasant com*
mentaiy on the panegyric that wot prom
-nomued at the first deoate, on the 'bro-
therhood of affection,' in which it was
said to be so ' becoming that all the sub-
jects of this country shcMrid dwell togeUier
in unity.' " It is impossible not to feel
s6me surprise at this passage; for, un-
doubtedly, no each sentiment vnu expreteed
iy either of the v^bmamfM cemnm. An
argument was indeed maintained to show,
that the proposal of establishing a brother- .
hood of affection, <iirf not ofnecemty mv^f
mty crimnaUtyy or that crhninality whidh
is meant to be chained in the indictment.
But no panegyrie wa$ prommneed; and in
general, it was admitted, that the oath
might be improper and dangerousy and
might raise uupiiont of criminal designs.
It would, therefore, have been more cor*
rect, if the prosecutor had withheld an in^
sinuation so perfoctly groundless.
The prosecutor has libelled the purport
of the oath, which he savs was adminis-
tered; and it is somewhat remarkable*
that he should come to a trial of so serious
a nature as this, in such uncertainty as to
' the words which were really used, Uiat he
can at pleasure substitute one word for
another, as it suits his argument on the
question of rdevancy. But as he waa
bound to aver the purport and intendment
of the oath, and has accordingly set forth
the words which he says contain the pur-
port of it, it is for your lordships to jndge,
whether, if an oath in such terms was
administered, it is an oath purporting or
intending to bind the pat^ taking it to
commit a treason. This is a question
quite distittot from the question already
considered, as to the necessity of setting
forth the specific treason. Supposing that
the prosecutor had libelled an engage-
ment to commit treason by lenyintt wary or
jmy other fptcific treason, and had then
set forth this oath, the qnesdon is, whe-
ther it comes up to tbe averment, that it
was an oath purporting or intending to
bind to the commission of a treason ?
But, in this part of the question, the
proeeontor is under another mistake. As-
suming that he is not obliged to state the
specific treason, he further takes it for
granted, that your lordships are not to be
satisfied that the oath does purport or
intend to bind to the eommission. of a .
* Inf. p. 37Q.
4ii3 SYOBOROfiUI.
IritdffAMirm U*Ki94^
[444
whniftypiaion my be ettortamcd on
th<i «tlMr point^ it ii qail« Uip«nible
tbatyo«f lordalup0 cm bold thai Uiis in-
diilmBt is wlcTAsty valest you ace Batis-
fied^ tet tbe p«rp«t of tb« oMb set fortb
U tocbt tbftt ytou, V9 now pMOMed to
affirm that ii4iei jNvpaK«riaioM to bind
to tba aommiauonof to«M ^pecj^ treason.
UnlMi yonr kwdsbipa can x^^joot all the
aaoamiiMtod auAbari^ on ^e Um oi ti»a^
so«^ and pnoeeed oai tha eid aulgar
aotioiui of titaaoA in the abttnct,. con-
•iitiag lA aaj thing inaginaMe diat is
^MagfMahlato tbamiatiBg goireEomentt
it u inpoeiible that yon oan bold the
Ipnrpofft «f the oath liballad to be an
oMigadiop to connait tieasoo, iMntll yon
aia lativftod wkat traaion it doci parport
•ritttead 4o bind tiie party to oonamit.
IQbeinlbfanNit sayti that 4faa proaacutor is
tasid As stele what iba tieason ts. But
aUoviBf biv to gat dd of this difficnlty,
at is at aU evavia naoasaafy^ that your
kvdsbipasboaldaaelbaitfAs 4Mth mferred
does parpait to bind to sonie s^Mecific
twaaon* Wtibont ibis, then is no and to
fthalaasentasiafaiicbaniadietiaeaC For,
iC 9(o«r toidaUps cannot tell wbiA the
tfaaiiin is, jhow is the panel lo dascorer
it? Hew aaairaiir ioidsbips to jodge of
ebi sAiiianayf How are the jury to judge
al tbeaiiplioation of the evidence f . The
JMiyaniat gi»»« veidiflt indeed; bnt the
wuf thing which the kw ioSends to pre-
^fcnt, by rsqvittBg an iotadaontor of re-
More ailowing the case to go
Tf m Iba risk mi ermnaaw in-
«c iawofwat views nf the. law,
^idkls of nsMctton which aaa not
itodifayanyeoaMid or lagiosAcfaurge.
Yottff loidahipa will l(«iu then, into
, this <aalb, l^aspng it m afaid <hse yon
flsiatsMhenpfOttrapiaieoi^ tbatitfdoes
pnsport «r sntand to bind to the aenmis-
aian lef peneafcoifio treaaan. The pro-
centoor bto said, iai the traason is that
0f leiFying war; and fat it is vary faanark-
afale» 4hat be has fset new Tentnfed to
toato Ibis in hia intfaraaatM. Tbairuth
aaaasB to be, that the moa^ent the case is.
laduead to Ae taatof a daAnad tseason,
it is oaihr by amest Tiolant atretcfa of the
fteram of the oaih, and ihf the aid of pre-
ouasptians and aappasitions not supported
by nay ^aels iibellad, thai it can be main-
tofaud to ttt an oath pnrnasting to bind to
Ue i^Baaecotor fiyideayogrs to distin-
ff«iah ti» tiadpiafWitfly diam tbeiword
— '^ ' eepeeaania iba ilatter as
:e io dn wtensiona of the
nay fca the tanoas or
apfiaarnt *pnrpoft of the oalb. 31m in-
^onaasiiflabanitai, tfaattbis eonstsootion is
ahogetfaer inadmissible; and be nnder-
stood your loidtfnpf to^iate long ago in-
lusnag refi
tiewted a dear gpinien, that these words,
^ (]iiiporting or tntaodtngy" do not refer
to the intentions of the parties, bnt to the
pmput and mUndmmt of the oath itself.
Iba infonnant does not mean by this, that
the pnMWQtor in tied down in bis proof
to Abe vary words which be sets forth in
the indictment, so that if be should prove
wotds aligbtly diisring irom tbemt be
would not be entitled to a veidict. Both
these words ooair peiba^ seem to eaclude
this supposition. The tnigrmant might
admit, that oeitbar the pwvart uer the
•ntoi^aan^ means the same thing wiih the
toior of an oalb. But wben this is ad-
mitted» which ad eoee answem m great
pan of the paaseentor's feaecntng» it is
stiU usie, that the pnrppii and intendment
being elated must show e^ ftck a rele-
vnncy. The oajb, nsetoled in point of
fMHport and tatendeaent, «u»st be an oaib
«Mch, in Ibe judgoenl cif yonr lecdshipa,
detaaiMiipoet and inlend to bind the party
idling it to oeisimit « specific tosason.
Ml i|4loee net defiend 9» ai^ iatoPt in-
tentians of the parties. U is the purport
aad ii^endment of tkfi eel^ that must
detnaraainn the relevancy of the iadM^toient ;
mid the opinion «f «our lordibipf on that
fMiat is not to be astered by eny eeppost-
4ion fof oonoe^a^ views in the parties.
Tkm mmaiiwble change of terms, be-
iwoan Ibis atatuto and tbe Ibrwer act
n^iinsl tMlaa^fid oelbs* veiy etrengljr con-
fiims this view«ns being tbe ivial meaning
of the kgiehiture. In that foneernet, tbo
wjnls were, ** pnrpoptiw or intended to
Umd/'lto. Tbe wwd <*UmdBd;' es op-
poeod to ^'pnrpoitingt'' might be snpposed
to «afer 4ireotly to tbe intoeilin» ef the
paitiea, andaoto :meM» Ibet 4boiiih the
oath migbt net eKaeAlrfNiipPii^i^>t<tog(«o-
meae to anamil. « Ueeeen, jfHH evs eo
undemtoed and mkmM by tk^ ^artiea.
The statote now before ye«r b>aMi»p(i is a
imcb neoie soveae jtotnie» eimag that
into the auk of aoapHel feieny^ which, if
toe anteningvere evectly the e«toe» was
before onfy a feloi9t« with bei»ete of ^rgy.
Hnsa, it aoMMt be enppoaedi ihe legislature
locked witbgveMer «nre to Ibe form of
espsessien; and tboogb ih»y aae4e it
eipttel to administer en oeth, #ieper<n^
to bind to the eomcHeaien of a tseaeon or
felony, or an oathtii(cn«Ng to bind to the
oommisaion of .a tceaaon or Moey; they
did not think et enpedieo^ to evtoad the
nanishment of deetbto an nctiof so very
looaa aiibaricto^.as that of iubewiietering
an oailb» which tiaeugbsiQjt htaaing, even
SB pnrpoit or tntendoieiiti eegr oUigation
to pnmaDii n laenaan or ji.^t6mff mght,
by ^nrnfierii'im, w^^hfww, m imfmuim^ be
ttfntmUi as so mumt or mkm^/d. The
.dflfarense between these 4Wo thim is
mamiest ; > ana yet tne prooecnvor nas occn
ptoaeed, irithouttoidng any n<?lieex€ the
4451
JiiiT AilmiMeriitg'mUgufiU Oaiht.
A. D. 1817.
C44d
«rg«Hi«iit| and In 1^ itee ftf iNbtt was
«riid«ftWod to bti eipreiMd mtb% opinion
tffyoitvk>Fdgliip0|toaitiiiii»fltoiio#9 that
If tli0ie it iiH itS^hMIt yiiUwm Ibr n»-
jMtolfN^ an tMMtfwn m Hie pa*ti« tv admi-
iriit«r or tak« an otttk to oontttit Ueason
or Mimff tho txiiM of tlM afat«t»ii com-
Ailt^d.
There ie an knporant di^tittctlott which
the proeeeotoF entitely o<rertook«i To
adinlniBter an Oiiflk whieh it intakfed to
^ind the fartiee to oomnit treeeetii is un-
doubtedly a great erinie; it is perhaps
olearly within the farmer statate^ but, at
idl evenie^ it is pnrishable on other
gmnnda. But, though a great crime, it
may not be Ife crime of fMv statute. The
informant has no donbt, that the prosecu-
tor cooid hate libelled the case which he
alleces in his informatieii, though not in
the tndlctnient) as a crime sererely punish-
able in the law of Sce^Sand. Bnt the
question on this Indictnient ie, whether
ihe dath as libelled is withib the particular
statute ; and there the question is^ whether
itpafyurlf or iniemk to bind the party to
eouMaittfi^ irmMU And tiiis is numbly
apprehend to be an entirely different
tf ing frum any supposed intention in the
patties to an oath which has no such pur-
pott or intendment.
One eonrideration may senv to show
the ^rety gresEt difihrence between the
terms or the BtaftutCi ttid the prosecutor's
nenstfnotion of them. When your lord-
Mps eve ennslieriing the putport or in-
tfcudin^ttt of an nath, writings or speech^
you afU entitled lo infer from the words,
thai h^h tile parties understood and in-
Uended Hiai wnit^ was expressed* But if
yow hMdMHps Biife required to lock into
the Moussus of patties in the use of words
wMch de ne^ pnr^peK the intentton assumed,
it Is etideut^ that Ae One party might in-
tend a meetdng, of whteh the other never
ihoeghft Ibr a memcfnt. zhe administrator
of thn Mrth might have meant to impose
an nbllgutiott to tommit a treason, while
the tflfeer teeeilred it in its plainest mean-
ing and purport, and nerer 0iou|^ of the
faiddett design. In such a case, it could
nefer be said, that Ifae oalh was an obli-
gation purporting or intending to bind the
pally th commit treason, when the party
taking H was altogether msenslbie or any
sneh meaning. In the same manner, the
patty taking it mi^ understand, an obli-
gation to oottMil a treaanni and jNst this
may be totally unknown to dm laMmtira-
Uftf from' whom the "secrel hileution may
ot entnuiy ^oMcealed, and who may, in
plain good ihith, administer a perfectly
innocent oath, hhring no eudi purport,
and no sudi intendment. ITiis just shows
^ great and essential difference between
the two things ; and the informant humbly
uppiufamNe^ omt^ ^tMifiCeiing the tnms of
Uris statute, he is entkMm the strlet and
true meaniMt of those t«nus, asflting a
iwle madly difbiuttt from that of the ex-
traneotis inlentions of me pavties.
But your loidihips WW ohserfU, Ihat in
rtn^ty the proeeeuter in this case has not
put mmseu in u sHuatlun to plead the
point in the way he sitempts to plead it.
He has not smied in the indictment.
Htm the oath was^McndM or nuribisfoorf to
bind the parties in oMy odicr tsn^ than
aooording to its e:iptm pirpefrt or mtentU
MSM* Tiitre la no mgation of a con*
eealed or di Areift meenlng, Ihr lesi any
Bpeciilcation e^ facta to support such an
allegetion. In trati)« (hei^mre, Am% is
here no it>om for this discussion. For
whatever it might he competent to a pro-
secutor to Vbel under this statute, surely
there can he no doubt, that If be libels the
purport of an oath, and males no special
averment of u diffe^rent meaning, and no
specification of fects to infer such k sup-
po^itiott, be ' must be held to cott4n^ him-
self to the purport set fbrfh, as indicating
the Inientidn both of the Udmioiitrator
end the receiver of the oath. Herii', ac-
eordfa|ly, the pr&secutor dees eonfine
himself to the purport stated. For as to
his stetement of secret meetings, and the
numbers to whom the oath is md to have
been administered, it iA quite absurd to
allege, that such ciieumsianees are of
the lightest Televaney, to give any effect
to the oafh whldilts purport and intend-
ment do nM wMWht.
The question then is, ^slmt thii oath
purports and intend^ by its terms m bind
theparty tsiting It to perrormf In con-
sideling this, the jAosecutor always as-
sumes, that there is no other e^mative
but to suppose, that the oath eidmr^und
due patty to commit treiEison, tft wns per*
fhctiy innoceirt. Bitt thii is a supposition
altogether etfloheous. fttnay be admitted,
that, without reference to some -odier
ohjeets, dris 6adi wes in a Mgh degree
improper; thi^ it was highly dtihinal;
that it was of an evtremely dangerous
tendency \ thtft tt vras the duty of the
pift)Kc prosecutor to take notice of it, if
^e fhets were due % end that it might,
with the utmost propriety, hhvu l^en
made "nie subject of an indictment* Sup*
posing all this, the question remains,
whether it is an oath binding the party to
tMMittt -a -fteassftf nothing, therefore, can
be mtMU irrdei^nt or inconclusive, than
to stMe trtcumstance^ in the oafh which
indiesAe improper or mimival views*
They nwy be toy Migrant to show mcA
tntuMtions: but what youz lordships are
%0Uttd %o Aeteimine is, whether the oath
purpovth to Mnd Ae party to commit
ti^eason* Supposing that tn^ prosecutor
liheUed, as he does, dmt thn inmnl^ ad-
mnuimmn mi umn purpeiwng ^
4471 VI GEORGE UI.
Trud oJAnitifm M'KMey
r446
la the oohlmiasioii of. a > iteatmi, and
that yoor lordships were satisfied that it
purported to bind to .oonnnission of a
particular /e^of^fy the criminal intention
ijrould be clear enough, but the iirelevattcy
of the indictment would be equally clear. -
Or, supposing that it were libelled in the
same way, and your lordships were satis-
fied that ^e administiaiion of the oath
amounted to utedUum^ or was meant to
excite a riaif the criminality would be
plain enough f but it would make nothing
towards showing that the indictment might
be sent to an assize. It is most important
to remember, that the law of treason is
the most sacred and delicate of all subjects
in the law^ and that this is an indictment
which eitiar inTolves an engagement to
commit o ireaum, akid nothing elsOf or is
totally wrekvtmt. The blame or crimi-
i^ality imputable to the parties in. other
rpspects is totally immaterial to the ques-
tion.
Look, then, into the terms of this oath.
The informant does not intond to detain
your lordships with any long or minute
cri|icism. He does not agree with the
prosecutor, that your lordslups can desire
no assistance from anjf lemaiks on the
oadi ; and he so far diflwrs from him as to
the obTious purport of it, that he thinks
no person can read it, and say that its
purport is to commit treason of any, kind,
lie may suspect bad intentions ; he may
eren suspect treasonable intentions. But
this is not the point. It has been the
prosecutor's object throughout to escape
mm all Iqpd precision, and to take away
the life of the informant on some rough
and unmeaning conclusions of a crimi-
nality which he cannot define* Butdsie
question is, whether the oath porpoits tfie
commission of a treason, and, according
to the veibal statemient of the prosecutor,
it truly is, whether it purporte an obiig^
turn to Itnjf HMT*
The purty swears^ ** that he will peise*
▼ere in his endeaTOurs to form a brother-
hood of affection among ^tons of cTeiy
description who are considered worthy of
confidence.'' It was said, that this im-
plied an association of prodigious extent.
Peihaps not; for it is limited by the ideas
of confidence which the parties enter-
tained. But though it were ever so wide,
that would not make the obligation to
form it an obligation to commit treason*
It does not even imply crimindity by
itself, though it may be rendered criminal
by the objects in view. He next swears
to "peisevere in his endeavonrs to obtain
the electiye tenchise for all persons of
the age of twenty-one, not disqualified by
crimfu, '&c. and annual parliaments.''
The prosecutor may state, and those who
aigue the case of the informant will, agree
With him| that^ nothing more unoonsti*
tutional,- nothing more absurd, nothing
more mischievous, nothing more ncjcessa-
rily leading to denrntism, and to the d^
stmction of the liberties of the countrfy
could be suggested, than this proposal of
universal aufficage and annual parliamente.
But if there is any liberty in this oonntty^
it permits the subject to entertain, and '
ereli publish, speculative opinions, which
are unconstitutional, absurd, and even
mischievous, if they do not tend to any
direct breach of law. If there is any
thing certain in the law of treason (and
it is the most certain of all lawsX the
pursuit of such oljeots has not tfie least
relation to any treason, and does not
even infer the slightest saspides of an
intention to commit it.
But the sting of this oath is supposed
to lie in the words which follow, ''and
that I will support the same to the utmost
of my power, either \rf moral or physical
strength (or force), as the case may re-^
quire." It is not clear to what the words^
''support the same" refer. Ihey may
refer to the hrothirhood of t^fktkmi or to
the fncfeonwrt for obtaining annual par-
liamente and universal suffrage themseivea
whei^ obtained. If there is any doubt,
your lordships will interpret fovourably..
And this is tne more neoeiMaiy, when you
eonsider thenatore of this offence. There
might be very mischievous designs in the
person or persons who originaUy framed
this oath ; and yet, if it was adnunistered
to hundreds, as die prosecutor says^ pro-
bably nine -tenths of them did not underw
stand it. At all events, they mig^ put
different constructions ; and if the PUUd
grammar of the • sentence admite ef w^
pljTing the words " to support the same,*^
to the objectewhen attainea, the informant
is entitled to the benefit of that constmc^
tion ; and in demanding it, he is not ask->
ing any force upon the words which they
do not fairly bean but only that masons
able allowance for the imperfisc^ion of
language, and the various understandings
of It, which all vmters agree must ba
given in such a case*
But, allowing the prosecutor to apply
these words to toe ondeaiwmn for obtaining
universal suffrage and annual pariiaments,
can any man say, that they purport an
engagement to levy war i^goms^ tke kng^
Ihe party is to support his endeavours ia
the utmott of hii power, either by his moral
or his fijftkal itrengthf as the case may
require.
If it had been that . he was to support
them to the. uimoet of kie pcwMr, wiibont
any addition, would it have, been an en-
gagement . to commit treason ? Those
Kords would have comprehended all that
it ejprested by the words as they stand s
Xhey. would have comprehended both
moral and physical tir^th, both mor»l
^4i»J
Jbhjidminisienng uniavoful Oaths,
A. D. 1817.
L450
ixkd, physical force. The informaot sup-
'po9es, that the prosecutor would not have
said in that case^ that tliis was ah engage-
ment to commit treason. And why would
Ke not have said it f For no reason that
the informant knows, but that, though a
man tnoy intend to lery war, in order to
obtain annual parliaments and nniyersal
soilrage, this is not to be inferred, merely
because he engages to support his endea-
▼onis for obtainitig them to the utmost of
bis power. All his powers^ moral and
physical, ixe includda in the terms ; and
yet the t>urport 6f an In^agemeut to
commit trekson cduld never oe stated.
The informant codfesses, he can see no
solution of this, extept by what the pro-
secutor is pleased to caU a ** reservation
bf illegali^:'' Ih plainer terms> that
presumption of irinoceiice, by which
words, which admit of an inilbceiit con-
struction, or of a construction which is
not treasonable, are not to be extended or
twisted, so as td make out a guilty or
traitorous desini.
If the words had been, ^That I will
support the same to the utmost of my
power, with ffiy whole. moral strength,^* the
design might equally hare tfeeto to commit
a treason: For undoubtedly, a tteason
toay be committed b^ moral strength
alone — ^by writing letters, — furnishing mo-
iiey, — giving advice, — giving information,
— encouragiifg, .comforting, persiiadinff
others. But yet the prosecutor would
scarcely have inferred an obligation to
.^commit treason, if the oath had b^en so
^pressed.. And why notf For.no r^asoo^
but that, though treason might be so com-
hnitted, the presumption of innoicence
would not dipw the engageihent to be so
construed, when so many other supposi-
tions, consistent With innocence, could be
made.
The prosecutor's caJe> then, lies entirely
in the supposed effect of the words, « or
physical strength;'* or, as he has now
oeen pleased to express it, *' or physidil
streng&i (or force)." Now, it ii true, that
a nan H^ho Undertakes tolevywai- map, and
most prbbably will, exert both moral and
physical strehgfli ; but it does not follow,
mat every man, Whb engages to support
certain end^ivours for obtaining a public
object, either by his moi^ or physical
stren^, as the case may require necessa-
rily hmdt himself to levy ioar, or to do any
act of treason, t. It is rfbt ab engagement
to Ifvy.war, because the occasion may-
never arise. Hie ' parties may be Con-
sented with the exertion of their moral
strength, and may even accoojplish the
object by these means. But 2, There are
JDSt as many ways in which phydcal
streng[th may be lawfulfy eierted for at^
tiinin^ such an ohject, as there are ways
in which moral strength may be lawfully
VOL. xxxin.
exerted. A man may make joufnies— he
may print books — ^he may make speech^
—he may work to procure money to pay
the expense— he may erect hustings-— he
ihay use his physical strength in keeping
off the crowd at a meeting — ^he may de-
fend the meeting against an illegal attack.
Itinumerable other suppositions may be
ma^e, demonstrating, tliat the exertion of
physical strength no more necessarily im-
plies levying War; or any treason, than the
Exertion of moral strength does. But, 3,
Either moral or bhysicail stieifgth may be
employed unlawpiUVf lind yet n6t have the
least tendency to become an overt act,
either of kvymg War; or of any other trea»
son, A man may resist a magistrate, who
requited th^ dissolution of an assembly,
under th^ late st^nte ; he may arrest a
member of parliament illegallY ; he may
murder a prime minister ; and he may do
innumerable other minor acts, contrary to
^law, all for the purpose of accomplishing
'the object of annual parliaments, and uni-
versal suffrage ; and yet it would be im"*
possible to state that he had levied war, or
was guUty <f trjMson. There is no denying
these thingS4 and the prosecutor has not
attembt^ to deny thehi.
But what is the consequence? It is^
With ^tibmission, quite inevitable, that the
engagemeifl to support his endeavours by^
his physical strength, if the case may re^
quire it, is no more an engagement to levpr
war, or to commit treason, than th6 obli*"
gation to support those endeavomv to the
utmost of his power generally, or to sup-
port them by his moral sttetigth> would be.
For the fei^ same principle of judgment
applies. The thing engaged to be done
m<inf hwhide tlie case' of criminalJtT, but it
also may be reconciled either with a law**
ful intention, or with the contemplation
5f acts, 'which, though not lawful, have no
relation to treason. The presumption in
favour of innocence comes in, and the
^ reservation of illegality*' is just as ad-^
missible, and as necessarily implied in
this case ai in the olbent.
Mdke (he supposition for a moment^
that this oath were legid tiUid binding, ac-
cording to its terms: Tlie party lK>und
might be obliged to make great exertions
' in order to obt^n the object of annual
parliaments, &C. But if he were required
to murder the king, ^ould it be stated
'that that was part of bis engagement T
Or suppose that he Were required to inur-
der hit own faihet, or Ids own u»/e, or his
owAchUd; could it be said, that, because
he had engaged to support his^en'deivours
• for a particular object with his m6ral or
physical strength, as the. case might re-
quire, he bad therefore engaged to commit
all manner of atrocities wiitiout distinc-
tion ? It is plain thai the engagement
never could admit of such a construction*
a G
4511
57 GEORGE IH.
Trud ^Andrem M^Kmleg
Tb« proiecutor'f nuUke UoeailjUie
tamey wl)icii lie b9> aniouno^ in bis
general pIfA t^ i^a nUtr^^icy, when be
•eypj fh|tt i( by anyfmi^ cofnAmcfwiiy
tbe Qtlh OMiry bev the soppoiidon of a
toeaeoDabie^eeigPx that i$ eiioiigh to make
it peievaat. Ue Mmines, that every im-
agioable case pf the £iertioo of physieal
Btrengtb ia undeitahen» ^thovgh he will
not make the #ame auppoeition in the case
ef MorW strepgth or power in general.
Bnt the informant faambly mfdnUins, that,
ta be eenld exert his power, «nd exert
his moffl strength^ and exier^ lu9 physical
itrength, aU alit^ either Imi^fUfy or unkw-'
fidl^i either UrmoiM^ or not trfotonahfy,
be is entitled in the last ease, just as
^ amch as in the othen, to the aiost ^vour-
able oonstructioDy and to boM» that the
engagement was merely to use his strength
in a lawiul manner; hut tha^, at all
e^ontSy it did not puiport an engegement
to levy war, or commit iFeasoB.
The additional term *(or fonoeV which
the prosecnter has imfi>dnced into this
indictment^ snrely cannot alter the state
of the question against the informant.
It .is stsied as an alternative <» synony-
mous term, though plainly not ^ynony*
mousy and introduced for tliat vm reason ;
and the introdiietipn of it only shews the
very uncertain date on whioh this prose-
tntion has been mwid, But it may be
observed^ that the pseeecito? has not told
your lordshipif wAwA 9f Ibepe ^o words
was employed, in any ef the fmiiaikr
eases in whi<A he eharges 4^ m^ to have
been administeied h^ the iaibrmant; and
he is here endeevouiing tp make e rele-
vancy by mere guess, without affirming
that the word new introdnoed w<» aetuaihf
used in m^ one of the eAAW Ubelled in
this indictment.
If the pre-secutor means lo say, that
this was an engagement <o 8l^)port the
endeavonra by a eombined physical force,
it is an idea completely ineonsistent with
the words of the oath, for yeur lordships
will remembei', that it is '* in|f eodeavours*'
that are to be supported, and #e engage-
ment is, * dtat I will support ^e same to
the utmost of m^ power ;*' the reference
being coustantly to individual exertions
alone. It is only by construction, and the
most violent implication, thai this idea of
a combined force can be at all maintained
as involved in this oath. And, in short,
it is impossible to call thif anenmiement
to levy wv, withoiit enticely departing
bo^hftom the lolfi; ^f l%w on that sub-
ject, and frpm ev«Or w^ect idea of the
qualities whidt ase n^eemry %» anch an
•ogagatoeat*
i4S^
The remainder of this oath contains an
engagemisnt to |iecrepy» to which the pro-
secutor fineqoently reCery. But an engage-
ment of secrecy, however improper it maj
be in itself, and however it maj^ raise
suspicions, and even belief, of criminal
4iesigns, wiU n^t make thi9 oath to be an
oath purpprting tp bind to levy war, or
commit any treason, if there it np engnge-
mfioAitfthU purport in the vest of the oiSh.
Such oaths of secrecy are known to exist,
and that with peculiar sanctions^ in so-
cieties which 'aie net deemed to be con-
trary to any law. But even spuposing
the socieUr to have had bad d^gns, it
does not follow thei there was ap engage-
ment to commit treason ; and youf lord-
ships will not viplate the law, and proceed
on principle^ pf constructive treason,
merely because the prpsecutor hes not
taken the right way cf putting p, $top to
proceedings which might be dangerous or
illegal.
It is' time to conclude this discqssioo.
Your lordships are here called on^ for tfie
first tvme, to decide pn the relevancy of an
indictment laid pn a ptatwte in th« highest
deipree penal. The act was pasted with
a view tp particular cironmstancei^ which
do pot, and never did exist in this ooun*
try; and the truth is, that those who made
it had more in their view the case of oathfr«
binding to comniU murder and other felo-
nies, than the ca^e of an oath binding to
commit treason. Perhaps the omo of
treason was not well considered* $nt be '
this as it may, it is humbly subniitted,
that, exclusive of thp separate point,
which is tp be argued, if there was here
an path administered^ purporting pr in-
tending to bind the pttrty taking. H to
commit any known tre^son^ there wna ao
difficult whenever in laying a reteiant
indictment for that offence. Bnt, it ift
now ppparani, that the prosecntor^s diff-
culties origias^te in the substanpe ef the
case. He raip?o< a?e^ thiLt the oath pur-
ported or intended tp bind the pnTty,
eiiker to levy wot, or to oav^^eis the, Ick^m
death, or to cfinmre to (ngr vxr, or to mU
here to the kin^B enemie$f kc He setn
forth an oath, which purports to bind t»
none of these treasons ; and he retees to
make the averment, in direct violatipn of
all the rules of cnmtnal indictmeats^
plainly meanine, and almost wrpwiqg hts
intention, to take the fel^vanq/ efthe cfceyc
entirely out of the htmdt iff the Coml.
J4NX9 hfogoi^iiirf •
459]
Jbr AimiiHslerhtg uniMofid Oaths*
A. D. 1817.
r4st
M^ t% 1817.
SOFPLKMENtARY INFOAMAtlON
AKOB£W M^KINLBY, prtient Frwmet in
tk€ Cottle^
ALBXANDEB MACONOCHIE, 1^..^
fat Ait Mo/es^f iii«dfiB«f .
•The prisoner hM next to Miblnit to the
Court a Tiew of the 4]i]6ttM totally dif«
toent ffom tho«e he has dready offieted^
and in trgiiiag which he is to proeeedi on
Che assumption, that those fiews which he
iuis already stated are erroneous. For the
puipose of this arguttent he is to assume,
that the oath does, in its terms necessarily,
and by due constructioni purport and in-
tend to bind the peraoM taking the iame
to commit treason ; and that the specific
treason, to the comnkission of which \\ did
purport And Intend to bind, is sufixdently
aet forth in this indictment.
Then the prisoner says, that the treason
there set forth is, and can be, no other
thatt the * levying war against the king,
ia order, by fof6e or constraint, to com-
pel him^ to change his measures or eeun-
aels, or m order to put force or constraint
iipe# both Houses, or either Houte of
nrfiament.''
The aeeusMfofl is, that the prisoner
** did, at secret iheetings, and other occa-
aions, at Oiasgow, or in t^ immediate
vienity thereof, iwfckedlry, maliciously,
and MmioiMly administei*, or cause to
be fldmhrist^Md^ or did aid or aasiat at
ahe administ^ilg,^ to a great duflSber of
persons, to fho amount of seYcral- hun-
dveds, an oath, or engagement, or ad en-
gagement, or obligation id tfie nature of
an oath, pdrportidg or intending to bind
Ihe persons taking thef same td codimit
treason, by Obtaining annual parliaments
and uniTenal sdifrage by physical stretigth
4>r force, and tiiereby emcting the sub-
▼ersf<$n of the establiaAied government,
laws, and const^tntioti of this kingdom,
by milawfiil and violent means/'
The prisoner hae eudedivoured to satisfy
your lordships, that -tfiis is liot such an
aiecusation ts is snfliciently precise to
put a person upon his trial either for
folony, m for high treason, or for any
•ther crime. The eiime provided against
b^tbe statute, is the administering an
oath, purporting or idteudiag to bind to
the commission of any treason. Whether
the oafli does puiport or inteud so to bind,
it a qaestion of legal constraction, and it
depends on two propositions, Fir^, What
act it is which to d»| the oath purports or
intends to bitid ; Secandfy, Whether that
act be a treason. This latter <|uestion de-
pedds on the words of certain statutes,
add your lordships, in determining whe-
ther any act dobe, or propo!jed to be done,
is, or would be, an act of treason, must
look to the Mrords of those statutes/ as
.they ar4 expounded bv the decrsions of
the Courts, and must be satisfied that
such act comes, or would com^, within
euch words so expottaded. This it is
which, byyottr interloeulor of relevancy,
you must necessarily declare, and this you
cannot do, unless the words of the indict-
ment are so fram^ that your simple af-
Hrroance of fhe proposition there set
forth may amount to a distinct and suffi-
cient judgment in law, that the foct al-
leged to be projected would, if carried
info execution, amouht to one or othet* of
ihe treasons declared by statute. Your
lordships, in your interlocutor of rele-
vancy, cannot vary from the terms of the
indictment. By finding this indictment
relevant, you do judicially declare, that
^ to obtain anuau parliaments add ani-
vereal suffrage by physical strength or
force, and thereby to effect the sdbversion
of the established government, laws, and
constitutiott of this kingdom, by unlawful
and violeni means,'' M treason legally and
sufficiently describe.
The prosecutor afilrmsy that the oath
purported to bind , persons (o comrmit
treason, and that It bound them to do so
by doing that Which is here set forth,
like doing that, therefore, he affirms us be
the committing of treason, and he desires
of your lordships to pronounce a solemn
judgment of this Court, declaring that it
IS so, in the terms with which he has sup-
plied you. An indtctmedt, therefore,
against any person for coidfditting trea-
son, alleging that he has done what it is
herein set forth that the oath in question
purported to bind the persons taking it
to do, and stating that allegation in the
terras here employed,, most l)ereafter,
under this judgment of your lordships, be
a good and valid indictment of treason,
since it would be conceived in terms
which your lordships have decided t^l>e,
in an indictment, a sufficient description
of treason.
But there ane no treasons in the law,
unless by the ilSfh Edward 3rd, or some
subsequent statute, and your lordships
cannot declare this to be a legal and sofTi-
cient description of treason, without de?
daring it to be a legal and sufficient de-
scription of some treason declared in that
or some subsequent statute. '
The declamtiod demanded of you by his
majesty's advocate is not* that the com-
mitting a particular act wiuld amount to an
avert act of$ome gpec^c treaton decfarcd htf
ikUnte; mM he desires that you shoufd
t
4Jf$} ^ ^7 GEORGE IIL
Triat of Andrew M*Kinkjf
[45^
ftud that this is a uffidtnt de$crifltiim cf a^
freatot^ declared hy your lordth^.
In Done of the statutes does thiy ftppetr
as the description of any sort of treason;'
^nd the demand of the prosecutor is diis.
that your lordships, of ypur authority, s^all
declare a new treofoUf Which is contrary to
law, and wqpld be matter of impeachment.
^ For it is a contradiction in terms to say^
that your lordships can declare that an
oath pqrport9 fo bind to the commission
of high 'treason, beo^use it purports to
bind to do acts fi^llipg within a certain
description, without declaring that that
description is (s docr^ioii oftreaum; and
it is a contradiction in terms to say, that
\i is Ugalfy and nMdetUUf alleged that an
oath purports to bind to the commission
of treason, by binding to do acts which
would come within a certain description,
without declaring that such descriptiop is
^ le^al and sMcient description of treason.
lITow, high trea^n is of two general
descriptiqns. Ther^ is qne which consists
in the oompassings and imaginations or
)he mind ; and another, ^orhich consists in
the doing some act, Treason^ of the
jformer description must be ms^nifested by
something actually done and 'perfonqed,
by which the treasonable compassing may
)>e known ; and to }]ie due allegation of such
treasons two things are necessary : Fvst,
To set forth, and legally to describe, the
pompassing and imagination constituting
^e treason ; and, SMmdlif, To set forth,
with sufficient accuracy, the act done,
Irom which such compassing and imagina- ^
tion is inferred. And the setting f9rth
the act only, is not setting forth the
treason, but what is meant to be giyeo in
evidence of the treason, 'and which can
peyer constitute treoMon^ till that from which
4in inference is drawn be confounfl^ if ith
ihat which is inferred ; or qntil the
f yidence adduced shall be deemed the same
thing with tlie ayerment which it is in-
tended to prpyQ.
In. the second description of treasons
*- those which do qot reside in the mjnd,
but which consist in some act performed
— the daar^ftion ^ftke act n the ducripltUM
qf the TREASOV,
In describing the treasons which reside
in the mind, the compastings andwuigmatiam
^ust be described m the terms of the statutes
which declare them to be treason^ and the
overt act must be so stated, that, if proyed
to follow from such compassings and
imaginations, it will amount to a manifes-
tation thereof. In treasons which consist
not in the intentions or wishes of the heart,
the fact commuted must be set forth ti) the
words of the statutes declaring it a treason.
Nor can, in either case, the statutory )an-
gu^ge be departed from, without holding
out a netQ definition of treason, or deman4ing
th^t tht treason which \s described \n^ the
statutes may be Uderred by cpniiitnatUon ;
both of which are direetly contrary to law.
If it be said, the description giyen is a
description of what would constitute aii
overt act of some treason, then the prisoner
replies, A description of the overt act U
not a description of the treason, but of^
the evidence of the treason merely. The^
Court and the prisoner are entitled to have
the treason alle^, of which the overt act
' it is said would be evidence, ' tiiatl4bt
former m^y judge whether it would be so,
and the latter may prepare to deTend
himself, by shewing that it would not.
It is to no purpose to say, that the sort
of treason is apparent, and the infer-
ence from the overt act quite plain.
The rule must general. Either the
treason must be set forth in all cases, or
it is nedbsary in none. Th^ legal form
of indictpiepts cannot v^ry, by the ca-
pricious estiQiat^ that v^%Y be made of
the convenience or iQcpnvenience of dis^
pepsing with them in particular cases. If,
m diis case* it be unnecessary to set forth
the treason, then this must be held for the
general rule in indictments on this statute
and eoually the rule as to oaths purporting
to bind to commit /efonia, notwithstanding
their indescribable nuipber and varietur ;
Uiough it is pbyiqui that in qiany, or in
most cases, this nile vvould ' be wholly in**
4:pnsistent ivith ju9tip^-
If it be said; the thing alleged to be
projected is itself the treason, then the
prboner replies, It is not a treason de*
scribed in any of the statutes.
But in what be is now to offer,* the
-prisoner, for the sake of argument, admits
that this position is a mistake— that the
description here given is a sufficient de^
scription of high treason — that it is not
necessaij to follow, in this instance, the
words of the statutes by which the various
treasons are created or defined — ^but thai
it is enough if the description be such as
to ponvey to ordinary apprehensions, that
the fact, if oommitted, would iall, or
might fall, under some of the known legal
descriptions of treason. The prisoner,^
th^refore, must set himself to consider of
what species of treason a person ought to
be indicted, who hath done that which, in
common language, and to a oommop in-
tent, the allegation in the indictment would
or might convey.
It is obvious, that no other treason cai^
be meant than that of levying war against
the king. It may involve the compassing
and imagining tlie deatii of the king, be-
cause the levying of war against the kiDg
may well be an overt act of such cons,
passing and imagining. For your lord-
ships know that it is laid down by lon|
Hale, * that " any assembly to levy war
* 1 Hale las. ^ ^
far Admmulfri»guiAmfid4)tiAt.
A. D. 1817.
C44&
jigjginst the king, eidier to depose, or
restraioy or enforce him to any act^ or to
come to his presence to remove his Goan-
sellors, or ministers, or to fight against the
king's lieutenant, or military commissiopate
officers, is an overt act, proting the coin-
passing the death of (he king, for sufh a
war is directed against 'the very person of
the king, and he that designs to fight
against the king, cannot but know at least
it must hazard his life." And in sir John
Friend's case, * who was indicted of high
treason, in compassing and conspiring the
death of the king, lord chief justice fiolt
^ys down the law, that ^ If there be only
a conspiracy to levy war, it is not treason;
but if the design and conspiracy be either
to kill the king or depose him, or imprison
bin^ gr put any force or restraint upon
him', aqd the way and method of effecting
pf these 18 by levying a war, then the con-
sultation and conspiracy to levy a war
for that purpose, ishigb treason, though
no war be levied; for such consultation
and conspiracy is an overt apt proving the
compassing the death of tjie king.*'
Kow if the )oose ^rords of jthjs indict*
ment are to be construed as describing
any sort of ^npwn treason, the obtaining
by physical strength that whid^ effects the
^iibTersion pf the established goyemment,
laws, and constitution, may be an assem-
bly to levy war against the king, to depose
him, and can hardly by construction, if
treason may be made matter of construe*
tion, be less than the levying war to en-
force the kin^ to some act, or to put a
force or restraint upon him, since it ciinnot
be supposed thsit.the king will consent
to suclt subversion, and since he cannot
consistently with his diity ^d his oath,
but oppose it at all hazards* fiut to effect
^is subversion by unlawful and violent
meens, through the obtaining annual par*
fiaments and universal suffrage by physical
force or strength, if they are words snf-
^ciently certain and precise to amount to
a legal allegation of any sort of treason,
^pan mean nothing else than a levying of
war, in order, by force and constraint, to
compel the king to change his measure^
or coon3e]s, or t^t vqy rate in order to put
,fgrce or cohstr^t upon both Houses, or
either House pf parliament, since annual
parliaments, and universal suffrage cannot
be obtained but by an act passed by the
two Houses, and by the king, and it this
passing be obtained by violent means,
which violence amounts to treasonable
violence, it can. be no other than the
putting such, force or constraint either
upon ms ms^esty, or upon one or other
House of Parliament, as is above men*
tioned.
Furtbe^ if the levying of war, mea^t
^ 4 St. Tr. 625, 6^6. [13 How. St. Tr. 61.]
here to be imputed, be;, as has been said
against the king's person, the oompas^ng
the kin|^s death is the treason, and the
conspinng to levy sudi war is an overt
{^ct therepf, pnder the statute of 25t|i
^ward 3rd- If the war to be levied
irerp for the purpose, by force or f;on«
straint, to compel the king to change his
measures, in order to put force on both
Houses, or either House of Par)iaii|ent,
the compassing or imagining to levy ^udi
war is oeclared to be high treason, during
his mmesty's life, by 36& Geo. Jrd, c* 7;
and of necessary consequence, tbe con-
spiring to levy such war is an overt apt of
such compassing and imagining.
It cannot be doubled mt the adminis*
tering, at secret meetinss, and on pther
occasions, to a great number of persops to
the amount of several hundreds, an oath,
purporting or intending to bind Oiese
nundreds of persons to levr such war,^
amounts to a conspiring, and to an overt
act of ccnnpassing such levying of war.
The prosecutor, therefore, is in this di-
lemma firom which it is impossible ha
should escape. Either he has not suf**
/iciently charged the felony under th^ act
preating it, because he has not sufficiently
alleged that the oath purported to bind to
pommit any treason ;--whidi the prisoner
says he has not : Or if he have sufficiently
phased it, which the prosecutor says he
has, then what he has cnarged amounts to
4n overt act of high treason ; and this the
prisoner undertakes to satisfy your loid«
ships cannot be tried on the indictment
of the lord advocate, or according to the
mode of trial which in this case has been
adopted. The prisoner is aware^ that
mere words, unaccompanied by any acting
pr any njeasure taken, do not constitute
an overt act of any sort of ^reason, thongh^
in particular cases, where the security of
the subject appears to have been less re-
garded than tne jealousy felt by die Crown,
it has been otherwise held ; but it never
Ifvas doubted, that the assembling of per-
sons, together to conspire, or to confider
of, or to bind themselves to commit, an
overt act of any treason which consists in
compassing and imagining, is in itself,
without more, an overt act of such
compassing and imagining. Thus, ** if
there be an assembling together to con-
sider how they may kill the king, this
assembling is an overt act to make good
an indictment of compassing the king's
death." ^ And in the case of SomerviU^
Arden, and others, f it was resolved bv
all the jndges of Endand assembled,
** that at to Arden and ue rest, that they
conspired with the said Somervill,^ and
procured him to undertake to commit the
•^ 1 Hale, P. C. 119.
t 1 Anderson's Rep. 106<
49Sf] 57GBOROB III.
7Mx/ ofAndrm »Kndey
treason which m^ to destroy the qaeeo^
was sufficient overt act, since they were
assembled to this purpose, and procured or
engaged him ; for otherwise the procurers
of treason might always escape punish-
ment, if, after their procurement, they did
not proceed fu/ther.^ And to the same
purpose^sergeant Hawkins says, '* It hath
been resoWed that conspiring to levv war
against the king's person may be alleged
ai» overt act of compassing his death;*'*
The accusation in this indictment
amounting In substance to a charge of
high treason, manifested by an overt act,
the prisoner humbly maintains, as conse-
quent on this, three propositions :
1st, That this accusation, amounting
to an accusation of having committed an
overt act of treason, cannot, bv the ge-
neral and established rules of law, be
tried as a felony under this or any other
statute.
2ndly, That by positive statute, 7th
iU^ne, c. SI. it cannot be tried in Scot-
land, by the ordinary forms of the Court
of Justiciary, or on an indictment by the
lord advocate.
3rdly, That there is nothing in the act
52nd Geo. III. c. 104. on which this in-
dictment is laid, which abrogates the rule
of law above mentioned, or repeals the
said statute of queen Anne. Neither is
any such alteration of the law to be in-
ferred ftom any legal construction of the
words of this statute of the king ; nor is
there any reason to believe that the legis*
lature entertained any such intention.
1st. The prisoner humbly maintains,
that the accusation against him, resolving
in substance into a charge of high treason,
cannot be tried as a felony.
The prisoner need hardly state, that the
law of Scotland was, by the said act of
queen Anne, rendered the same in matters
of high treason with that of England.
The act declares, that what is treason
within England, snail be adjudged treasnn
within Scotland; that nothing shall be
treason in Scotland which is not treasan
in England ; and that the trial of treason
in Scotland shall be the same as is used
in England. Therefore the two questions,
1st, what is treason in Scotland? and,
2ndly, How that wliich is treason shall
be tried in Scotland ? must be determined
by the English law. In these respects,
the law of England is a part of the law of
Scotland ; and if it be tnu^ generally in-
troduced into this Country, and ingrafted
upon our national law. it cannot be
doubted Iha^ it was introauoed wholly and
entire, that all its principles and rules are
our principles and rules in these matters,
and that your lordships, wherever a ques-
tion of high treason arises^ are as much
T ~ I — — — — — — - - ■
* Hawkins, P. C. B. 1, c. 17, § 27.
\AS6
bound to jndge according to the pnnciplea
which govern the courts of la win England
in such cases, both of what oonstitntes
the offence, of the mode in which it mutt
be set forth and alleged, and of how it
may be tried and mvestigtted, as, in a
charge oif theft^ yon are bcwaid to adheie i
to the common and statute law of Scot- '
land, to the principles of our own muni-
cipal institutions, and to tlie eonne of
procedure established by fhe praetiee of
your predeoessan in the Coorc Of Jnsti-
ciary. To talk of introdndng a system
of law ftom a foreign country, in an ex-
tensive and important branch of the law,
rejecting at the same time any of those
rules and maxims which in its own coontiy
attend that part of its institutionB, and re-
guhite, extend^ restrain, or modmr timir
application, is in terms a oontradletion,
and would be in practice worse than an
absurdity.
If, therefore, the facts charged In the
present indictment would amount, ao-
eording to the English' authorities, to hi^
treason, and if such &cts committed la
England could not be tried there as a
felony, — ^if it be true that, in case of a
trial in England for a folony, the trial
must, bv the law of England, m slopped,
if the nets came out in evidence so<m as
they are h^re alleged, and no verdiet or
judgment of the folony oonld be pro-
nounced on such evidence^ — ^then the pri-
soner maintains, that by the law of Scot-
land, this being the same in this matter
as the law of island, no triad for folony
can proceed in Scotland on this charse.
If it could, then it is obvious, that Sie
law of treason in England would be no
longer the law of treason in Scotland, and
the mode of trial fin England would be no
longer the mode of trial in Scotland ; for
offences amounting by the law of Eng^nd
to high treason, might neverdieless be
tried in Scodand by a fonn of trial, by
which the same offences coaM 0ot be
tried in England.
On this part of the subject the prose-
cutor has oividedhis axgument into two
averments.* 1st, That the principle of
the common law of England founded on,
has no application to any trial in this
Court, according to the law of Scotland.
And, 2ndly^ That even in England it has
no application to a trial for an ofl^nce
against the act of the 52nd of the king.
To the second Question the nrisoner
will have to address nimself hereafter* In
the meanwhile, he ia anxiotv to c<m&ne
your lordship's attention to the first, be-
cadse if it be true that die prindple of
, the law of England has iKT appHcation to
this trial, it were vain to inquire footber
what that principle is.
* Information for his mii||esty's advocate, p. 9^.
MU
for 4iminuimng unlmfiU Oaths*
A. D. I»i7«
Uea
To Hm mtHBer %u irludi the prosecutor
liM met tliif ebfectioD* the prisoner's
Qomieel ee^bftfdlj widerlske te ao justice,
eioee tliej eve oospelled to confess, that
theie is much of his reesoBsng which they
4ere not pretea^ to undeistand. For the
seeeaing respect niA which he conde-
soendea to honoui that stated at the bar
for the prisoaer, the pmecotor has thought
it necessary to apolo|[iie, by accounting
for it from the impression on his mind at
the timci tha|L the aigoment must have
something in it he was unable to diseorer ;
and to atone for it by deolaring^ that be
has now ascertained that there was no
discovery to make. The prisoner's counsel
are by no pieans in this situation. On
the contraiy, from the beaten track of an
jaquiiy into the application of some simple
and welMLuown principles of law^ they
have found themselTes suddenly trans-
ported into unexplored regions^, where
discoferies are made at every step, and
psopofitions equaUy new anq surprising
start up at every tuning.
In one sentence the prisoner finds,
let* JhM ** though it is understood to be
a principle in Ewilish law, that if e nun
fia imumi% Is titnonf le mn9i be ac-
^vvn^Df yet ** iker§ mnoauthoriiyfor
m/mg^ J%at • «vBi cmmpi be triid for
And, 2ndly, '^ iM ike >ry akme am
jedgt^ wnzTxnn bx has coyvirrBD
TmnAson on nor.'' Tbe 9rst of these
pn^ositiqas aponnte to thii^ that where
n man cannpt be UwfiiULy couTicted, he
may yet be lawfbUy tned; sud is so
stated, lefiffenieerMf^ in tfie next sentence
but ene, for it is laftdp that '^ this objee-
figm derived froas thakw of £og;|and is
AV QiMlct^qir XQ A eovTiCTion, avd
HOT TO A TnzAi^'' So thet it is no ob-
jection to the poking a men on biatrial,
thai no conviction cen ibllow* nor any
vassnn w)iy yonr loidshios should not send
en indictment to the Knowledge of an
eesise* tbetf. if eU the bcu are proved as
laidy th^ assise cennnt lawfriUy convict.
That is» the Cowt and jury a^ te sit and
ar eeuses fi>i the amusement of my lord-
voeate^ or tho ettom^-general, where
no result ean tiJte piece; imd prisoners
erem he e^rpesed to torturvvul to danger,
ftr Af eo^e pwp^iee of tins inhmnsn di-
Of th^e«t(il9|ld of tb« WnB^dMMT. ^ch
lekt Ipf 0wi^> the possu^t^ of e trial
hfi mfmm^ wifr th% ^ vdiiql^otence
mytHm«|tt9H«ifpNm^ l!fe(?^fierson
«w }m <fl4 m «n wnicp egmst the
9^ mjliieh irftaMtmit elitWiemf time
te tsyng> tine denes imnKe« imfbsur-
mf[r YtJiet thif dense does imply^ will
• laf, Pi |M.
iVM
be afterwards shown. But assuredly it
impUes no such absurdly as this, that it
meant to authorise the triel of persons
under drcomstances in which they cannot
be lawfully convicted.
But if this proposition he astonishing^
the second, by which it ^ meant to be
supported, is not less so. Ihe counsel
for the prisoner had elways be|ieved, that
whether certain friels amounted to a cer«
tain crime, waa^a gtirtHon ^iiour— of which,
in Scotland, the Cdurl disposed on the
showing of uie indictment, by thdv inter*
locntor of relevancy — ana on which, in
England, as the facts came out in^evidence,
the Court may stop the trial, or direct en
accfuittal, or direct a special verdict.; and
which, after trial, may be jud|^ of there
by the Court, dther on a special vevdkt,
or on a motion in arrest of ^ud^ent on
the evidence. They have now learaed,
that they have all along been miserably
deceived, for thev have it on grave antho-
rity, that ^ whether what a man haa oom-
mitted be treason or not. Me /ury elpnc
ten judge ;^ and ** OaH one accused of
felony cannot he acquitted on the around
that he has committed treason, umcsi ike
j»yiire9ati^fiedqftkii. tfim the emdtmce^
lese, and some otner wuw»**hvi.«,
are staled to be smA en oofioer et mey be
nmde in on £ri^^ eauri to tkk o^jectiem.
This the prisoner must be perinitted to
deubt; although it appears to the pioee*
outor ^wte concbmoe md aati^adory*
But the argument* by which the proee*
eutor wQuldprovi^ that ^' the principle of
the law 9f ^ngland^ as to the merging of
fdony in treason, has no application
whatever to trials before the criminal
courts of Sootland," is too- curiomi to be
passed over. ^
h is said, the! ** it will not do to say
generaUj^ ml Uui whole docUines ^ the
English law, a« to treason^ have been
introduced into Seotlandi" though it is
a4mitled to be enacted by the stalnle of'
queen Anne^that ** dl crimes and offeneee
which are treason in En|^d shall be
treason in Scotland." And it ia asked,
^ whether this compds the prosecution
of any crime as treason, whkkwft^; be tried
under onather and lower rff noumMiififlu T**
With great deference the questiqn is,
leb^tker or not U ma^ be iq trkdl It is
quite true, thet the tendering of thoee
offences treason in Scotland whidi are
tieason in England, would of itsdi^ make
no abersdon in the mode dther otprose-
eution or of punishment, But t£e act
rm e great ded further* E<^b|.i|fction
it is ejected, thail ^ the jpstica court,
eniothCY oenrts*. having pp^ to jndge
tn.eeses-nf hidi ti^sen-epi mif^rismn of
high tieesoisSi Seotleml, ees mgiiissd is
^ (pif.p«99<h
463] ^7 GEORGE til.
en^n hy the oaihi of twelve ikeH in th«
khire or stewartry where the courts shall
^if&faU high treasottt and mispriaSoD of
high treason committed within tne shires
. or stewartries, and theirtapon to ptoceed^
hear, mnd deUrtmne offences, whereof any
' person shall be indicted before them, in
9uch mmmar a$ £le cburt afQueerCi beiichf or
jmtices of Oyer and Terminer in En^hmd
mau do. And if any person be indicted,
of nigh treason, fcc. oefore any justices of
Oyer and Terminer, or of the Circuit
Courts, &c. upon the request of the
queen^s advocate ffeneral, the lord chan-.
celtor shall award her majesty's writ of
teriiinFari directed to the justices of Oyef
and Terminer, &c. commanding tiiem to
tertify such indictment into (he justice
court, which court it required to proceed
•poll, Aeor, and determine the same at the
court ^ Queen* t bench in England mty do ;
and ail persons convicted or attaititetf of
nigh treason or misprision of high t/eason
in Scotland, shall be subject to the same
' corruption X)f blood, pains, and forfeitures,
m persons convicted or attainted of high
' treason or misprision of high treason in
Enkland.''
What is there wanting in this act tc^
make up the Proposition, that ** the vihole
' doctrines of the SngUsh law at to treason
have heen introduced into ScttlandT There
' is here a declaration that the same thing
'shall constitute the offence; that tl^e
mode of inquiry, indictment, and trial,
- shall be the same, and that the same pains
and forfeitures shall follow on conviction.
How can it be said, that* the previously
' existing^ common law of Scotland has not,
in relation to offences which amount to
treason, been, by this declaration of the
le^pslature abrogated?'' or that to a^rt
itus, is ^to take away the prinisiples of
our common law by implication P" How
can it be said, ''thttt it is neither said
fior iihplied, that such offences shdll al*'
^ys be tried as treason V^ Whether an
offence amount to treason or not, .does
not depend oil the denomination which
the lora advocate may think fit to bestow
upon it. It is not the doctrite of the
law of Scotland, that the lord adtocate
may prosecute one crime, under the
denomination appropriated to another —
murder under the denomination of theft
— 6r treason under tfiat of mm^er. But
that, where a[ crime consists of v^oos
species, or de^es of guilt and aggrava-
tion., he may indict for the lower species,
or for circtunstatrces of infe^ibr affgrava*
lion, in order to restrict the punishment ;
' Mj having indicled for' an offence capitally,
to which a capital pnnishbient is affixM,
' be may, if he thinks proper, on the same
^ "Mictnteitt, restrict his charge to the infer-
Tritd of Andrew M^Kinley
Ud4
rr •- *
• Inf. p. 391.
ring[ an inferior punishment. He tnay also,
Where two crimes have been comridtted,
indict for the one and not for the otiier, if
he thinks fit, as he may in his discretion
Abstain from indictifag altogether. But
he cannot alter the nature of the
offence committed, or declare that, that
which constitutes one sort of crime vhall
be held to constitute another, ot .that,
that which constitutes a cenain crime shall
be held nbt so to do.
The prosecutor's argument is this, That
by denominating certaihi abts folony, he
may tiy theili ks felony j that by refusing
to call them treason, he inay ^Iter their
nature, and dispense with the statute
regarding them. Whereas the previous
question is. To what offence ao these
facts amount? Do they constitute any
high treason } If they do, it is clear they
are within the statute of queien Anne,
&nd there is no loneer any room for
talking of the powers of the lord advbcate,
or of the rul^ of the common law of
Scotland, which, in this case, have no
more application than they would have
in a country removed beyond the' juris-
diction of your lordships.
It is really to no puipose for. the prose-
cutor to ifay, that thetaw-of treason intro-
duced by the act of queen AiAft; B'eo^ly
Statutory, andlias noihing to db with the
common law of England,* or to con-
gratulate himself on the total ignorance
in which he is presumed and entitled to'
remain on this subjects What is intro-
duced by the act of queen Anne, b the
whole laiw of Etigland, whether by statute
or by common law, regarding higfaf
treason^ its trial, and its punishment.
Whether '(he rule' contended for arises
from *^ ft general principle of the com-
' mbn law of Enjgl^d, not peouSar to the
law of treason, is not the quesGofi. Is*
it a principle of the law of Engtattd t^
piitable to cases of treason ? - If it be^
then it is a principle introduced into'
Scotland, in cases of treason by. the act
of oueen Anne. Btit (haft the whole law
of England as to treason is transferred*
to Scotland, is aidmitted'by the pt^^utor.
For he states that "iC is impossible to
dispute, that in the I'e^ definition 6i the
crime of treitson ; in th4 mod6 and fonn
of process bv which it is to be tried ;
in tne hdei'of evidence by whidi it is
t<ybe established; in, the' mode and effect
of conviction' andpuni^aient; in shorty
in (he whole process from the commence-'
Iheht to'the terminati6n, the law of Eog^.
land is transferired to^Sootlaad* Bu^^
he adds, f' at this ' poivt* the tratislittw
' 6rice of tlie English law, end 'the inm>^
vation upon ' the . Scotch loiw, • m^ tkori/*
' that is, at the termination' of Mr^wMr
• Inf. p. 391,.
40ft]
^fiir Mmnitleting knte^/tc/ Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
C46(h
ffoeem. The prisoner is pracUely of this
opinion, that after having determined
the definition of the ciimey the whole
oouiae of proced<kre> and the punishment,
the in^iwsce of the En^ish law stops,
and lea?es yotir loidships to define,
iovestigats, and punish other crimes
aocofdmg to (he rules of our ancient
municipS law. Whether this can he
called ''stopping short/' he does not
presome to detennine.
The prisoner, theTefoTe,trHl i^ply him'
self first of all to prove, that an offence
amounting on thtf endence to what b
here attempted to he charged, and
insisted to he sufficfently charged, could
Hot io England be tried as a felony, under
HoM or any other act of Pariiament.
The rule of the common hew of Eng-
land is this^ ^'Treason drowns felony^''
or, as it is otherwise expressed, '' Felony
merges in treason.'' And in general, by
the rule of the common law of England,
the greater offence drowns the less.
Thus, in the year-book, 31A Hen« Gth^
15, it was agreed, that if a man be
indicted, arraif^ied, and acquitted of the
robbery of J. S. he (meaning J. S.) shall
not have trespass, for the trespass is
extinct in the f^ony, e$ onme mt^ trahit
mdmnwnm,^
And no trespass lies for what appears
to the Court to be felony* So no actioir
of ttespass lies bv the husband for a bat-
lefy of the wife, by which die languished
for six weeks, and then died of the same
blow, for this is felony. Iliongfa for the
batteiy of the wiihi by which he lost her
society for a certain time, an action of
trespass does lie by the husband* alone,t
And in Dawkes v. Coreneighf Mr. Jus-
liee Jones, citing the above case of Hug-
gins, says, *'If the ptrty robbed may
have his election, either to indict the
felon, or to have his action of trespass^
this would prove very dangerous.'^ And
lord chief-justice Roll§ gives the same
reason for an action of trespass lying
when the fects amount to a felony, namely,
the danger the felon mij^t not be tried.
In like manner^ it b laid down, 8rd
Hen. rth, 10, by Hussey C. J. <' There
can be no accessary in treason. Tkt re-
cMmg^ a traiior emmoi be onfy Jelamfy (le
veaetment de traitor ne poet esse tantwn
fidony), but b treason, et m tarn %bidemJ^\
Saceombe's case, 33rd Hen. 8th, is
thus reported by lofd 'chief-justice Dyers
** A woman had poison'd her husband,
which offence is made treason about the
aist Hen. 8th, (32nd Hen. 8ih^; and by
Ibe gjBnetal paraon granted by PaHiament
jtr^
^ 31. Hen. 6th, 15, Brokers Ah. Trespass, 145.
t Hwgins^ Case, 4 Jsc 1 ; 2 Roll's Ah. 557.
1 Ibid. 556. Pl. 16. $ Stile's Rep. 347-8.
H Year-Bookf 3,.Heii. 7fb, 10 ; Broke's Ab. 19.
VOL. XXXIII. '
in 32nd Hen. 8th, thb offence was
pardoned. Now the son had brought
appeal of murder against the wife. "Die
question was. Whether this appeal lies ?
And some thought, that because the
, offence b made treason, it meigeth each
lesser crime, as the crime of murder,
which was before at common law; and
so the offence is not punishable aS
murder, but as treason, and so no appeal
lies. . But some were of a contrary
opinion, &c. But the opinion of the
judges was, that the appeal was not
maintainable.''* And the reporter refers
to the case 3rd Hen. 7th, above stated.
And in Coke's Eep. in ''the cases olP
|mrd(ms," 29th Sllz. it is laid down : << If
murder cr petit treason be made high
ireason, thereby the murder or petit
treason b extinct,^)r lugh ireaaon doth
droum every lea qffoteeJ^f
And it hath been held, that petit
treason, which b lit fact an aggravated
species of murder, being the murder of
a husband by hb wife, or of the master
or mistress by a servant, which are de-
clared to be treasons by 25th £dw. 3rd,
in like manner drowns and extinguishes
the felony of murder.
It is very true, that it is questioned
whether petit treason be in truth an
offence of a distinct sort from murder.
Lord Hale thinks not ; for he says, that all
petit treason comes- under the name of
fetony. But so, of old, did high treason
idso.
Judge Foster.also b at much pains to
' flbow^ that petit treason is an oneace of
the same nature with murder.
Be this, however, as it may, Judcre
Foster's opinion b conclusive, that by the
tommen law of En^landy all ftlaniet merge
in the ofienee of high treason'; and an act
imouniing in its dreumstanees^ toon act
of MtA treakon, camutt by the law of Eng^
land be tried ae a feUmy,
** There is a case in "Dyer^X says the
learned Judge (the case cited above),
^' which hath been thought to favour tlie
opinion, that the crime of musder b
merged in petit treaaon^ and that a pardon
of treason dbofaarged it, notwithstanding
the exception of murder; but that case
proveth nothing like it. A irife,' about
the 31st Hen. 8th, poboned her husband <^
Then came a general pardon by whjch
treasou was pardoned, but with au ex-
ception, of wilful murder. The heir
brought an appeal of murder, kgatnst the
wife, and it was a4judged that the appeal
did not lie^ Thb case doth not prove
that murder is merged in petit treason,
but thsitboth murder and peta treaaon were
* Dyer's Rep. 50. a.
t 6. Coke's kep. 13. 6.
t Dyer^s Bep. 50, 25tli Hen. 8th. supra.
2 H
467]
57 GEORGE III.
Trial of Andrea M*Ki»Uy
[468
' merged and exlinguuhed m the effmu of
Mgh treatum; for at that time,- by virtue
of the 22iul Hen; 8thy all wilful poison-
ing was high treason, end- being to, the
i|jpeai^ not being saved by the act, wa$
htarredf whether the te£ason had
BEEK PABDOKED OB NOT/'*
Deeming that manslaughter^ murder,
and petit treason, are various species of
crimmal homicide, Judge Foster con-
cludes, that if, upon aninmctment for mur-
der, the facts should turn out to be petit
inaton, he does not think it advisable to
dirett a verdict of acquittal, for fear it
should avail the prisoner on a subsequent
indictmeut for murder* But he by no
• means thinks that in suqh a case he ought
to be convicted, for he 8ays,t " Though
I am satisfied that the law considers petit
treason and murder as one offence, differ-
ing only in circumstance and degree, yet,
wbether it may be advisable to proceed
upon an indictment for murder against a
perK>n plainly appearing to be guilty of
petit treason, is a matter that deserveth
gieat consideration, and probably deter-
mined the attorney-general to prefer a
fresh bill for petit treason in Swanks case,"
(who had been first indicted of murder,
and the attorney-general discovered before
the trial that the deceased was his
master). '*For though- the otfences are
to most purposes considered as substanti-
ally the same, yet as there is some differ-
ence between them with regftrd to Uie
judgment that is to be pronounced upon
a conviction, and a very material one with
. w^ard to the trial, a person indicted for
pmt treoMon being entitled to a peremptory
challenge of a^y I thiidc, if the prosecutor
be apprised of the true state ot the case,
ashemaj^beif he useth due diligence,
he ought td adapt the indictment to the
tiutk of the fact. But if, through mis-
take on the part of the prosecutor, or
through the i^^orance or inattention of
the officer, a bill be preferred at for murder,,
and it thall come out m evidence that the
friumer ttood tn that tort of relation to
the deceated which rendered the offence
fetit treaton, 1 do not think it by any
means advisid)le to direct the jury to
• give a Terdiot of acquittal, for a person
charged with a crime of so heinous a
nature ougjit not to hsve the chance
given him by the court of avaiUog himself
of a plea of. auterfoitM acquit. In such a
4iase I should make no sort' of difficulty
^ ditcharging the Jury of that indietmentf
and ordering a fresh indictment for petit
treason. In this method the prisoner will
have the advantage of his peren^Oory chaUen-
•^^and the public justice will not suffer.
Upon this two observations arise. Fin/,
That though the offences are substantially
■^ * Foster^ Crown Law, 325. f »bid. 82T.
the same, the greater advantages afi^rded
by the law to the prisoner on the trial,
in the peremptory challenge of 35 of the
jury — ^in the requiring two vntntesies-^-and
otber circumstances beyond what .are
allowed in trials of murder, entitle the
prisoner, in Judge Foster's opinion, lo
be indicted for petit treason, if bis ofience
amount to that description, and to have
the indictment dismissed, if through
mistake, or ignorance, or inattention in
the prosecutor, it be preferred as for
murder, and it comes out in evidence that
his relation to- the deceased renders the
poffence peti t treason. Secondly, That if petit
treason were to be considered as a distinct
species of offence, of another and higher
description (as high treason compared with
felony), an acciuittal must follow, if the
facts on the evidence should amoont to
the higher crime. *
The prisoner thinks therefore, that your
lordships will be satisfied from what is
above stated, that there is no doubt what-
ever, but by the common law of England
all inferior offences are merged and ex-
tinguished in the offence of high treason.
The case in the 33rd Hen. 8th, in Dyer's
Reports as explained by Mr. Justice
Foster, is by him declared to be law;
and he states expressly, that in thai case,
though the crime committed was murder,
yet it being also treason, the murder mer-
ged in the treason, and the trial, a{^>eal,
or indictment for murder, was therefore
barred by the rule of law, independent
of the question arising out of the subse-
quent pardon. Indeed, when that learned
judge declares, that where, no/tuMstanding
there be adifference m thepunishment, yet there
being also a dMrence in the mods of ^ trials
one indicted tor murder cannot properly
be convicted, if on the evidence the
offence turn out to be petit treason: al-
though that learned judge is so clearly
of opinion, the two offences are but
shades of the *same generic crimes that be
thinks It doubtful whether the 'prisoner
may not plead an- acquittal of the murder,
in bar or the second indictment; when
he declares, that in such a case the judge
should rather take the strong snep of
' discharging the juiy without their* find-
ing a verdict, tn order that the prisoner nu^
be tried with those advantages to uMdk the
law has entitled him ; he could not but be of
opinion, that where the crimes are essen-
tially different in their nature, it Is im-
possible to deprive a prisoner of the ben^fite
of the mode of trial appointed for the crime
he is truly accused of, under pretext of
assigning to it an inferior denominaiiain,
II. But, in the second plaee, if this be
true generally by the princi^es of the
common law of England, which in thcs
matter is the law of Scotland also, in the
latter country, the necessity of adherinf ^
4d9]
Jbr AdmimsteriHg vn/awfid Oaths.
A. O. 1817.
C47«
in all cases of treason, to the form of pro-
ceeding which the la^r ha^ prescribed for
the trial of such cases, is yet more impe-
rative. In this country, the duty of* pro-
ceeding aoeording to a particular form
, and mode of trial, is imposed on your
lordships by positive statute.
The act 7th queen Anne« c. 21, has
not only declared, that *' such crimes and
oflfences which are high treason witliin
England, shall be construed, adjudged,
, and taken to be high treason within Scot-
land ; but it positively commands that all
acts of treason shall be inquired into, and
tried in Scptland in the same manner as
is used in the court of King's bench, or
by the justices of Oyer and Terminer in
England.
Your lordships know, that in that act'there
is not only a permissive clause, enabling
tb^ queen and her su^essors to issue out
commiiisions of Oyef and Terminer in
Scotland under the great seal, to hear and
determine cases of high treason ; but by
4 3, it is enacted, *' That the justice couc,t
of Scotland shall have full power and au-
thority, end they are heremf required to
inqukt hjf the oaihi of twelve good and
Imofid men, of the county, shiie, or stew-
znrj where the respective Courts shall
•it, of all high treason and misprision of
^gh treason committed within the said
county, &c. and thereupon to proceed^
kear^ and determine** (tha^ is, they are re-
quired, to proceed, hear, and deteimine),
** Me ioid offenees of any persons who are
indicted to stand before them, m $uch
mannei m the amrt ofKin^i ftencA, or the
justieee of Oyer and Temnner tn England^
may do (y the lawt of England,
Here, then, is a positive enactment
re^iiring and commanding your lordships
to inquire into, Aeor, end determine ell quet-
tkm$ of high treaion, in the tame manner e$
the Coart of King* t bench does in England,
mndin no other. If your lordships were
to hear and determine any question of
ihis sort, by any other manner of proceed-
ing, there cannot be a doubt that it would
be a direct breach of this act of parlia-
ment ; and it will hardly be contended
that the question. Whether ,a fact iom-
mitted be an act of high treason, or an
inferior offence? depends on the words
in which the public prosecutor may choose
to charge it. This were an evident ab-
sardity ; for thus it would be in the power
of the public prosecutor, at his pleasure^
to dispense with the law. It is not here
the question. Whether the })ublic prose-
cutor shall restrict his charge, or dispense
widi part of the punishment? but.
Whether he Mi diaente wOh the mode or
TRJAi* which your tordth^ are commanded
, hf statute to obterve 7 It is to no purpose
to say, that if he takef^from the prisoner the
;»dvantage conferred on him by law in the 1
mode of trial, he compensates this by so
framing, his accusation as to infer a more
limited punishment. It were a sufficient
answer to say, that this is contrary to law.
But it can hardly be gravely asserted,
that, in the present instance, any such
compensation is offered, since 'What the
prosecutor demands is nothing iess than
the life of the unfortunate man ^ho now
addresses yqu; and with what further
consequences his conviction is to be at-
tended, is equally unimportant to himself,
to those in whom he is interested, and
to the public. That because he waves
certain consequences following conviction
on an indictment of hi^h treason, in the
corruption of the blood, and the infliction
of some senseless indignities on the life- ,
less body of the criminal, the public
prosecutor shall be permitted to prosecute
him to a conviction of deatli, from which
he is entitled to believe he might escape,
if not deprived of the mode of trial ap-
pointed by laWf under 4he xsircnmstances
in which he stands, is a proposition so
monstrous — so inconsistent with substan-
tial justice — so opposite to every doctrine
of any law — and so totally irreconcileable
to the humane principle of British law,
that the prisoner is incapable of reasoning
upon it. He cannot adequately express
his surprise, that it should - ever have
occurred to any person, as one on which
it was possible for a court of justice to
consent to proceed.
And that the legislature, in passing the
said act of queen Anne, was aware, .that
from that time no act which amounted to
high treason could be tried in Scotland
by the usual forms of the criininal courts,
appears from this, that, lest there should
be any doubt respecting those crimes
which had been treason before by the law
of Scotland, but which by this act were
declared to be so no longer, it was thought
proper, by the 7th section, to enact,
** lliat theft in landed men, murder under
trust, wilful fire-raising, firing coal-heoshs,
and assassination, which were declared to
be treason by particular statutes in Scot-
land, should tnereafter only be judged
and deemed to be capital offences," &c.
'* And the persons committers thereof, are
10 be punished and fried in the same
manner as by the laws of Scotland is pro-
vided in the cases of other capital crimes,
any thing in this act to the contrary not-
withstanding."
III. In the third place, the prisoner has
to st)ibmit, that there is nothing contained *
in the act 52nd Geo. 3rd, c. 104 on which
this indictment is laid, which abrogates
the general rule of law, that an act of
treason cannot be tried as a felony, or re»
peals the said statute of queen Anne, by
which your lordships are bound to inquire
of,^ hear^ an^, determine all acts of treason.
4711 57 GEORGE III.
Triai i^Andrein M*Kiiikg
[472*
in such manner as the Court of King's-
bench, or the justices of Oyer and Ter-
miner may do.
The prisoner undertakes entirely to
satisfy your lordships, that by no just
rule of construction can this act 52nd of the
King be held so to do— that it contains
no words sufficient for this purpose-^that
it is not to be inferred, either from its
general scope, or any of its enactments
— that sudi a construction was not in the
Tiew of the legblature when it was pass-
ed— and that it would invoWe the most
manifest absurdities.
There can be no doubt that the statutes
1st Edw. 6th^ c. 12, requiring two wit-
nesses in cases of treason, and 5th and'
6th Edw. 6th, f. 11, confirming this pro*
vision, and requiring that the witnesses^
if living; shall be examined in person in
the bpen coart ; the 1st & 2na Phil. 9t
Mar. restoring in all cases of treason to
the prisoner, the peremptory chadlenge of
35 jurymen ; (he statute 7th Will . 3rd, c. 3,
confirming these privileges, and adding
Other valuable ones, such as the allowing
the prisoner a copy of his indictment, the
assigning him counsel, limiting the time
of prosecution, and so on, are statutes
for the benefit of tbe subject, and in
favour of life. As little can it be doubted
that tlie act f th of queen Anne, limiting
and defining cases of treason, introducing
into Scotland the same mode of trial as
in England, and allowing the prisoner a
list of tbe witnesses against him, is of
the same nature. Many valuable pri-
vileges belone to the subject in Scotland
when accused o^ ordinary crimes which
are not conferred by the law and practice
of England ; but in the case of high trear-
fion, he has, by the law of England, all
the same privileges, as by the law of
Scotland in ordinary crimes; a copy al-
lowed him of his indictment, counsel to
conduct his defence, and two witnesses
necessary to be produced against him.
And to these other valuable privileges are
superadded, his indictment is not the
discretion of a law-officer of the Crown,
but must be found by a grand jury on
their oaths; he has a peremptory chal-
lenge, without cause shewn, of 35 of his
jury ; and the jury to convict him must
be unanimous.
Of th^se acts, therefore, this prisoner
thinks himself entitled to say, tnatlthey
are to be interpreted favourably for the
subject, and' strictly against him ; and that
it would be contrary to all the rUle*s of
law to hold, that they may be repealed by
implication.- Nothing less than the ex-
press will of the legislature can be suffi-
cient for this purpose, and this will con-
veyed in distinct words of repeal. It
mi^ht be a question, whether, if a stibse*
quent act were passed; whkh could receive
no t^tct con^stenily with mch acts con"
tinumg in foroe^ tbit would of necessity
repeal them in the same manner as posi-
tive and direct words to that effect. But
the prisoner submits, that there can be no
doubt, where a ndmquent tiaiute may re-
cewe effect to mamf e$9enikd mrpota^
al&ou^ there be some to which it will
not apply, unless by operating the repeal
of former laws of the nature which has
been described. In this case, ecooiding
to no recdved rule of construction, can
the subsequent statute be held to operate
such repeal without express words.
The clauses of the act 5t^nd Geo. 3rd,
c. 104, which affect the present question,
are, the first, the seventh, and the last.
The first clause is in these words : *' That
every person who shall, in any manner or
form whatsoever, administer or canse to
be administered, fiui. any oath or engage-
ment, purporting or intending to bind Sie
person taking the same, to commit any
treason or murder, or any f^ony pnnish-
able by law with death, shall, on convic-
tion thereof by due course of law, be ad**
judged guilty of felony, and suffer death
as a felon, without benefit of clergy.'*
The seventh clause enacts, '^lliat any
offence committed against this act, if
committed in that part of Great Britain
called Scotland, shall and may be prose-
cuted, tried and determined, either before
the Justiciary Court at Edinbuigh, or in
any of the Circuit Courts in thu part of
the United Kingdom." The daiise pro-
vides and declares, ** That any person
who shall be tried, and acquitted or con-
victed of any ofi^nce against this act,
shall not be liable to be indicted, prose*
cuted, or tried again for the same offence
or hx^. as high treason ; and that Aothing
in this. act contained shall be construed
to extend to prohibit any person guilty of
any offence against this act, and who shall
not be tried for the same as an offifence
against this act, from being tried for the
same as high treason, or misprision of
high treason, in such a manner as if this
act had not been made."
There are here no express vrords re-
pealing any of the acts above mentioned*
which confer on the subject the privileges
he is entitled to when accused of an of-
fence amounting to the crime of high
treason. There is not even an allusion
to any of these statutes, or the insertion of
the usual general words where it is io*
tended to introduce any alteration in the
law ; ^ %ny law or practice to the contrary
notwithstanding.*^ If, therefbre» these
beneficial statutes of Edw. 6th, mi. It
Mary, William 3rd, and Anne, are lo be
held repealed, it is evident that they can
only be so by inference and impHcatioo.
It were a waste of your lordsaips' tlnfte,
to argue at length,^ that the gtnerd lUles
47a3
Jor 4^immdeiiKg «
OtOu,
A. D. ^817.
Ut*
of the common law are not to be lidd* ab«
Togated 1>y implication^ much less are po-
skire statutes enacted for the -benefit of
the SQbject in favour of life and liberty.
To take an instance that happens at the
moment to occur, the act 19tb Geo. 3rdy
commonly caHed the comprehending act,
empowered the commissionerB Of supply
in Scothmdy to examine such peisons as
were brought before them, and if fbrund
withili the description of the act, as able-
bodied, idle, and disorderly persons, &c.
to deUver them over to the military offi-
cers of the king for recruiting the forces ;
and it was dec&red, ** that from and after
such delivery, fcc. every person so raised,
shall be deemed a listed soldier to all in-
tents, &c. and shall not be liable tbbe
taken out of his majesty^s service by any
process other than ibr some criminal
matter ;" and it was contended, that no
civil -cottit, therefore, could give any relief
irom the a4iudipation of the commis-
sioners. Bat in the case of Pattillo v.
Sir William Maxwell,* and in Cooper v.
Sir John Ogilvie,t the Court of Session
were of opinion, that ^ their powers of
reviewing the sentences of the commis-
sioners, aturngfrcm, their inherent and con-
itUtttkm$l juradkHon^ were not excluded
by this statute/' And, in like manner, in
the case of Guthrie v. Cowan,^ which
was a conviction by the Justices of the
Peace, under 3dth Geo, 3rd, c. 06, to
prevent the damaging of raw hides and
•ekiiis, by which act the Justices at quarter
sessions, on appeal, ** aire empaioered fir-
wdfy to hear and determine the tamef^ and
still more to mark the intention of the le-
gislature, it \& enacted, that ** no Such
Judgment or conviction shall be Remove-
able by '^ certiorari into any Court what-
soever .'* Yet the Court of Session Were
of opinioui that tohere the privilege of op-
peai to the Soprtime Court vna not ejipudtfy
prokSfitedj an, exeltmon of its jvritdktien
um not to he presumed.
But the prisoner must revert once more
to what -he has already endeavoured to
urge on your lordships' particular atten-
jtion, that this question, How this offbnce
is to be tried ? most be decided by your
lordships by the principles of the English
law ; for it is no other than a question,
jof how a matter constituting the crime of
high treason is to be tried r as to which.
both according to the general purport and
effect, and by the particular words of the
statute of Anne, your lordships are to
proceed in the same manner that the
Court of King's^bench in England wduld
proceed*
If therefore the pti«oner ean saHsfy
• June 25, 177^.
t Aug. 10, 1780. June 22, 1781, Dec.
1788. • t I>ec. 10, 1807.
your lerdships, lh£l this act of the 52nd
of the king cantot "be held, according to
the law of England, to authorise the trial
of this bffence otherwise than as high
treason; he thinks your lordships will
have no difficulty In deciding, that the
same rule of construction must be adopt-
ed in this Court. It would be sufficient
for this purpose to remark on the strange
and anomalous situation in which the
subjects of the opposite ends of the island
would be placea, if your lordships were
to hold this act a virtual repeal of the
treason laws, nro ^cm^o, while no such con-
struction could take place in Englsmd ;
thus, supposing ' that the legislature in-
tended to deprive the inhabitants of Scot-
land of benefits carefully conferred on
them at the Union, while ^et it left tliese
benefits entire for the enjoyment of' our
more fortunate neighbours.
That it is a rule of the common law of
England, that an act amounting io high
^treason, cannot be tried as an inferior
spedes of ofience, has bfcen made ap-
parent.
In the construction of statutes, it is a
general rule in the law of England, that a
statute ought to be ^ construed atcafding.
to the reason and rule of the common law.
this is BO laid down by Lotd Chief Btiron
Comyns,* quoting Plowden*^ Comm^tap
ries, an ancient book of great authority.
And in the modern case of Eton Col-
lege V. the bishop of Winchester,f it is
laid down by the Court of Common Pleas,
that even private acts are subject to this
rule. *' Private- acts of parliament.'* it is
said, ^ must be construed according to
the principle of the common law."^ A
general custoiti as is well known, is no-
Siing else than part of the common law.
And it is said by lord Coke,| *' there is a
diversity between an act of parliament in
the negative and in the affirmative ; for
an affirmative act does not take away a
custom." And the learned editor, Mr.
Hargrave, has the following note oh this
passage § " Hiis rule, about affirmative
statutes, is very common in the hooks,"
and he refers to Flowden's Commentaries.
** In another place," he adds, ** Loid
Coke lays down a like rule, as to these
not taking away the common law, but
with more particularity; for his words
are, that a iatute made in the qffirmdtioe^
toithfmt anv negative expressed or implied^
doth not take away the common Icxo.^
And lord.^Coke says, ^ It appears in
our books, that in many cases tne com*
mon law will control acts of parliairient,
and sometimes adjudge them to be' ut-
. ■«■■■»>■
% w
♦ Comyna* Dig. o.
t 3 Wilson's Rep, 496.
} Cbke, Linleton, 115, &.
§ Coke's 2nd Inst. 200.
Farliaaent, R. 12.
475]
57 GEORGE III.
TrUd ^Atidrea M^KtHk}/
U76
terly void ; for when an act of iMurliament
18 against common rig^t and reason, or
repugnant, or impossible to be performed,
the common law will control it^ and ad«
judge such act to be void."*
As in a grant to the king, a reeenration
by act of parliament to the donor of Ser-
vices, ^'/^the common law controls it, and
adjudees it void as to the services, for it
is against reason diat the king should do
services.*' — ** So, if an act of parliament
gives to any to bold all manner of pleas
within his manor of D. yet he shall bold
no Plea to whidi be himself is party, for
tiMMpn at^ kc. And elsewhere he says,
** This case is of necessity .by construction
excepted out of the statute/'t
And in like manner, speaking of a cer-
tain action, an action oi waste, whether,
under the statute of Glocester, it may be
brought against the assignee of one
having alife estate as tenant l^ thecourtesy,
the wcffds of the statute being general,
that it may be brought against him that
boldedi by law of England, or othenom
fffr term cf l^, lord Coke says, ** Albeit
the assignee of the tenant by the courtesy
is wUkin the letter of thit lam^ yet no ac-
tion of waste shall be brought against the
assignee ; for m conairtietkm of Uaiutes^
the reaun of ike common law poeth great
Ugkt^ AKD THE JUDGES, AB MUCH AS MAY
BE FOLLOW THE RULE THEREOF ."^
The prisoner, therefore, assuming it to
be sufficiently proved, that the rule of the
common law in his case is as he has stated
it, humbly contends, that the statute on
whidi this indictment is laid, must be in-
terpreted agreeably to that rule of the
common law if possible. That an officer
of the crown should at his pleasure, by
calling an offence by one name insteaui of
by another, deprive the subject of that
mode of trial, to which, under such cir-
cumstances, the law has entitled him for
bis benefit, ie against common right and
reatonf and therefore nothing less than
express words can induce your lordships
so to interpret an act of parliament. Nor
is it possible that the Court shall shew
less anxiety to protect the rules of the
common law, in cases of such inferior
interest as are above stated, than in
a case of life and death, where the sub-
ject is under an accusation which the law
considers ss calling on it to watch over his
safety with peculiar jealousy.
In like manner, it is the general rule in
interpreting subsequent acts of parliament.
BO to expound them as that they mt^ not
contradict former etatutee^ which they do
not exprndjr contain words to repeal.
Thus, it is laid down in Roll's Reports as
a general rule, legafoeteriereeprioree con*
• 8 Coke's Rep. 118.
I Coke, 2 Inst 301.
t 2 Inst. 25.
trariae abrogant. But it is said, ^This
cannot be by ambiguous . and general
words." And it is stated as a rule, that
** when two general statutes are made, and
one contradicts (apparently) the other,
both if they can be, snail be so expoanded
that the one may not contradict the other.
And a txdnequent act, which cah he re-
consiled with theformery shall not be a repeal
qfit,^* .
In like manner, lord Coke lays down
the rules for interpreting subsequent
statutes, with reference to former ones, as
follows. Having agreed to the general
rule above mentioned, leges posteriores
priores conlrarias abrogantf be observes that
*<as to this purpose contrarium est nod-
tiplex.f
** Iff, If one is an express and material
negative, and the last is an express and
material affirmative; or if the first is
affirmative, and the latter negative.
**2dfy. Although both are affirmative;
as by the statute 33Td Henry 8th, c 23»
it is enacted. That if any person being
examined before the king's counsel, or
three of them, shall confess any treajon,
misprision, or murder, or be by them ve-
hemently suspected, he shall be tried in
any county where the king pleases, by his
commission, 'kc. And afterwards another
law was made, lst& 2nd P.&M. 10, in these
words, that all trials hereafter to be had far
ang treason shall be had according to the
course of the common law, and not otherwise.
This latter act, although the latter words
had not been, had abrogated the former,
because Uiey were contrary in matter.
But it doth not abrogate the statute 35th
Henry 8th, c; 2, of trial of treasons beyond
the seas, notvnthstanding the negative words,
because it was not contrary in matter,ybr
that was not triable by the common Imo,
** 3dfy, Contrariety in respect of the form
prescribed, &c. Only it must be known, thai
for as much as acts of Parliament are et-
taldish^ with such gravityy uMomy and
wmertal consent of the whole realm, for the
adcaneement of the commonwealth, they ought
not, by any constrained construction, out of
THE GEM ERA L AND AMBIGUOUS WORDS
OF A SUBSEQUEST ACT, to bs abrogated, but
ought to be numUained and supported with a
benign and favourable construction" And
he illustrates this hj a case in the 21st of
Elizabeth in which it was found, that the
act 16th Richard 2nd, c. 5, which enacts,
that all the lands and tenements of one
attainted in a premunire shall be forfeited
to the king, had not repealed the statnle* ,
de Donis, authorising the creation of
estates-tail, and that the tenant m tal should
notwithstandmg forfeit only for his it^
Thus, lord Kenyon says, '* There axe
* • I I ■ 1 ■
* 2nd Roll's Rep. 410.
t 11 Coke's Rep. 63.* a,**
471]
jor Admintstering unknot Otini.
A'. D. UlT.
C478
te? end cases in the books to shew, tdat
vrfaere the intention of the legislalnre was
ftpparenty that the subsequent act should
not hafe sach an operation, there, eren
though the words of such statute, taken
stricUyand grammaticallj, would repeal
a former act, the courts of law, jidjni^ /or
ike hmtpt of the tukjeet^ haye hdd that
they ought not to receive such a construc-
tion.''•
And in the interpretation of statutes
more nearly connected with the sutject in
hand, there is an instance directly in point,
to shew that it is not sufficient that the
words of a subsequent statute mt^ amoumi
to a repeal of a former law, to induce the
courts to hold a prior statute, enaeted for
the^benefit of the subject, repealed. It
seems to be agreed at present, that, by the
common law, as it stood before the 1st of
Edward 6th, one witness was sufficient in
the case of treason, as well as in other
oapttal cases. This is the opinion of
sergeant Hawkins, t and more clearly that
of Mr. J. Foster.}
By Ist Edward 6th, c It, and 5th &
6th Edward 6th, c. 11, two witn^ses are
rendered necessary in all indictments or
convictions for treason, petit treason, or
misprision of treason ; and by Ist U 2nd
Philip fc Mary c. 10, ** it is enacted, that
all trials after that statute to be had,
awazded, or made for any treason, shall
be bad and used cnfy aaurding id the Ate
enkr and come of the common imoy By
like general terms of this act, strictly taken,
it would appear as if the acts of £dward
6th, introducing two witnesses in trials
for treason, were repealed, as well as those
statutes of Henry 8th, to some of which
fusion has been made above, which
trenched upon the rules established for
the safety of the subject. Bat it is clearly
shewn by Mr. Justice Foster, that, not-
withstanding the generality of the words,
the act of railip and Mary was never so
interpreted. Lord Coke§ is of this
opinion. Lord Hale, though he appears
sometimes to have doubted it, yet seems
finally to have been of this opinion also. ||
The judges, in the case of the re^cides,
agreed that the law requires two witnesses
in the case of treason; and in lord
Slaflbrd's trial the same thingwas agreed.f
From that time to the Revolution, this has
been regarded as settted law, which, till
' die passing of 7th William 8rd, could only ;
Ims so under thie said statutes of Edward
6th. The ground on which the statute of
Philip and Maiy received this interpre-
^ 4 Term Bos, 2.
t Hawk. P. C. B. 2, c.25, § 129.
t Foster 233. § Coke, 3rdlnst. 26, 27.
A 1 Hale, 906.,
f Kelyng's Rep. 9 ; 3 St. Tr. 204. (7 How.
St. Tr. 1293.J
tation conld be only this, that the rule inm
troAteed by Me Mte ^ Etkoatd Zrd^ were m
faoour of the ndjtet^ and eould therefore mi
he held to be repeokdbiU by eeprem w^rde.
Without doubt, tiie words of the statote
of Philip and Mary were sufficient, if
taken in their extent, to repeal Uie tw«
statutes of Ed^raud 6th. In that inslanoe
the advantages conferred on thesabjeci
in the mode of trial for the ofienoe^ were
held not to be abrogated by general words,
though in strictness liable to this inter-
pretation. So, in the i»esent instance, the
prisoner hmnbly contends, that the benefits
eonferred in the mode of trial by so many
statutes, cannot be hdd to be abrogated
by the general worfs of the act on whidi
this indictment is ftamed; words lese
subject to sndi an interpretation than those
of die act of Philip and Mary.
But further, the prisoner humbly sab-*
mits it as quite dear, that without the
most express words, it can never he ander- ^
stood that the Ugidatme intended to render
ancffisnoea^eio^fViUchbylawiemtroaeani
Lideed, this mn^t appear to evei^ laiiiyer
nothing short of a oontiadictioii in terms*
And it is to be observed, that it is not
here the question, whether the legislature
intended merely that the partiealar sort of
treason, which might be committed by
administerinff . some sorts of treasonable
oaths, thoMoe teibd m the mam manaar
as felomes are triedf and that the subjeet,
in this ease, should be deprived of the
benefits of a trial as for treason. That
this is not lightly to be inferred, the
prisoner has already endeavoured fo show*
But the demiand made by the prosecutor
is of a yet more extraordinaiy nature.-
He desires that your lovdsbips shouldliold,
that by this act the legblotare have de-
dared a treason to be ajmmy. The words
of the statute are, that the person ad-
ministering a obtain oath, shall be ad-
judged ffuilty of felony ; and the propo-
"sition of the prosecutor is, that he shall
be so ad^ged, although, by the act of
which he is accused, he is guilty of treason.
The prisoner affirms, without fear of con-
tradiction, that if that be the meaning of
the act, it stands single in the statute-book.
He ventures to affirm, without fear of
contradiction, that there is not a passage
in any writer on the kw of England, m
the doctrine of any judge, or the argument
of any Englidi lawyer, of which a record
has been preserved, from wbich it may
be inferred, that the possibility of any
such enactment was ever contemplated.
bf the coune the legislature adopts, when
it proposes to dispense with the mode of
trial m treason, there are modem in-
stances ; but that this is not tiie course
for that purpose^ there is abundant
authority to shew.
By the 3rd Henry 7th, c« 14> it is
47»1 57€U|OtQt Uh
to he tkarkingV saswA 9tnm9.mA hb
■MP»ppiil.to*ihB ohjMiBarHMlhof bi>k)tt8e*
' hob^ Ik* mite'. any^o»iiM«Mmks«i com-
]MMag% qpMpiwiwetyi oa: inagiiMlionSy
muniir.
the
tbft
bjpi Ae
MMOiv«Brp«Mn%.tO'destioy or
we kingi. w 99^ iMd^ o&^ other
m to thmMka^oamamAf &c.
he jjHd9B4.Mo»ji^ and
toj have judgmbnt. and
iHMMllMiAed flughtto have
laaiJ' CfeiiypMini and
Oe
oMMairaui to Arfxt'iiA nwdew
ia^ wiUntill amr <Mbl| ligh Iraaanm .under
thft statato df Bdwadli aadfi;. Mid 2^ ^Ae
9f^Mti$tofHmryJtk it) would
»iiUi ha tkie.naafceBDtnioiatnaiyy
aaitie ana eatv^defiriirai o£ the faenefit
of dergf.. BM:ta ltodlOobB^.wha has an
enpffaaii da^itag upee thisittiutul%it never
Qa0nncd.diet . thia inteanretotien jooald be
fHiatapes. itk Hft rafaraa? it aa only ap-
plaaaUai tai nah.aaat off oonfadaraagr^ ^om-
ptowag^.ftg. aa^ Aaag ■aaiiwpwef \i iy the
adeutt a§t^ refmni, laaetf eo^ tmmimt to
toeofoeu. Bot^heL^aa^^ ^To. daataay or
miaiiaaithain^i Bj,ihM aet<t^ egpreufy
lypm-i^ tf^dimjfmigmmi'^ rte:ia6<w jmt*
faiMial^ tfae^ basuicB ttaafloefhdeaetf 9 con-
aptegy, or uaagiaeilwn^ tfaaae nuatbaBome
ffliheiovtiit aaiy i)r daedy I wwl i n§ <ha lai 1 nto,
to make it tieaaoawilh&euthe aiatote of
Wih MwmdAd. Jmd^ikmfitn^ Urn bare
nf^tdtn^^ €OMf&ttnif^j, oontfnai^ or
•winy'miitwi,* 1^ «Maim^/ ti ^amdr^/^s/br^
iy iAia.adb/ fiat«i£-the oonspiratois do
paonrida. any maeoai^.or'Olbar tfaingy to
aeoompUiihdiefardevilialriinteiM, tkk,and
the fi«v ia oe^owr^ otf. to makeiittaeaKm.***
efafafaoaaconaei II iiag jhaiia 1 1 aMwaftnld be
a— ctedinto e felehy/heholda.theanlicting
en oflenoft^be. a m>afv 4o:be .ajuS^gmen$
of tikcwkile 'patfiammtf thet thait ase eir-
onmatancaatnedar.iahich it aii|^.be.com«
niitlifl withoea being gnihy of tieasoo,
akhough the woada joe ecpreasLyaiich as
ere theveiy deflnitioDof thehigheat sort
of treason.
In like manner, thepiiaoner would say,
tiMt the act 53nd of the king, declaring
thet the adaainiateang of an oath^ pur-
Crttoff to bind to oommit tfeaaoBy shall i
a feloiiy, ia a judgment of paiiiament
that it may be oommittad without being
guiky of tveaaoa. But aa lord Gokii goes
on. to aay, if certaiacixcumatancaa aecom-
pany> the ceelhdeieciea mentioned in the
M of Heniy 7tfa» these are overt aeta to
toake ittreaaon, intimating that it can no
longer be triad, as a.fiakniy undet that
ataluto; ao, the.jpaiaaoer would say^ that,
if the.oalh.ba edininiatared undte certain
oiceomalanees, thfen^aach adminiatering is
trnhMntiaadihe ofiSmneT cannot be tried
under the 53nd of theektog%
To the same purpose lol^ Hi^ ob-
serving on this statute of Henry 7th> re-
marks, ** that it makes conspiring the
king's death to be felony, which k wndd
wot kaoedom^ ^ 0e hare wumras^withoitt
anoaert^KthadbotHUreaumr* The same
author remarks, that, ^ the statutes 1st
and 2nd Phil, and Mar. c. 3., 1st ^w.
M» 0. 19.> 23rd £Us. Cri 3., making several
offences felony, kaoe this wary claSm^ the
mMn MOT' BBIIto TnBASON BY STATUTE
23th Edward 3rd f and he aays, ** enaO-
mg a» qffmce to hea /eiony as a gnat em-
dSwethatU wa$not treaton brfarB, avd A'
iVDGMBIlT OF PABLXAMEIIT tV POINT,
FOR IT OAVNOT BB THOVORT THAT IT
WOULD MAKB THAT LESS THAR TABASON-
WaiOH WAS tRBASOU BY %&TU KdwaBD'
And Mr. J. Foster^ in terms more ez-
plidty says^ ^ Lord ohief-jttstioe Hale vras
of opinion, that bare words are not an
overt, act of treaaon. Coke waa of the
siaae opUiioiL I{ale.has treated the sub-
ject pretty much at* large, and I^ha)l not
repeat hm argument,, but I muflt say, J
MmA hi$ reaeom founded OH' temporal^ actSy
or act€.mce repeaUdy. which maktefeaking
thewordttheremeetjorthfelo'iyycr aiaefe-
meonoTf ABE ukanbwbbablr;* For, }f
theee word9,< seditious to the last degree,
had been demed overt act^wiUmthc etattdep
qfireaeentf the. leo^slaturb couia not,
WIf« Aaiir«90BT OJ CONSXSTEIiCr, HAVE
TliB^TEn. TREie A6 B&LONT Oft lUSDE-
iceeiien." And he adds in a^ note, the
like' use hath been made oi temporary
slaltutasy which make words in certain
cesae treason. But I do not buUd upon
thaatw I BELT OR- those which* make
WORDS felony OSU MISDfiM BAROBt^'t
The prisoner, therefore, takes it for
gBranted>oii all theauthoiitiesyithatso &r
is the en^Btii^. ask oflGemce to be felony
whieh was ^understood to be treason^ from
being, a declaration of thhr legislature, that
although treason, it may be tried as felony,
it is at jjfdgpBent of parliament that it was
net treason before; and wher^* the legis-
k^se^ in enectingan ofienceto be felony,
haa employed woraa which might embrace
the comn^asion of it under dicumistancee
w^dtk would make it Ueasob, it is an es-
tablished rule of law, that stfoh enaotment
applies only to oaaes where<the offence
doeS'Uot amount to treason. It is, there*
fore, only necessary for the prisoner to
shoW) with regasd to the ofience menfeioDed
in the ac^ tl^t-l^ere are caoes in which
its> commission would no^ amount to
treason, in order to relieve your lordshipe
from any difficulty yeu Rifgbi .fied>yeur-
selves undtfr, if. you iK^re* bound eidier to
'decide against the weight of au^rity.
• Cokeys 3rd Inst. 3&.
-*t-
. »l'HaleaU. •tXW<i,2eo,2W. jFoetery
200, 201.
4811
Jw AdmnuUring unbut^ful Oalhsi
A. D. 1817.
1483
that has been produced, or else to hold as
nugatory the 'nntpart of this enactment
of these statutes. But there k no occa-
sion for any such difBcolly. .
In the',^rtr place, the words, ^ any
treason/' are necessary m the statute, in,
order to embrace the ease of an oath to
commit petit tretmmj which, your lordships
know, is an aggraTated species of murder,
and which otherwise, in England, woM
not have fallen under the words of the tUdute.
Whether it might, notwithstanding, have
been held within its meaning, it is unne-
cessary to discuss. It is certain, that in
all general pardons which have been
pass^ for a century aod a half, the ez-
eeption of petit treason, eo nomine^ has
been constantly inserted with that of
wil/ul murder; and such is now the usual
wording of acts of parliament.* Seccndfy,
there are not wanting cases of oaths to
commit high tremon to which it applies.
Thus, an. oath, or engagement to join in
a «onspiraicy to obtain any public purpose
by open force and Tiolence, as to raise
the rate of wages generally ; to destroy
all machinery, not merely in one parti-
cidar place, or of one particular descrip-
tion ; or to redress any public grieyance ;
in short, to join in any of those acts of
open Tiolence and tumult, which are dis-
tinguished in law as a constructive lerying
of war against the king in his realm,
would he witkm the Uatute ; and the ad-
ministering and taking sach oath would not
mmnaU to an overt act aftreaton wnder any
emitting law. For the compassing to leyy
suoh a war as tliis, is, as your lordships
weH know, not treaaon : and the compas-
sing or eonspiring to levy ami war, unless
it amount to an overt act of compassing
the king's death, as only treasonable
under the statute of the 36th «of his pre-
sent majesty.
In no view could this word treason have
been omitted out of the statute consist-
ently with the main object for which it
was passed, namely, the putting down
certain disturbances, threatening very
•erions consequences. As it was obvious
that all nnaderoiu engagements would
not be included without the insertien of
the word /reoKm, sp it was easy to see
that the projected disturbances might be
•f a nature amounting to a constructive
levying of war, and that, without the in-
sertioB of the word treason, a diflSculty
anght occur, since an engagement to
eommit this sort of treason would not fall
under the description of an engagement
to oommit felony. Another reason may
Ve supposed to have had its weight,
naiMly, that the act 86th of the king,
rendering the compassing to levy war for
■ certain purposes therein set forth in itself
• Fnrter'i Cro. Law,' 325.
VOL. XXXIII.
eenwd of high 'treason, kenl^ atemi
fary statute, which espires with the life
of 'his present majesty, whereas this act
of the '53nd of the king is perpetuid.
IVo things only remain. To give your
lordships an example of the course which
the legislature adopts, when its object
really is that which the prosecutor would
attribute to it in the present instance, and
to show, in very few words, that no such
conclusion as he would draw can be fairly
inferred from the last -section of the act,
on which he seems mainly to rely.
At the time of the detestable attack
made on his majesty in the year 1800, it
was thought advisable to place direct at-
tacks upon 'thC'king's person on a difi^rfent
footing from other acts -of treason with
regard to the mode of trial, and to assi-
milate them, in this respect, 'to the Kke
murderous attempts on the person of a
subject. That the actual murder of the
king does not itself constitute treason, but
can only be tried as an overt act of com-
passing his death, was, as your lordships
know, solemnly decided in the case of
those who put to death king Charles
1st.* It never occurred to any one, that it
was possible to try these persons for
mti-dar. And by statute 9th Geo. 1st. c.
22., it is enacted, " that if any person
vrilfuUy and maliciously shoot at any
person, he shall be adjudged guilty of
felony, without benefit of clergy." But
it was not thought, that by this act, the
shootina at the Tang could be proeeeuted ae
each felony f nor was it thought possible to
enact the treason of attacking the king's ^
life into a felony. Accordingly, the act
39th and 40th Geo. 3rd. c. 93. was passed,
reciting in the preamble, that ** whereas
it is expedient, in cases oihigh treaun^ in
compamng and imagining the death of the
king, where the overt act alleged shall be
the assassination -or killins uie king, or
any direct attack against his life, 6cc. the
trial for such offence should -not be dif-
ferent from trials for murder, or wilful
and maMcioHS shooting ;** it then enacts,
^ that the person shaH be imdieted, ^rro^gn-
edy triedy and attainted in the same manner,
and according to the eame coune and order
■of trial in every respect, and upon the Uke
evidence f at jf mth person or persons stood
'Charged toUh murder J* And so thoroughly
aware was the legislature that treason
could not be tried as felony, and that acts
passed for the benefit of the subject could
not be repealed by implication, that that
act contains a special clause, enactiDg,
** Hiat none of the provisions contaioM
in the several acts of the 7th year of king
William drd^ and the 7th of queen Anne
respectively, touching trials m cases of
treason, Stc' shall extend to any indict-
21
* Kelyng's ]Up. 8.
4831
57 GEORGE III.
Trial nfAi^tfm M^SmU]/
r484
iD€Bt of high treaiOD, in compaitiBf &e.
'where the overt act shall be such as afore-
said, buty upon con^ictiony judgnjient shall
nevertheless be given, and execution done,
as in other cases of high treason* any law,
statute, or usage to the contrary notwith*
standing.*'
It is believed, that the act of the pre-
sent session, for the better preservation
of the prince regent's person, is of the
same tenor.
The prisoner has now to show, that the
words in the last section of the act, relied
on by the prosecutor to prove that an
option is given of prosecuting treason as
felony, not only authorise no such infer-
ence, but that such an inference would
be attended with consequences the most
preposterous* and the most dangerous.
It must be recollected, that this statute
is, bot\| by its title and preamble, to be
considered as an extension of the act 37th
of the king, which it vfas passed for the
purpose of rendering more effectual. By
this acty 37th Geo. 3rd, c. 123, '^ the ad-
ministering or taking any oath, purport-
ing or intending to bind the person taki".g
the same ta engage in any mutinous or
seditious purposes, or to disturb the public
peace, or to be of any association, society,
or confederacy formed for any such pur-
pose, or to obey the orders or commands
of any committee not lawfully constituted,
or of any leader or commander, or other
person not having authority by law for
that purpose, or not to inform or give
evidence against any associate," &c is
declared felony, and punished by trans-
portation for seven years. The last section
of that act is in the same words vrith the
last section of the act now under consi-
deration. So that, by the same rule of
construction, it must be maintained, that
in passing the act 37th of the king, it was
the intention of the legislature, that per-
sons guilty of high treason might be tried
for this felony, and be sentenced to trans-
portation for seven years, and, being so
tried, should be for ever quit from all
question as to their treason. And if the
words of that statute be attended to, and
such be its construction, the offence might
obviously amount to no less an act of
treason than the enlisting in a regular body
sworn to obey the orders of a leader or
commander in open rebellion. The pri-
soner has already shown, that the direct
and general words in the jint teeimri of
the act on which he is indicted* vrill not
abrogate the rule of the common law.
There is, therefore, to this effect* no dif-
ference between the two statutes. If the
inference is to be drawn from the last
^katae, it is equally applicable to the 87th
of the king as to the latter act of the 52nd.
To engage in a mutinous or seditious
purposie 'may mclade p, treasonable en-
gag«mettt ; and to administer or take an
oath* binding to any such engagement*
may most easily be an overt act of treason.
To disturb the public peace* may include
treasbn; to become'' bound, or engage
another* to be of any confederacy formed
for such purpose* if the purpose be trea-
sonable* which it may well be, nay be an
overt act of tteason. To administef or
take an oath to obey the commands of
any body of men* not lawfully con-
stituted, or of any leader or commander*
not having authority by law* if such body
or leader be engaged in any treasonable
purpose, may be an overt act of treason*
and in many, perhaps most of the in-
stances* in which a leader and commander
could be supposed appointed, is more
likely to be an act of treason than other-
vrise. If to these considerations be
added the last clause of the said act of
the 37th of the king, declaring, *«lliat
any person, who shall be tried and ac-
qmtted* or convicted of any ofience
against this act, shall not be indicted*
prosecuted* or tried again for the same
offence or fact, as high treason* or mis*
prision of high treason* and that nothing
m this act contained shall be construed
to extend to prevent any person guilty of
any offence against this act, and who shall
not be tried for the same as an oAence
against this act, from being tried for the
same as high treason, or misprision of
high treason* in such manner as if this
act had never been made;^ then the
prosecutor has* according to Ait reasoning*
eomplete evidence* that* ^it is quite
dearly the meaning of this law* to make
the administering or taking an oath* pur-
porting in terms of the statute* triable
acoordmg to the ordinary course of jus-
tice (that is* as a felony)* whether it be
treason or not;"*— that is, that **it is
quite clearly the meaning of the law*** to
make high treaaon triakU as a irmmportabie
fekfmf ;— to give the power to every in-
former, perhaps an accomplice* of laying
an information under this act, to tlie eifect
of obtaining the culprit to be indicted
under it at the quarter-sessions, so that*
although die offence should turn out to
be truly an act of high treason, amounting
to actuid rebellion* and a conspiracy to
take up arms, provided it be also an en-
gagement to embark in any mutinous or
seditions purpose* and it cannot wdl be
otherwise* or to obey a body or leader,
not having authority bv law* he can only
be convicted under the act* and tiams-
ported for seven years.
There is* as your korddiips know* in
England* nothing to pfevent any man
from bringing another ta justice for a
public crime ; and if it be the law* that
^ Information* p. 390^
4»o\
Jbr AdmiMiteriiig unlamfid Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
C486
it it no objefitton to an iodictmeDt and
trinl under the ttatatey that the faot com"
mitted^ is hi^ treaaoa, then, on tnch in-
CMftnatioa being giiwn to the grand jury,
V * they may hwiul^ tndid one gnilty of
treason as for this felony; and if the
treasonable matter be kept back from the
knowledge of the grand jniTy ^ey have
no choice bnt to indiot him or the felony,
and then, though it appear manifestly on
the trial that the crime was high treason
of te moet dangerooa nature, there is no
legal remedy ; but the cnlprit must escape
with a pnnishment ab§oliaeiy ludicrous
when compared to thi txteni Sf kk guilt.
Is it not obrious, that if this were the
intention of the legislature, the title of
the statute has been mistaken, and that it
ought to have been intituled, '^ an act for
abolishing the plains and penalties of high
treason in certain cases, and substituting
the punishment of transportation for
seven years in lien thereof ?' Nor under
the last act, the 52nd of the king, is the
oondusion much less absvrd ; for though
the admimtieritig a treasonable oath ren-
ders the person subject to a capital
pnnishment, the tMng it is oi^ a trans-
portable offence ; so tiMCt for an oath taken
to kill the king I though n weapon were
provided for the pnrpose, and omer steps
taken to aeoomptish it, a man might yet
be only liable to transportation ; and this,
k is gravely supposed, wae in ihe view of
the legislature in passing this act.
We ate here, in a question not wholly
without ambigtttsy, endeavonring to as-
certain the antentioB of the legtriature in
passing an act of parliament. .The act
creates two descriptions of felony, one
without beneftt of mergy, and capital, the
other within beneik of clergy, and trans-
portable. The legislature must therefore
nnve been aware^ not only that acts of
high treason might be tried under the
statute at a tapiial /dtmy, but that acts of
the same nnture might be tried of a trwu'
forUibie ftlcmtf, ^<yt the act says, any
pereon takkig an oath to commit treason,
shall be transported for life, or for such
terra as the Court shall adjudge. And if
the legislature meant, in one case, that high
trason might be punished a* • aj^pitalfdony^
it is equally clear, that it meant in the
other that it might he punished at a trant'
poHabie fiUnhf, And lu passing the 37th
of the king, it meant, that high treason
flhonld be punished hif tr^mtfoirta^km for
$men yean onfy. The prisoner will not
sajr« that it is dilBcuk to suppose any
ihmg more unlikely; but- he uSrms, that
nothing can be supposed more impossible.
'Eo.asotibe this intontion to the legislature
in im vtter ahenrdity. He possesses no
Means of Htnstrating what appears so
plain and undeniable, to which lie enroot
even imagine an aasvrety and whicbi if it
required additional support, is amply con-
firmed by the uniform doctrine of all
writers of authorit}r — Coke, Hale, Foster
•— foAo agree thai iiitnot tobe imputed to
tkt legitlattaref thai it ever intended, by any
statute, to enact treason into felony. If the
words, therefore, of this last clause, of
these two statutes should remain utterly
nagatory and unintelligible to the end of
the world, this would not involve half
the difficultv, or a tenth part bf the
absurdity, of imputing to the legislature
an intontion such as has been supposed.
Instead, therefore, of assuming such a
proposition as this, the prisoner will
rather endeavour to ascertain what mean-
ing this clause can have, consistently with
the plain rules of law and common sense.
And in so doing, he is happy to think
there is no extraordinary difficulty.
The clause consists of two parts. The
prisoner will beg leave to begin with the
last* It is in these terms, "That nothing
in this act contained, shall be construed
to extend to prohibit any person guilty of
any offence against this act, and who shall
not be tried for the same as an offence
against this act, from beiog tried for the
same as high treason, or misprision of
high treason, in such manner as if this
act had not been .made.'*
Now, what is this but a clause of the
nature of that toary douse, whicH lord
Hale remarks in the statutes of Philip
and Mary, Edward, and Elisabeth, making
several offences felony, ** the same not being
treason by statute %5th Edward ZrdV* The
legiskUure was aware, that the enacting
these offences into felony was a judgment
of parliament that they were not treason ;
and therefore to avoid the risk of any
such intorpretation, where the oifences
were treason, this clause was introduced.
In the same manner, the53nd of the king
deelares, that nothing therein contained
shall be construed to prohibit any offence
against this act from being tried as hieh
treason ; lest it should be argued, that the
general terms of the statuto were a de-
daration of parliament, that such offence
was no longer to be considered a treason,
but a felony. The general terms of the
enacting clause, that the admiaisteiing or
takiuff any oath binding to commit any trea»
son, shall be deemed felony, would take
in all the cases of administering or taking
such oaths, though such administering or
taking should amount to treason. It is
tnie, that according to just rules of con-
struction, and agreeably to the precedents
and principles whichhave been mentioned,
it ought not to be so construed. But it
was justly thought proper not to leave
this to construetion, but to declare, by
this express olanse, that it was not in-
tended that the statute slmuld apply to
cases where the oAence actually amounted
4871 tn GEORGE III.
to kigh trcsson, but thai thwe should be
lri«d in the same inamier as before. And,
a» Jvudge Foeter very justly remaiks,
^ thoagh it is a goodi general role, that the
pariitmeni doth miking m vainy yet this is
▼ery well known not to be universally
trae. For many valnable purposes, which
wisdom, and a- just oonoern for the public
welfitre, will suggest, may be answered
by an express |>rovision,. not in itself of
absolute indispensable necessity; some-
tines for remoTing doubts, where different
opinions have been entertained, and at
other times out of abundant caution, for
obviating doubts which possibly may
arise/'*
But the words, ** who shall not be tried
ibr the same as an offence against this
act,* are supposed to aliudC' to this alter-
native power, which the a^t must there-
fore be held to havecreate4« Tliis alludes
to, and is connected with, the former part
of the clause, and will be best understood
by examining what the meaning of this
former part is^ I
It is^ in ' these weids : *i Provided also,
and it is hereby declared, that any person
who shali be tried and acquitted, or con-
victed of any offence against this act,
•hall not be liable to be indicted, prose-
cuted, or tried again for the same offence
or fact as high treason, or misprision of
hieh treason/'
The prisoner readily admits, that to
persons not accustomed to <iuestions of
legal ceastmction, it may at first sight
appear as if the legislatore had contem-
plated the possibility of trying the same
•flbnoe either as high treason or felony, at
the pleasure of we prosecutor, or the
indictors, vii. the grand jury. But it is
^uito obvious, that without any supposi-
tion of this sort,, it must have beei» fore-
seen, that cases might readily occur where
the facts might approach very close to
tieasoQ, and where it might be doubtful
whether to proceed for treason, or for the
folony under the statute. If the latter
eourse were adopted, and it came out in
evidence to be treieon,. the pcisoner,
thougliJUi()nitted, was yet subject,. accor-
ding t» the law of England, to be tried
over t^n- for the* same fact, under the
denommataeo of the higher crime. It
was this hardship the legislature meant to
It meant to extend to the sub-
Triul ofAhdi^mo M^tSnUff
r48S
.*■
jpct in Rnghnd b]r sutute in »^ ««»«,
t^ benefit to which he is entitled in
Scotland by the coaunoa law in all cases,
that he shall not be tried on diiforent ac-
cusations, and nodes differentdenomina-
tions of guilt, more than once for the
samf fact. There is nothing either so
anomalous, or so jextraordinary, in a pro-
vision by the legislature to remedy this
I.,ft0,f984.
* hardship, when il was ereatiag new
offences, to be punished by the latter
statute with great severity, thai we should
rather have recourse to the extravagant
supposition suggested by the prosecutor,
to account for the insertion of these
words.
But it may be said that this reasoning
relates only to a case of aeqmtuli and it
may be asked, To what purpoee is it
declared, that a person comrieted of an
offence against this act, shall not be tried
again for the same offence or foct as high
treason, if, the foct amountiug to high
treason, he could not be legally convicted
of that offence or fact under this actf
The solution of this difficulty, if it be
one, is not very intricate. In the Jini
place. The prisoner is not aware that the
legisUture has ever declared, that where
an acquittal on one indictment shall be a
bar to another, a conviction shall not be
equally so; and it would seem a singular
hardship if it were otherwise. In the
seoonrf place. It was obvious, that circum-
stances might come out afterwards, shew-
ing the fiMts committed to have amounted
to treason, which might not appear at
the trial. And the legislature thought it
would be too rigorous a proceeding, on
acconnt of after discoveries, which,,
though the^ might vary its legal com-
plexion, might not vary the fo^ of the
case, again to put the ofiinider on his
trial, which might be by the common law.
For a eonvietion or acquittal on a charge
of Mooj could not be pleaded in bar of
a dmrge of high treason by the common
hw.
In the Hdrd place, An offence not
amounting to treason when committed or
' tried, may become treason by a subse-
quent event, and the possibiiity of this,
was more obvious in those offences whidi
were in tlie particular view of the legisla-
ture in passing these acts. The species
of treason to which the engagements con-
templated- were the most l&ely to lead,
vras evidently the levying of war. Now,
if the war proposed to be levied^ were not
directly against the king's- person or go-
vernment, or cominff under the 86th of
the king^ but only what is termed a con-
structive levying of war against the king,
then the bare oooapiracy would be no
treasoUi unless the rising were effected,
or the war levied. But ** in that ease,
the conspirators, as well as the actors,
will be all equally gutlt]^; for in high
treasons of all kinds, the ^eritcfMS cnms-
fiip are principals.*^ . '* And if divers
conspire to levy war, md some of them
actually levy it, tUe is high treason in all
the eonspirators; becanse in tseeeon all
are principals, and hare is a war levied."
»»
^ FoMr, %IZ.
4801
fiiit Aimi»t^t»timg wnitn^iA Oalht.
A. o. mi*
C490
So it was declared at the arraignment of
sir Ni6holat Tbrogmorton, by the opi-
nions of the jodgesy that tf two or aore
oonspire to commit treason, as in loTying
war, and any of them afterwards pot it in
execntion, that is treason in all, and this
by the common law before the declaration
was made in 3^th Edw. 3rd."* Thus, if
one were indicted under the 37th of the
king, (or adminiirtering or taking an oath,
binding to be of an association for any
mntinoos or seditious purpose, or to obey
the orders or commands of anr commit*
tee or bodv of men not lawfiuiy oonsti-
toted, or of an^ leader or commander not
baring aathonty by law, there being at
the time of his arrai^ment no war levied,
he could not be tned for treason. But
beinp; either acquitted or convicted under
this indictment, if afterwards the associa-
tion or committee, or body of men, or
leader, or commander with whom he had
so conapirM, should actually jAroceed to
effect the rising contemplated, such rising
amounting to a losing of war, he would
be thereby rendered ex part facto guilty of
treason ; and but for this clause in the
act, might be tried for treason accord-
ingly; nor could he plead in bar, his
former acquittal or conviction of the
felony.
Tkiese considerations rendered this
clause indispensable. So to interpret the
intention pt the legislature infers no ab-
surdity, but, on the contraiT, is for the
advancement of justice, and for the fre^
dom of the subject from vexatious and
oppressive prosecutions. The only incon-
venience th^t can be supposed to arise
from it is this, that if an offender be tried
under either of these actt, and it come
out on evidence that his offence amounts
to high treason,' he must be acquitted
under the general rule of law, that trea-
son cannot be tried as felony. But this
by no means follows ; for if it be the in-
tention of the legislature that treason
shall not be tried as a felony under this
act, he cannot be lawfolly put upon his
tnal for this felony,' if his offence amounts
to treason. If the (acts so appear to the
magistrate, he ought to be committed
for treason, and not for fslony. If they
so appear to the grand jurv, he cannot be
Immily indicted for the idony, and the
Mm will not waSat him to be put on his
trill on such indictment. If it so appear
to your lordships, yon will not pronounoe
an interloenlor of relevancy* If in Engi-
land, ** throni^ mistake on the part of
the prosecutor, or through the ignorance
or inattention of the officer, a bill were
preferred as for ^ts felony, and it should
cone out on evidence u»t the offence
treason, the judge would not
• 1 Hale, 133.
think it byanymteis advisabU to direct
the jury to give a verdict of ae(|uittal : for
a person «iarged with a ohme of so
heinous a nature, ouf^t not to have the
chance given him by the' Court, of avail-
ing hinuelf of a plea of amicrfiiH§ aequU."
— ** In such a case,^ in the words of Mr.
Justice Foster, ^ he would make no sort
of difficulty of disdiarging the jury of that
indictment, and ordering a fresh indict-
ment for the treason/ In this method, the
prisoner would have the advantage of his
peremptory challenges, and the public
justice would not siaSfer."*
That the Court has authori^, agreeably
to the law and practice in Enf^d, to
discharge the juiV after the prisoner has
pleaded, and evidence given, where the
purposes of justice require i^ has, from
before the time of Lord Hale been ad-
mitted by the best authorities.t'
The case of a trial on this statute,
where the offence amounts to high trea-
son, is precisely in point with that put in
by Mr. Justice Foster, of a trial for mur-
der where the offence amounts to petit
treason. . For in that case it is laiddown
by all the authorities, that an acquittal
upon an indictment of mwder; is a good
bar to an indictment of petit treason in
the same way as an acquittal of this felony
created br the statutes of the king, would
be a good plea in bar of an indictmtot of
high treason for the same offence, though
neither in the case of petit treason, even
in Judge Foster's opinion, ought a con-
viction to foUow, nor by the aeneral rule
of law, in an indictmmit* under this sta-
tute, as the prisoner trusts he has shown,
can a conviction follow, if the offence
amount to high treasott.t
' According to the construction which
Ihe prosecutor* would put on the in-
tention of the legislatiire in passing the
sutute on which he has laid the present
indictment, he would impute to the legis-
lature this inconceivable injustice and ab-
surdity—That on the one hand the highest
and most dangerous species of treason,
>, involving a m^itated atttack on the life
of the sovereign, sanctioned by the so-
lemnitv of cams,, and extending, as is
alleged in this casci to a conspiracy of
hundreds or thousands of persons, threats
ening, as is here also alleged, '^ to effect
the subversion of the established |;ovenH
ment, laws, and constitution of this king-
dom,'' by means which must involve the
whole nation in bloodshed and fai open
* Foster, Crown Law, 8t8.
t 1 Hale 35, 523, 657- 2 Hale, 295.
Kelyng*s Rep. 36, 47, 52.
t Foster, 38, 39. Foster's C. L. pp. 30,
et seq. lb. 328. Leach's case in C. 1. Case
233. Ibid. Ca. 257. Foster, 329. 2 ilale,
246, 252. 8 Coke Inst. 213.
4911
S7 GEORGE III.
Triat o/j^ndnm M'Kinlty
[402
war, ma^ bt triad as ^ felony, puniibable
only with tnuispoitation; and like in-
dictaant bainy onea piefarvad, wbather
by a grand jury in £D|^d, or ihe public
piosacutor in Scotland, no ranady re-
ntaini, but the offauden mvat be for erer
disduurged by this means fioa all further
coaaaquenoes of their goilt. And on the
•ther hand, by the cootrivanoa of the offi-
cers of tha CrowD, the anbjaots of this
country may ba biottght to trial, and
placed in hasard of their U?as on a State
prosacutioD-— with tha whole weight and
influence of goremment to oppress, them
•^the overheated zeal of iu officers ex-
dtedy perhaps their interest and reputa-
tion at stake on the issiia--as well as the
passions of the Custious, the tenors of the
tiaud, the just indignatioa of tha weU*
affiicted against crimes inTolving the
common suety. overpowering the natural
disposition to demeney and deliberation,
•'—an combining to deprive the aocnsed of
the security which in ordinary cases they
possess, for a fair and impartial trial ; —
while they are at the same time stripped
of those safeguards, which it has been the
ceaseless eodeavour of the 'law of Eng-
land, from the most aacieai times, e?ei^
in the midst of tyranny and disorder, to
provide for tha protection of the subject
against that oppression, and that danger,
to which it has always felt and adinow-
ledged him to ba in these drcumstances
exposed. The prisoner will only add,
that io p«t sneii a constmctaon upon these
acts of pariiameat, would not be to ex-
pound the laws, bat to libel those who<
made them. At your lordships' hands,
he is certain there is no danger of their
receiving such a oonstniction, equally
disposed as yon feel, at once to protect
the subject from oppression, and to vindi-
cate the necessary justice oflJic country.
In rtsped wktrtef^ 4^.
J. P. Grant. .
Cowueljbr ike Panel, '
COURT OF JUSTICIARy.
JULT 18, 1817.
Freteni,
Rjt. Hon. David Bo^le, Lord Justice Clerk.
Jiord Hermand,
I/>rd GUlki.
Loid FUmiify.
Caumeljbr ike Crcmt.
BX, Hon. Mexm^det Maoonodde of Meadow-
bank, His Majesty's Advocate [afterwards a
lotd of Session and Justiciary, with the title
of Lord Meadowbank.l
Jmi» ffaUvtorvi, Esq. Solioitor-Ganeral.
H, flome Drvmnmdf Em|. Advoaate-Depnia.
Jofo Clerks Esq.
Qea. OrwuUmn^ Esq.
2^. TAomson, Esq.
Framm J^frtM^ Em}.
X P. Gnmr, Esq.
J. A, Murray f Esq.
J&noB Momcrkfff Esq.
Heary Cockkumf Esq. '
[The Panel was placed at the bar.]
LmiJmtUx CMc— Vonr loadships will
collect, that, at a former diet, objections were
stat^ at great length to the relevancy of the
indictment against the panel, which objections
. were considered by yon so important, mat yon
ordered them to be embodied in informations.
The informations are now before you, and
yovr lordships will now give yonr opinions
upon them.
Mr. Clerk, — I attend your lordships for tlie
panel, and, I trust I may be permitted to say
a few words upon the indictment in addition
to what is stated in the informations ; and I
shall not detain you long.
Lord Advocate.--^The genHemtn have given
in two informations when tha order was for
oae ; and yonr lordships will judge whether
we are now to go into a new pleading. .
Mr. Clerk, — You know, that before the in-
dictment was ready, it was concerted there
should be informations. That appointment
was renewed after the indictment was pre-
pared and after hearing counsel ; but it was
uefore the last indictment was prepared
that it was fixed there should be . infor*
mations; and your lordships have not yet
nven any opinion at all upon this indictment. —
The informations were ordered upon. the under-
standing, that the indictment would be nearly
the same as the former one, only correc^ng the
slovenly statement of the former. It would
be strange if your lordships were not to hear
counsel. I shall not detain you long, bul shall
on^ call your attention to some passages that
had escaped the acuteness of my learned
friend Mr. Moncrieff.
As to the other argument, by Mr. Gout, I
do not mean to touch upon it at all. ^
Lord Juftiee Clerk, — ^It is neoeesary to attend
to the ahape in which the case comes before
OS. Mr. Clerk in his statement is correct in
point of fact ; bnt I distinctly intimated, when
a new indictment wais servad on tha panel,
that na atad voce additional arguments would
ba looked for bv the Canit Aom the bar, but
that tl|e counsel for the ftfiaaner should em-
body thair whole arguments in the informa-
tians — whea we would ocnsidor tiMn and give
dnr opinicns. I oonaidetad it inad, that no
tether atvd aaos disooisians were to taka place
in this case. There was n discnssicn aa* to the
time to be given for preparing the informatioos,
and we listened to tbe cotrasAy for further time
1
Jot AdtUhmtmng mtinifui Oatht.
A. D. 1817.
[4M
to the gcnUemati who fins to di«w tht infor-
BMtioii far the p«mL Mr. Coekbnni was th»
eouBfel who toade an appUettion 09 the sub-
ject. We gave to the paners covnsel the
foUest and most ample opportunity for prep**
mtion ; and not only u there an able aigument
for the panel by Mr. Moncrieff, but one abo
by Mr. Grant. I have folly considered the in-
fermationSy and I presume your lordships are
all prepared to give your opinioos npon them.
Lord Hermand. — I am of the same opinion
with your lordship, and I beg leave to make
an addition to your statement; that in this
case the information for the Crown was drawn
first. It was put into the hands of the ablest
band of counsel that could appear for any
panel, and I do not see for what reason we
should reverse the usual course of proceeding,
and a^ain take a day or two to consider what
Mr. Clerk or othen may bring forward.
Lofd OUUn. — Any thing additional ahonld
have been stated at an earlier period.
Lord PiimiSy was of the same opinion.
Lord HemumtL — ^This case has been truly
stated to be a case of great importance. It is
of the last importance to the panel at the bar,
for it is a question of capital punishment ;
wbi<A, whatever may be done in another
quarter, we have no power to mitigate. But
it is of greater consequence in another view :
it is of infinite oonsequence to every one who
now bears me, every one who has a dse
ref^trd for the exoelleBt constitution VBder
which we have the happiness to live.
. The questioii, however, is extremely simple
in itself; and I cannot say I am mnoh afraid
of Che hint of impeachaeBt thrvwn out,* if
wo xeAne to give effeet to what is cafied a.
jodgment of Parliament in the days of a
fofiner Sovereign. I sit here, in the reign of
George the thinl, to give my opinion how far
am indictment is well laid, upon the stat 52nd.
G«o. 3rd. cap. 104, an act called for by the
cirenmslances of the times ; and to which,
every man having a due sense of the consti-
tntion; should wuh to give fair and iiiU effect.
it is upon that statute, therefore, I have
formed my opinion ; and to it I beg leave to
call the attention of the Court. It enacts,
''That every person who shall, in any manner
or form whatsoever, administer, or cause to
be administered, or be aiding or assisting at
the administering, of any oath or engagement,
purporting or intending to bind the person
taking the same to commit any treason or
mnrdter, or any felony punishable by law with
death, shall, on conviction diereof bv due
course of law, be adjudged guilty of felony,
and sofTer death as a felon, without benefit of
ciergy.''' Yet in the foce of this clear enact-
ment vire are gravely told, that, by some rule,
of the fiibmerston of one crime into another,
said to be found in English law books, of
* 2nd Inf. p. 4S5.
whieh I prttendfo ktiow littloi it isndt ia dur
power, without violating our duty, to pfo»
nounce judgment in this case as in a fblony,
though we are commanded to do so by a.
solemn act of the legislatare. The term/ctony
occurs in almost every cLanse of the statoto,
particularly that whicb I have just now
feed. And the minor proposition, duly fid*
lowing out the words of the statute, states
that, '<You the said Andrew M'Kiuley
are guilbr of the said crimes, or of one or
more of them, actor, or art and part :
i» so far as you the said Andrew M'Kinl^
did, at secret meetings, and on other occasions,
at Glasgow, and in the viciniw thereof, in
the course- of the montiis of November and
December 1816, and Jamtaiy and Februiry
1817, vrickedly, maliciously, and feloniously
administer, or cause to be administered, or
did aid or assist at the administering, to a
great number of persons, to the amount of
several hundreds, an oath or engagement, or an
engageinent or obligation in the nature of an
oath, purporting or intending to bind the
person^ taking the same to commit treasoB|
by obtaining annual parliamenti and univer*
sal suffrage by physical strength or force, and
thereby dSfecting the subversion of the estab*
lished government, lavrs, and constitution of
this kingdom, by unlawful and violent means."
It is inconceivable to me, that a statement
more in terras of the act of parliament could
be made.
After reciting the oath, the indictment
charges the administoring it, at various tecrtt
meetings, to sundry persons, many of them
secured, and seme of whom bave absconded.
The material <^estiott therefore turns upon
the oath, which is here recited :
^Inawfol presence of God, I, A. B. do
voluntarily swear, that I will persevere in my
endeavonring to form a nrotherhood of
affection aasongst Britons of cveiy description,
who are considered worthy of"^ confidence ;
ami ^atl will persevere in my endeavoun to
obtain for all the people in Great Britain and
Ireland, not disqualified by crimes or insanity,
the elective franchise, at the age of twenty-
one, with free and equal representation, and
annual parliaments, and that I will support
the same to the utmost of my power, eiUMr by '
mord or physical strength (or force), as the
case may require : And I do further swear,
that nei&ier hopes, fears, rewards or punirit*
ments, shall induce me to inform on, or give
evidence against any member or members,
collectively or individually, for any act or
expression done, or made in, <or out, in this or
similar societies, under the punishment of death,
to beinfiicted on me b^ any meatfaeror oaembea
of such societies; so help me Ged, and
keep me stedfast/'
I think thia is the blackest oailjh I ever read.
I think it bears treason and blasphemy on the
face of it. It shocks me to see the name of
God used for such purposes. With that name
this strange o^di begins and ends.
49Si
87 geouge III.
TriaiofAndrtn
[400
Is ity however, an oath undor the ^tatate f
And with evefy mpect for the ability displayed
in contesting it, I have no doubt that it is ; for it
did purport, or intend to bind the persons
taking it, to commit treason, murder, or other
felony punishable with death. A brotherhood
was to be formed of persons worthy of confi-
dence, a tecrgt brotnerhood, for purposes
8ub7ersive of the constitution. What more
so than uniyersal suffrage, or annual electimis
to parliament f I take the words of my learn-
ed friends on tliis subject. One gentleman
said the plan was productive of anarchy or
despotism. I took down this from Mr. Cran-
stoun. Mr. Clerk said the oath was wicked
enouffh, indicating a very bad intention. I
iind the very same proposition stated by Mr.
Moncrieff. I agree with them in tiiis; and it
amuses me to see that >the gentleman who
drew the one information, does not say a word
upon the other. On the contrary, Mr. Clerk,
who stood up a little ago, said he would take
no notice of it whatever. I«fay, in the infor-
mation to which I referred, there is a passage
which I do not understand, and which I tkiXX
therefore read, that it may be explained in
conformity to the panel's argument, if it
admit of such explanation. ^It may be ad-
mitted, that without reference to some other
objects, this oath was in a high degree. im-
proper, that it was highly criminal; that it
was of an extremely dangerous tendency;
th!at it was the duty of the public prosecutor
to take notice of it, if the fiicts were true ;
and that it might with the utmost propriety
have been made the subject of an inaictmenU
Supposing all ihis, the question remains,
whether it is an oath binding the party to
commit a treaton? Nothing, therefore, can be
more irrelevant 'or incondnsive, than to state
circumstances in the oath which indicate
iinproper-or criminal views. They may be
very relevant to shew jucA intentions ; but
what your lordships are bound to determine is,
whether the oath purports to bind the party
to commit treason V*
It appears to me, that, with the utmost
propriety, the oath has been made the subject
of indictment ; and I cannot characterise it
more strongly than is done in this passage.
Nay, more, ^ The prosecutor may state, amd
thoee who arffue the case of the informant
will agree wim him, that nothing more uncon-
stitutional, nothing more absurd, nothing
more nuschievous, nothing more neoevarily
leading to despotism, and to the destruction of
the liberties of the country, could be suggested,
than this'proposal of universal suffrage and
annual paniaments."t Better language than
I could nave used ; but it expresses the very
Ustling of mv heart, and the sentiments of
every one who has ever turned his attention
to such a snlject as that unfortunately now
before the Court.
We were told that lawful means might be
• Ist Inf. p. 446. t lit Inf. p. 447.
employed to accomplish all these objects. Ther«
is a good deal of inconsiatency in this ;. and,
in a question of relevancy, such lawful meaas
are not to be implied. They are not ta \m
implied in tvying the relevancy of this indict*
ment, though they may be the subject of afler-
proof.
The Question recurs. If there be treason in
all this t or rather does the oath purport, or
intend to bind to the commission of treason^
murder, or other felonv punishable with
death? Now, laying aside the other crimes
specified, if the measure contemplated be
subversive of the constitution, it is treason
against the state. And though the king^s
name be employed by lawyers, as compassing
the J^mg*$ death, levying war against the
kifigy it is as the representative of the state^
thepreservation of which is the great object.
Tnis is well explained, in a passage from
one of the first lawyers and judges that £ng«
land ever saw, quoted in the information for
the crown.
** In every insurrection, which, in judgment
of l(^w, is intended against the perFon of the
king, be it to dethrone or impnson him, or
to oblige him to alter his measures of govern-
ment, or to rempve evil counsellors from about
him, these risings all amount to levying war
within the statute, whether attend^ with
the pomp and circumstances of open war or
not. And any conspiracy to levy, war for
these purposes, though not treason within the
clause of^ levying war, is yet an overt ad
within the other clause of compassing the
king's death. For these purposes cannot b»
effected by numbers and open force, without
manifest danger to his person."'^
And, in another passage, ^ Insnrrectionn
likewise for redressing national grievances, or
for the expulsion of foreigners in genersl, or
indeed any single nation, living here under
the protection cl the king, or for the r^op-
mation of real or imaginary evils of ^ ftMc
ruUvre, and in which th€ imwgemU haoe no
nedal interat ; risings to effect these ends, by
force and numbers^ are, by consthiction at
law, within the clause of levying war, for
they 9fe levelled at the king's crown and
royal dignity." That is, I conceive, the law
upon this subject ; and, though I speak with the
highest respect of the great man (Hale), in
one part of whose works there is a pSAsage
from which this learned judge (Foster) differs,
the quotations which I have read express
the true law of the case, so far as I cub
presume to understandit. Indeed, so uhanswer*
able is this, that the counsel for the paml
admits it, and adduces the authority of sir
Matthew Hale in these words :
^^Tt is obvious that no other treason eta
be meant than that of levying war against
the king. It may involve the compassing and
imagining the death of the kifkg, beeaose the
levying of war against the king may well bo
* 1st Inf. p. 381.
49f]
Jar AdmnUtering unlawfial Oaths.
A. li. 1817.
[4d8
an oTert act of such coi^^passtng and imagining.
For your lordships know that it is laid doWn
by lord Hale (1 Hale, 1 22)^ that ' ao assembly
to levy 'war against the king, either to depose,
6r restrain, or enforce him to any act, or to
tome to his presence to remove his counsellors
or ministers, or to fight against the king's lieu-
tenant, or military commissionate oflScers, is
an overt a^t, proving the compassing the
death of the king ; for such a war is directed
against the very person of the king, and he
t£^ designs to fight against the king, cannot
but know that at least it must hsueard his
lift).' And in sir John Friend's case,* who
was convicted of high treason in compassing
and conspiriTie the death of the king, lord
cbi^f-jostice llolt lays down the law, that, ' If
there be only a conspiracy to levy war, it is not
treason ; but if the design and conspiracy be
either to kill the king, or depose him, or im<*
prison htmy or put any force or restraint upon
nimy and the way and method of effecting of
these is by levying a war, then the consultation
and conspiracy to levy a war for tl\at purpose
is high treason, thoudi no war be levied ; for
SQch consultation and conspiracy is an overt
fuAf proving the compassing the death of the
king.S
In the other information for the panel, we
are told, that the kind of treasion is not specified
in the indictment; but here, another of his
learned counsel, tells us that it is specified.
He sayiy it can be nothine else than levying
war against Uie king. And, in another passage
still more fiivourable to the indictment, ^ But
to effect this subversion by unlawful and violent
means, through the obtaining annual par*
liaments and universal suffrage by physical
fiwce or strength^ if they are words slifficiently
Certain and predse to amount to a legal alle-
gation of any sort of treason;^can mean nothing
else Uian a levying of -war, in order, by force
and constraint, to compel the kiqg to change his
measures or counsels, or, at any rate, in order
to pat force or constraint upon both houses or
either House of Parliament.'^ The word sub-
ixrsion was quarrelled vrith ; but it is cured
here, ^ since annual parliaments and universal
suffrage cannot be obtained but by an act
pasted by ^e two houses and by the king, and
ff this passing be obtained by violent means;
which violence amounts to treasonable violence,
it can be no other than the putting such force
or constraint either upon his majesty, or upon
one or othei^ house or parliament, as is above
nentioned."
When I read this, i looked to the title of the
paper. I took it to have come fropa the counsel
fer the crown — for I cannot conceive a stronger
argument they could have urged. Figure. then
the effect of this ttniversal suffrage and these
annual mrliaments^ t. e. annual eUctionSy not
/ annual stsnom of parliament.. The life of the
king, of every oth^r good man, and, 'among
• 4. State Trials, 625, 626; [13 How. St.
Tr. 61.1 •♦• 2nd Inf. p. 457. % Ibid.
yOL. XXXIII.
them, I regret to saj^ it, the lives of the panel's
zealous defenders, would be in the ^tuafion of
republican France. The lantern afrd the
guillotine would be the order Of the day ; atni
my learned friends would probably go tbii first*
Every revolution begins with the lowest of the
people; and experience shows, that, those
whom they deemed their friends are' the first
to be sacrificed. It is absurd, therefore, to
suppose, that legal means can be used for such
deplorable ends. Bad intention is inherent inr
the oath, constituting a formed plan to subvert
the constitution, which only would wont ad
overt act to convert it into treasofr.
In the present deliberation, it is essential to
remark, that there is oo charge of treason in'
the indictment, a circumstance which cuts up
the panel's argument by the root. The charge
is wtt a charge of treason. The indictment
mentions treason indeed, but it does not say
that treason has been committed. - It has nut
been committed ; and, under the providence of
Ood, may never be. Yet we are told that the
indictment is irrelevant, because it does not
mention what species of treason the parties to
the oath had in their minds. The charge is of
quite a difierent nature. It is, that the panel
administered an oath, purporting to bind to
the commission of treason. By what means
was that object to be attained ? The oath re-^
moves every doubt, ^ That I will support the
same to the utmost of my power, either by
moral'or physical strength, as the case may re*^
quire," — in the judgment, no doubt, of the
brotherhood supposed to have been already
established.
These words require no commentary.
Moral strength consists in argument : physical
strength is strength of arms ; and these arc to
be employed as the case may require — the ne
cessiiy being to be determined by the framers
of the oath, and the brotherhood • which it
mentions. All this is under the dreadful
sanction, *' And I do further swear, that neitlier
hopes, fears, rewards, or punishments, shall
tnauce me to inform on, or give evidence
against, any member or members, collectively
or individtially, for any act or expr^ston done
or made, in or out, in this or similar societies,
vnder the punMment,qf, death^ to be inflicted on
me by any member or members of such so-
cieties. So help me God, and keep me stedfast.''
I think that the indictment need not have been
confined to' the charge of an oath binding to
commit treason*. It might have been also
stated that this was an- engagement binding to
commit murder.
From the fii^C I thought this a simple case ;
and. after all I have heard and read upon the
subject, I still consider it in that light. It may
not be improper, however, to say a few words
upon the arguments of the panel hi his two in-
formations.
It is said, and seems . to be .the great argu-
ment in the first, that this indicl|pent is va^ue,
as not specifying any particular treason ; and
we have a long quotation from Mr. Hume, to
400J 57 GEORGE UT.
Trial aJAiuifem M^Khiey
r5oo
"Yt
shewy what wu neTer disputed, that q>eciflbt«
tion is necessax^ in eveiy criminal charge.
But that is. nothing to the present question.
The cha^ is not a diarge of treason but of
administering an oath which purports to bind
to commit treason. It is not libelled that
treason was toromitted ; and it is impossible
that the species of what ne?er existed
could be stated in the indictment. The
oath itself is sufficiently special, bearing an
obligation to bring about uni?ersal sufnage
and annual pariiaments^ either by moral or
physical, streo^, as the case may reqniire.
Reference is made to the case of Kendal.*
In that case sir James Montgomery stood
committed on a charge of treason ;, and it was
therefore, by mere inaccuracy, that the public
prosecutor did npt specify what he knew ; he
bad only to look at Ine bill found by the grand
to see the species of treason charged.
[t is said, that ta specify the purport of the
oath is not sufficient. K might not be
sufficient in the case of incendiary lettera
and other instances, but here the objection
is in the fieu^e of the act of parliament,
which enacts, that it shall be sufficient to set
forth the purport of such oath or engagement,
or some material part thereof.
A question was put. What is the antecedent
to the wordS) ^ the same" in this oath ? It is
neither eleffant, nor classical, nor correct ; but
the antecedent may be trukmnurt or it may be
annual fiarliaments and universal suffirage ; in
either view, though clumsily eipressed^ the
meaning is sufficiently clear.
The case was figured, that the oath had
been, " to the utmost of my power,'' without
addition: which words imnly every power.
Here, howerer, there would be room for con-
struction, and that which was iaYourable for the
panel might have been adopted. In the pr^
sent case, .the oath is too clear X<y admit it.
But, it is obvious, that they were to emplojr
every sort of force. Where there is a possr-
bility of a fiwourablie eonstruction for the
panel, it ever will reeeive effect from me ; but
the words of the oath exclude that construc-
tion. I see a clear obligation to employ
physical strength to Mag about these detes-
table ends.-
The supplementary information contains a
new idea contradictoiy to the statement in the
first. ^* The pisoner has next to submit to the
Court a view of the question, totally different
from those he has already offered, and, in
arguing which, he is to proceed on the assump-
tion, that those views which he has alreaaj
stated are erroneous. For the purpose of this
argument he is to assume, that the oath does^
in its terms, necessarily, and by due construc-
tion, purport and intend to bind the persona
taking the saOBe to commit treason ; and that
the specific treason, to the commission of
which it did purport and intend to bind, is
sufficiently set forth in this indictment.^ I
■1^
IS How. Si. T^ 1369.
cordially agree with the proposition ** That the
oath does in its terms necessarily, and by due
construction, purport and intend to bind the
persons taking the same to commit treason >
and thai the specific treason, to the commission
of which it did purport and tend to bind, is
sufficiently set forth in this indictment^" But
what I desiderate is, how any thing favouraUa
to the unhappy man at the bar can be elicited
from this contradiction of bis former argument*
Both propositions cannot be true, but both may
hejkue.
The first information ^ates the indictment
as fiiulty, as not charging the oath as binding
to any particular treason, or to any treason at
all. To this I have already alluded. The
second information admits, that the oath doe»
purport and intend to bind to the conunission
of treason; and the argument is, that because
it binds to commit treason, it cannot be tried as
a felony, though the act expressly makes it
triable as such.
Here it is necessary to attend to ^e dif-
ference between the law of England, so far a9
I understand it, and the law of Scotland ; and
in the former there, may be reason why felony
should meiige in treason. For 1. Cnmes are
there, in general, tried at the instance of
private prosecutors, who, from corruption or
irom lenity, nuiy be induced to screen the
greater, by bringing the trial for the lesser
offence. 2. £ven aner going to a jury, a new
trial is competent in England.
The law of Scotland differs in both these
important particulars. 1. Trials h^e proceed
a\ the instance of a public prosecutor, placed
fiir above the influence of such a motive. 2.
After going to a jury, die panel cannot be sub*
jected to a second tnaU
But it is unnecessary to go into tiiis deduo*
tion. The act of parliament is the rule ; and
upon an oath binning to commit treason, or
Surportiag to bind to commit treason, it in-
icts the punishment of. felony. And the fi>l-
lowing clause is highly material in the argu-
ment : ** Provided also, and it is hereby de-
clared, That any person who shall be tried and
acquitted, or convicted of any offence against
this act, shall not be liable to be indicted,
prosecuted, or tried again for the same offence
or £Eu:t, as high treason or misprision of higk
treason ; and' that nothing in this act contained,
shall be construed to extend to prohibit any
person guilty of any offence against this act,
and who shsdl not be tried for the same as an
offence against this act, from being tried for
the same as high treeson, or misprision of high
treason, in suot manner as if this act had not
been made." This necessarily implies, that
the same act may be treason or mlony, and
tried under either denomination. And in case
of acquittal on a trial under this act, no trial
for treason can afterwards take place i- And if
there be no trial under this act, then trial for
treason may proceed.
On this pomt the counlei for the panel was
much at a loss. ** We are beie, in a queatioa
5011
^foflr Admimstering uniawfid Oaths,
A. D. iai7.
[502
not wholly without ambiguity, endeaTOuriog to
ascertain the intention of the legislature in
passing an act of parliament. The act creates
two descriptions of felony ; one without benefit
of clergy, and capital; the other within benefit
of clergy, and transportable. The legislature
musty tnerefbre, have been aware, not only that
acts of high treason might be tried under the
statute 4a a coital Jdmf^ but that acts of the
same nature might be tried as a transportable
felony.''*
And in another passage, ''The prisoner
readily admits, that to persons not accustomed
to questions of l^ptl oonstmotion, it may at
first sight appear, as if the legislature liad con-
templated the possibility of trying the same
offence^ either as high treason or felony, «t the
pleasure of the prosecutor or the indictors, TVk.
the grand jury, f Of that possibility we have
only to read the act of parltament to have an
absolute certainty.
It is not however npon critical niceties, but
«pon the plain common sense construction ef
the acts of the legislature, that judges are en-
titled and bound to proceed. Indeed, much
of the aiifument, however proper in the House
ef Commons, though even of that doubts maty
be entertained, comes in an irregular shape
before this Court, who must apply the statute
that has actually passed, without entering into
speculations as to the propriety of the enact-
ment itself. At the same time, I feel it in-
cumbent upon me to declare, that in my ap-
prehension, called for by the situation of the
timesy consummate wisdom and enlightened
humanity are the genuine characteristics of the
statute.
Having said so much, I cannot conclude
better than in the words of a great and ez-
ceQent man : ^ In favour of lite, great strict-
nesses have been in all times required in points
of indictments; and the truth is, that it is
grown to be a blemish and inconveniencv in
the law and the administration thereof. More
offenders escape by the orer easy ear given to
exceptions in indictments, than by their own
innocence; and many times gross murders,
burglaries, robberies, and other heinous and
oying offences, escape by these unseemly
niceties, to the reproach of the law, to the shame
of the government, and to the encouragement
of villainy, and to the dishonour of God. And
it were very fit that, by some law, this over-
grovni curiosity and nicety were reformed,
which is now become the disease of the law ; and
will, I fear, in time grow mortal, without some
timely remedy." Tbe editor adds, in a note :
''This advice of our author would, if complied
with, be' of excellent use : for it would not only
Erevent the guilty from escaping, but would
kewise be a guard to innocence ; for thereby
would be removed the only pretence upon
which coonsel is denied the prisoner in cases
of felony ; for if no exceptions were ^to be
allowed but what went to the merits, th^re
• SMl Uf. p. 485.
t p. 467.
would then be no reason to deny that assistance
in cases where life is concerned, which yet is
allowed in every petit trespass."*
Lord GiUici. — I wish I could agree with the y
4eanied judge in thinking this a very easy and
simple case. It has cost me much time and
Deflection to make up my mind upon it.
The debate opens four important questions,
leach of considerable diffioiutjr. I shall state
them in what appears to me.to be their natural
order. It is a little different from that which
has been adopted by the learned counsel for
the panel, in the ^erv able p^er which has
been drawn by Mr.^Moncreiff. But this is of
no consequence. I*shall, in Ihe course of de-
livering my opinion, take notice of each of the
(points which lie has brought under our con^^
sideration.
1. The first question in the order in which
I propose to consider them is, whether the
oath, as set forth in the indictment, is of the
description alleged? Does it purport or in-
tend Ao bind to commit any treason, or mur-
der, or any capital felony?
2. The second question is this, if it shall
appear that the oath is, or may be of the de-
scription alleged, h it inoumbent on the pro-
secutor to specify «r describe in his indictment
the crime, to the commission of which he states
that the oath imports an obligation P
3. The third question is, whether the prose- '
cutor was bound or not to specify the crime,
has he in this indictment specified 'Or described
it? And, if so, is his specification or descrip-
tion of it accurate and correct, and such as
your lordships can sustain as a proper definition
of a capital felony, or of a treason ?
4. Tne fourth and last question to which I •
propose to speak is, does the offence disclosed
m this indictment, as explained by the prose-
cutor, amount to a case of treason 7 and, if so,
«an it, or ought it to be tried as a felony T
Tliis last is the question treated in the supple-
mentary information for the prisoner.
I shall speak to these questions in the order
in which I have stated them. But first of all,
I wish to call the attention of your lordships
to the terms of the indictment itself, and to
those ru4es and principles by wtiich it appears
to me that we must be guided in judging of
its relevancy.
I need not tell your lordships, that in all
criminal cases, the crime which the prosecutor
means to charge* must be distinctly stated in
the major proposition of the indictment ; and
in this, as in every other indictment, we must '
k>ok, and have only to look at the major pro-
position in order to discover what the crime is
of which the prisoner is accused. That crime,
whatever it may be, statutoiy or not, mahm
prohibitum^ or tmdum in «e, so set forth in the
major proposition of the indictment, is the
crime cnarged, and that crimen alone, and no
other, can be proved by the public prosecutor.
Now, in the major, proposition of this inr
• 2 Hale's P. C. 193.
5031
57 GEORGE HI.
Trial of Andrem M^Kbieif
C504
dictment, what is the criine set forth? The
crime there set forth, so far as regards any
acts dobe by the prisoner, is merely that of
administering an oath. There is no other fact
charged against him. The single solitary act
charged is that of administering an oath of a
isertain description, viz^ an otSh ** purporting
or intending to bind the person taking the
same to commit anv treason, or murder^ or any
felony p^nisl^qble by law with death.''
The mere act of administering this oat}i, is
the crime charged. And for the tri^l ,of this
charge there are just two points which this in-
^dictment brings under the consideration of the
tribunal which has to judge of the guilt or in-
nocence of the prisoner. It is to be considered
Jint, whether tne act was done — whether the
oath was administered ? and tecandfy, whether
the oath be of the description alleged in the
indictment f The pur]^se or intention of (he
party, except that he intended to administer
the oath, is not charged here. Whether his
intentions were guilty or innocent is not stated,
and is therefore excluded from our inquiry as
not essential to it. From the beginning to the
end of the major proposition of this indictment^
you will not find any thing alleged as to the
criminal intention of the prisoner further than
what the charge necessarily implies, namely,
that he intentumaUy administered an oath of
the description th^re meutioned.
Such is the charge stated in the major pro-
position of this indictment, and I need hardly ;
observe to ' your lordships, that this <;harge
cannot be extended or rendered broader by ,
any thing contained in the minor proposition,
or subsequent part of the indictment. In this
partof it.the prosecutor's allegations must be
confined to the charge contained in the major
proposition^ and to such facts as may be proved
in support of th^t charge, and in so far as they
go beyond that charge his allegations must be
rejected and dismissed from our minds in
judging of the present case in all its stages.
, In the minor proposition of this indictment
It }s stated^ that the panel " wickedly, malici-
ously, and feloniously administered, or caused
to be jid^inistered, an oath binding," Sec. in
the terms there set forth.' The word *' traitor-
ously * ,wl)ich stood in the former indictments,
is omitted -here, and the omission is certainly
a proper i^nc; but the act is here said to have
been done wickedly and feloniously. These
words are very properly used with reference
to the statute which declared this act to be a
felony, and prohibits it ynder the sanction of
a capital punishment, byt not in reference to
any thing extraneous to die statute^ which the
purpose and intentions of the party, except that
be intended to administer the oath, certainly are,
If the crime be descrit>ed as it must be, and
IS set forth in the major proposition, the pro-
secutor is entitled to prove that the prisoner
intended to administer the oath ; that he did it
intentionally ; and this he justly calls a wicked
iand felonious intention ; lor, it is so, because
he intends to do, and does, that. Mfhlch this act
prohibits and ponishes with deatfi as a capital
crime.
The circumstances stated in the minor pro*
position, of doing it at secret meetings, &c.
tuither than explanalovy of administering the
oath, are extraneous, as they are not ingre-
dients of the crime charged in the major pro-
position. If murder be changed in the major
proposition of an indictn^nt, a proof of mali-
cious intention stated in die minor proposition
is idlowable. If sedition be chained in the
major propoeition, you allow it to be proved
that the party intended to excite disturoance,
as that is an essential ingredient in the crime
of sedition. But here the cnme charged is
different. The mere act of administering a
certain oath constitutes Uie whole crime, if the
oath is of the description alleged.
I observe it ^ated, in the ingenious pleading
for the pnblic prosecntor, that the intention of
the parties and not of the oath must be consi-
dered, and that it is absurd to ascribe intention
to an oath, ** As if there were any sense in
personifying an oath and giving it uie powers
of the understanding and the will." But aa
oath, or the words of an oath, nuiy be said to,
intend, vrith the same propriety as they are
said to mean so and so, and there js no per-
sonification in the one case more than in the
other. What the legislature refers to, is the
intendment of the oath and not the intention
of parties. They refer to an oath binding to
do so and so ; and this is clear froiQ a fpnqep
act of parliament in which the words proploye^l
are ^ purporting or intended*" In thp majpr
proposition of the indictment, is any thing
said as to the intention of pBurties except as to
administering this oath ? The intention of the
pauel to 4p &ny other thipg than administer
the oath is extraneous, and is not charged
against him.
Whether he can be allowed to prove that
his intentions in what he did were innocent is
another question. I must hold he is so entt-.
tied, because we cannot convict any man
whose intentions are proved to be innocent.
The words of the act of parliament say nothing
of the intentions of^rties; not that the legis-
lature held that where intention is innocent,
any person is to be punished ; but the legisla-
ture may hold, and seems here to hold, that the
criroind intention is to be presumed from the
commission of the fact which it prohibits —
that there is a presumption that any person
who administers such an oath is actuated by a
wicked and felonious intention. The view of
the case which I have now taken, is supported
by the terms of the indictment itself; for crimi*
nal intention, except as to adminbtering the
oath, is no where alleged ; and this is right, as
nothing else is comprehended in the major
proposition.
This brings me back to the major protposttion,
what is the«crime? Administering an oath.
What else is included in the charge? Only
the nature of the oath or obligation. It must
be one purporting or intending to bind the
far AdmfOitenMg unlawfid OtUhsM
505]
penofos taking tbe tame to commit tMaion.
Assuming the fact, as to the oath being admi-
nisteredy whid) in this sti^e of the proceeding
we are bound to assume, nothii^ ramains for
us but to interpret the oath said to have been
administered, and the purport of which is set
forth in this indietment. This we must do, in
judging of the relevancy, and a most delicate
task it IS.
Is it, or not, an oath purporting or intending
to bind to commit treason 1 We have no al-
ternative; we must reijam an answer to this
question either in the negative or affirmative-^
the former if we reject, the latter if we sustain
the relevancy of the indictment. And What is
the ooitfequence of a judgment to the last effect
sustaining tbe relevancy of this indictment?
By that judgment we declare, by our deliberate,
opinions, that the oath i| of the import alleged
in tbe indictment, and declared in the statute.
And what is the conse<)nence ? — that the ad-
ministrator of the oath ought to be punished
with death. I do not question ihi right or
power of the jury to return a verdict of not
guilty although we find the indictment relevant,
and although the fact of having administered
the oath be proved ; but such a verdict would
directlv contradict our judgment. The Court
finds me oath purporting or intending to bind
to commit treason, and the jury says it is not
of that import. Tlie case is different from
other trials, where the direction given to the
jury forms no part of the record. If we sustain
the relevancy of the indictment, we put an in-
terpretation upon this oath ; and that interpret
tation is to be contradicted if the fact of admi-
nistering be proved, and the jury find the
panel not guilty. IThe solemn judgment of
your lordships, pronounced under the sanction
of your oaths, is to be contradicted by a verdict
of tbe jury pronounced b^ them, under the
sacred sanction and obligation of their oaths.
Such is the situation in which we are placed,
and it is one peculiar to ourselves; for in
Kngland there is no such proceeding as this
— there is there nothing analogous to tbe
proceeding in which we are now engaged,
nothing analogous to our judgment upon
fbe televancy. We are, as in former times,
when by special indictments, and special find-
ings upon the relevancy, the Court usurped
tbe power of the iury. Certainly nothing could
be further from toe inteution of the legiskture
than to occasion this; but England being
chiefly contemplated by' them, such is the
effect of the statute in question, that by our
deliberate recorded judgment, declaring the
administration of the oatli to be a capital
crime, the junr cannot, if the facts adminis-
tering the oath be proved, find the panel not
guilty, without directly contradicting the jo*
lemn recohied decision of the Court.
Wz. charge of Sedition, I sustain the rele-
vancy without minutely or critically examin-
ing the words charged, because I send the
whole to the jury, who jadge of the seditious
intention as well as of the nature of the words.
A. D. 1617.
C506
In Sedition the eaaence of the crime is
intention ;.aqd as the juiy is to jnd|^e of that,
the Court can seldom reject an mdictment
for sedition. Here the question is otherwise.
All is before us that goes before the jury.
The intendment of the oath is to be collected
from the oath itself, and the intention of the
party is out of the question. I can well con-
ceive, as was pointed out by the public prose-
cutor, that an oath might be framea and
administered, containing words in a different
sense from the common one — a terni might
be used to denote .war, and another to desig-
nate the king, "Sec. These terms might bo
explained by proof. But here there is nothing
of that kind alleged. Here the natural and
necessary purport is charged. There is here
nothing to oe supplied but proof of the
administration of the oath. The words of the
oath, taken in the natural sense, are said to
import an obligation to commit treason. We
are to say, whether the words, as set forth
in the indictment, do so or not ; and in this
we are going into the proper province of the
jurv. The Court and jury are united in fact ;
and a judge who sustains the relevancy of this
indictment must be prepared to say, that, as
a juryman, if the fact of administering the oath
be proved, he would return a verdict of guilty.
Am I then prepared to return a vierdict of
guilty in this case? This is a very serious
question, and, permit me to say, it is an
awful and a difficult question. As to the oath
itself, I agree with lord Hermand in saying
it is abominable and shocking. It is impossible
to look at it without -suspecting, and thinking
it probable, it imports an obligation to commit
a capital crime. That has been, and is my
impression. But the presumption in favour
of innocence is not to ne redargued by mere
suspicion. I am sorry to see, in this infor-
mation, that the public prosecutor treats tliis
too lightly; he seems to think that the law
entertains no such presuniption of innocence.
I cannot listen to this. X conceive that this
presumption is to be found in every code of
law which has reason, and religion, and
humanity, for a foundation. It is a maxim
which ought to be inscribed in indelible
characters in tbe heart of every judge and
juryman ; and X was happy to hear from lord
Hermand, he is inclined to give full effect
to it. To overturn this, there must be legal
evidence of guilt, carrying home a degree of
conviction short only of absolute certainty.
Here suspicion is not sufficient, there must be
sufficient proof that this oath imports an
obligation to commit treason, to entitle us to
sustain the relevancy of this indictment.
With this, I shall proceed to the consideration
of this oath, for that is the principle upon
which I am bound to proceed.
Since this case came before |is, a verr
material alteration has been made upon this oath
or its purport* In die two former indictments
against the panel, the word ^ force** did not
appear. Here it is introduced, anddoesy iii
507] ^ GEORGE IIL
Triai^A«imt M'KinUjf
isos
my opinKHi^ make a very materidtl iteration
in die nature and import o^ the oath. ludiall
first consider it as without the wend ** force/'
and I hare great doubts as to this oath ftJling
within the act of pariiament. I shall state die
founds of this aonbt, after mentioning why
think the import given lo the oath groundless.
These oonsideratiotts whidi indicate a criminal
import here are obvious. FSnt^ The secret
meetings. Second^ Physical' strength con-
trasted with moral. llM, The exertion of
▼iolenoe to obtain an alteration of law^ parti-
cularly if by numbers. Th^ oath shews, by a
brotherhood, that a number of persons were to
act Therefore, takinf^ the whole words
together, I suspect the import is criminal. I
am now talking of the oath as it stood ; and
I am considering it as any written instrument
is considered. I take the whole of the oath
together, ' and this I conceive to be the way
to proceed. In the common case, we give
the effect to a written instrument which appears
agreeable to its general tendency. If A. and
B. dispute about a will, I take what I conceive
to have been the intention of the testator.
But, here, the case is different. My opinion
of the instrument must guide me in both
cases ; but the sort of proof which makes me
prefer A.- to B. is very different from that
conviction which I must feel before I can
declare a prisoner to be guilty of a capital
crime. I cannot do this, if a meaning other
than the one alleged can reasonably be as-
cribed to the words.
I have great doubts, taking the oath as it
originally stood, whether I be entitled to say
it is an oath falling under this act of parlia-
ment. I agree with my brother, as to the
consequences of the wild scheme of introducing
universal suffrage and annual parliaments. They
strike us as leading to anarchy, and issuing in
military despotism. This feeling, as to the
political expediency of the objects expressed
m it, naturally creates in the mind a strong
suspicion 'of its treasonable import. But I do
not think it a legitimate ground of suspidon,
and therefore it ought to be discarded from
our minds. This object has been recommended
by men of high name. It has been stated to
be an essential part of the constitution by
men of whose fidelity and loyalty there cannot
be a doubt; and therefore our view of the
object ought not to influence our determination
on this occasion. It has appeared laudable
and constitutional to men of upright intentions,
and it may have appeared in the same light
to the party here. In short, we are bound
to make a distinction which is often very
essential to the ends of justice, and which has
not here been sufficiently attended to— we are
bound to distinguish between the end and
the means. Whatever opinion we entertain
as to the mid, we ought not from that to judge .
of the means. However ruinous, the conse-
quences of introducing universal suffrage and
^nual parliaments may be, the crime of
^^ " to introduce Uiese is not charged
against the panel. l}ie object is not criminal.
The means by which they proposed to attain
it constitute the crime, and not the object
itself; and, because we think the end would
destroy the constitution,- we must not infer
that treason is the means employed for attain-
ing it. This very end has been recommended
by men of the highest name. The duke of
Richmond * introduced into Parliament a
bill, stating that universal sufiVage and annual
parliaments are the birthright of the inhabi-
tants of this countty, and, until so constituted,
the country could not be considered free. No
man ever imputed to him treasonable inten-
tions, or a desire to subvert the constitution.
In short, in order to get at the import of the
oath, we must separate the object in view of
tile parties from the means employed to attain
it; tor the means alone were criminal.
Suppose that these men had come under a
similar oath, and that their object had been
to obtain a repeal of the law as to the slave
trade ; that it had been either to obtain the
law abolishing the slave trade, or a repeal of
it; or any other object, as a repeal of the
coach tax — you cannot say this oath is an
obligation to any crime unless you could say
that the same oath for such purposes would he
a capital crime. 'It is therefore our duty to
separate all consideration of the object in
view from the means employed to carry it
into effect. We must look to the terms of
the oath itself, and see whether the means
would be criminal if employed to obtain any
other alteration of any existing law of the
country.
Viewing the matter in this light, I may
suspect, but how can I be sure any thing
illegal was meant by the parties? If the oath
had stopped at the obligation to obtain and
support ** the same to the utmost of my power,**
the meaning would have been the same. Then
as to the words '^ physical strength,** how
could I know it was to be illegally exerted ?
How can I know violence was to be used,
when strength does not denote violence ? The
question is not whether the oath moy or doe$
import an obligation to commit a capital crime,
but whether it neceuarify doa so. As to the
material words of the oath engaging to exert
physical strength, physical strength may be
exerted for politicsa purposes, or influencing
the legislature, where nothing is done or
contemplated at all of a criminal nature.
There are instances of this which may be
given. We lately have seen a case of a* num-
ber of misguided and guilty men, setting out
to wander on foot from Mancbester to London.
These were to exert physical strength, and no'
small share of physical strength, in that expe-
dition. They were guilty, but that they wtfe
l^ty of a capital crime I doubt. That is an
instance of the exertion of physical strength^
Higher instances may be found. When it wa^
proposed to recognize the independence of Ame
•Vide 21 New ParL Hist 686.
SQ9\
for
uiUanfiil Oalkt.
A. D. 1817.
[«10
rica, Chatham an»e froma bed of siclcDessy came
down to the House of IxHdsy and «iimloyed
his voice againat what he thottght.was fraught
with disgrace to his countrr. He exerted ia-
tellect^ he exerted physical strength, and the
exertion proved fatal to him. I say, therefore,
it is impossible for us to infer that the mere
exertion of physical strength infers crime. It
does not jiecessarily do so, and therefore I am
not prepared to return a yerdict of guilty
against the prisoner.
Such is the opinion I have formed upon the
oath as it stood. It is now materially altered.
The word "force" is introduced; and the
terms of the oath, as it now stands, are : ^'I
will support the same to the utmost of mv
power, either by moral or physical strength
(or force), as the case may reauire,'' *' Force"
IS within parendiesis ; but tnis has not been
sufficiently explained. It is said, the terms
were used " not only synonymously but pro-
miscuously.*' Wheuer th^ were used in the
same sense, or sometimes the one and some-
times the odier, I cannot tell, I must take it as in
the indictment; and this oath does appear to
me one which does fall under the act of par-
liament ; one to which the statute does apply ;
for *^ Ibrce" necessarily denotes violence,
and in soch a case must iiaVe amounted to a
d^tttalcrime. But while I say that, in this
view, the oath &lls under the statute, it. yet
remains to inquire, what is the crime to com-
mit which this oath is an Ql>ligation? And
this leads me to consider tiie second question,
which is.
If it flhall appear the oath is, or may be, of
die description alle^^, ia it incumbent on the
prosecQtor to speafjr in &e indictment the
crime to the commission of whicb he says the
oath imports an obligation ?
The public prosecutor contends he is not
jMmnd to specify the crime. It is very true he
has said the crime is treason ; but this, accord-
ing to his argument, was unnecessary and
superfluous; and so for he is right and con-
sistent. For if it be necessary to describe the
crime at all, to call it treason is no description.
Treason is a generic term as well as felony;
and some treasons do not differ mora from
feloay than one treason from another. The
prosecutor is sensible of this ; and though he
nas stated the crime to be treason, he says he
is not bound to give it any further ^)ecifica-
tion. It is only necessary to look at pages 13
and 14 of the prosecutor's information, to
find his doctrine on this subject. On the
fofmer page, he savs : ** Now, what can the
potecntor set forth of the puiport or the
intendment, which is the essence oi the crime,
except the terms of the oath itself and such
other cireumstances as accompanied the ad-
ministration of it, as may throw light upon
the meaning of the a4ministrators or takers ?
All this he has done, and more he cannot do.
Heeanaot state more of the facts than he knows ;
nor oan be state more than was actuaUv perpe-
trated; and the oath is the whole tact and
onlysource of information. Still less can he be
called upon to draw an inference in law ftum
facts that have never existed. The minor
proposition is a detail of facts, and has
nothing to do with law ; and if he had dmwn
the inference required by the panel, he would
not have added one ioia to the relevancy. He
has told your lordships all Uiat was done ; the
whole focts of the case ; and it is the principal
^art of those fiicts, that there was an obliga-
tion to commit a crime. That this crime, if
committed, would have been of a p^irticular
description, and effected in a particular way,
is nothing to the purpose, as it is not the
intended crime, but the ooUgation to commit it,
that is the point of dittay.'' On page 14, the
doctrine is explained in still clearer and more
unambiguous terms ; ^ He is bound to tell the
panel the facts he intends to prove against him,
and the law by which they are punishable, in
order that he may be prepared for his defence ;
but he does not know how it can help the
panel to shape his defence, to tell him what
would have been the legal consequence of an
act of which he is not accused, and which be
only intended to commit. He might as well
be required, in a case of an indictment for an
attempt to poison, to specify the mode of
death, and the legsd consequences of murder.
It is maintained, that this indictment would
have been perfectly relevant, if it had merely
libelled the wicked and malicious administra-
tion of the oath charged, without a syllable
as to what its purport or intendment is ; for
if the oath means what the prosecutor alleges,
the prosecutor's gloss upon it is mere surplus-
age. If it did not mean any thing that comes
under the acL then to be sure it would be
necessary to libel the hidden meanine and
purpose with which it is administered and
taken, otherwise there would be no relevancy
in the charge. But if it openly express 'the
unlawful meaning, s^ in the present case, it
is itself the minor proposition, the connecting
link between the major proposition and the
conclusion; and the prosecutor knows no
addition that can make the syllogism more
perfect. Mm, The administering an oath of
a particular description is a crime : Min. You
did administer the following oath : Ergo, You
ought to be pimished.**
In consistency with this argument, the pro-
secutor in the commencement states, that "the
prisoner's argumenjt rested on the fallacy of
treason being the crime charged;'* and the
prosecutor says, ''this is not a charge of
treason. The crime of administering an oath
alone is charged, and the crime contemplated
in the oath is not diamdi^ and need not there-
fore be speci6ed.'' This argument is plain
and intelhgible, and states accurately the true
question which is here raised, namely, whether
an indictment under this statute is to be held
relevant, because it sets forth the purport of
the oath merely, without stating whether such
oath intended the person taking it to commit
murder, or treason, or felony, and still less
'511i 57 ^fiORGE III.
tri4 ifAndrtm M'Kiniof
C513
Stating the treasofi, 6r iht felony cotitetnpkted.
Hiis is truly the question. Tike setting forth
that th« huh bound -to the commission of
treason ii surplusage. So the prosecutor says,
and condstetktly says. For, if he is bound to
explain \vhether it is treason or felony that is
contemplated, he is bound on the same prin-
ciple to explain what treason it is that is
contemplated.
Now I cannot hold an indictment on this
statute relevant which does not explain what
the crime is to which the oath binds. I
cannot do so upon any principle of reason, or
any principle of law. The oaths contem-
Slatea by die statute, are oaths binding to
o a certain act or acts, which, when done,
would be treason, murder, or felony. Bat is
it consistent wtth reason to allow the prosecu-
tor to tell us of the act which it is thus sworn
to commit, that he cannot or will not say
whether it be treason, or murder, or felony, or
what treason, or what felony P Dreadfhl,
indeed, would be the import of this statute,
were die prosecutor's interpretation to be
sanctioned. A taan is to be put on trial for
his life, because he administered an oath
binding to do an act of which the public
prosecutor infers that it may be murder, or
that it may be any of the numerous treasons,
or that it may be any of the numberless
felonies which are punished with death. At-
tend for. a moment to the consecjuences of
this doctrine. If a verdict of guilty be re-
turned, what is found by such a verdictP That
the prisoner administered an oath binding to
commit any treason or murder, or any felony,
punishable with death. A general yerdict on
this indictment is just an uncertain special
yerdict. The essence of the guilt of an
offence against this statute consists not in the
oath, but in the crime which the oath purports
to commit. But here is a yerdict of guilty,
and neither from it, nor from the record can
we learn what the crime is, the intention or
instigation to commit which forms the essence
of the prisoner*ii ^uflt. Now, is this con-
sistent with any notions that are, or ever were
entertained of criminal law and justice f But
the matter does not end here, it involves con-
sequences still more absuni and dreadfiil.
Such a yerdict of guilty may be returned,
although there are not any two jurymen agreed
in opinion as to the prisoner's guilt. On^
juryman may think the oath binds to one
felony or one treason, and another to a differ-
ent felony or a different treason. In this very
case this may happen. Treason is alleged;
but this matters not, for there are ten different
treasons, and of eight jurymen each may
thiiik a different treason contemplated in the
oath. But the principle contended for, and
truly at issue, is, that no crime need b^ speci-
fied or described, and such an indictment we
must sustain, if we sustain this indictment.
Can this doctrine be tolerated, or b it more
consistent with law than with reason? Mr.
Hwnie has well expUtned tbe law of indict*
ment»-{Here his lordship quoted' the doctrine^
of Mr. Hume on this subject] — It is true, the
prosecutor ' says, that that which the oath
bound to commit is treason. But can he be
allowed to allege that an oath binds to com-
mit treason, when he will not or cannot ex-
plain what the treason is which it binds to
commit? How would this do, if a capital
felony instead of treason were alleged, and
the sort of felony were not descrit^ ? But
the prosecutor says that the purport of the
oath supplies all the deficiencies. But how
can this be ? Either the oath is quite clear, or
it is not. If the purport of the oath be
perfectly clear, if that which it bin& to do is
so obviously an act df murder, or of treason',
or of capital felony, why should not the
prosecutor tell us what it is? If treason, what
treason it is? — If felony, what felony? It is a
rule of common sense, as well as of law, on
the one hand not to require from the prose-
cutor any information or explanation which,
from the nature of the case, it may be im-
possible or difficult for him to give. But, on
tbe other hand, he is certainly bound to giv^
every information and explanation which is
material to the case, and which he can give
without diffi^culty. Now, if the purport of
the oath be so clear, what prevents him
from doing that which he can have no difficulty
in doing, namely describing the crime whidk
it binds to commit ?
On the other hand, if the putport of fbd
oath be not clear, if it does not distinctly
appear from it what the crime is to* which ii
bound, then it never can supply the deficiency
in the indictment, or '*^ form the connecting
link between the major proposition and th^
conclusion,*' or render it unnecessary for the
prosecutor to describe the criiae to which it is
alleged to bind.
"Ae prosecutor puts the case of an oath
binding m termmU to commit treason. Thb
is an extravagant supposition, and I cannot
reason on it. An oath may, no doubt, be ad-
ministered, binding to commit murder, treason,
or felony, in termm. But such an oath conld-
not be in the contemplation of the legiylature,
and it would be a proof of lunacy raSier than
an instance of guilt; but, at any rate, this is
not the case here. This oath makes no meiF*
tion of murder, treason, or felony ; and ita
terms, therefore, neither do* nor can remove
the necessity of explanation ; and we recur to
the true question, which is, whether it be ne«^
cessary to specify in the indictment any crime
at all, either murder, felony^ or treason? I
am clearly of opinion that it is.
Zi But the prosecutor has specified treasonr,
and this leads me to' the third question whidk
I have mentioned— whether the specfficatioA
and description in this indictment, oftlye
treason said to be contemplated, be accnimte
and correct, and such as the Court can sustain?
The indictment sets forth, that .the' oath
purported or intended to bind the "persons
taking the tame to commit treason; by obiaitt*
413]
Ji)r ^'dminuftnng unlai^ui Oqtht.
A-.P-^ISI?.
lAU'
iag iimaal parluunents ftnd udTenal suffrage^ |
5 physical strength w fonoty and thereby
ecdag the subvenioi gf the eetablUhed go*
verameDt, Uwe, and copstitntioa of this king-
don^ by ualawfol aad Yiolent means. This is a
description^ and the only description contained
in this indietmenty of the crime charged.
TbeR) at it appears to me* the treason of ob-
taining annual pariiaments and aniversal su^
fiage bj physical strength or force, is the
treston to which the oath is alleged to bind.
Now, is this a treason ? The prosecutor says
he has done avbat he was not Imund to do.
He has tet forth the treason in the words I
hate read. If it be treason to obtain annual
pariisBients and univ«isal suffrage, by phy-
aioal strength or force, muUo majm must it be
tveeson to eifect the sulyvezsioa of the eata-
hiiahed government, law8> and constitution
of this kingdom, by unlawful and violent
aseans. Yet this latter has been solemnly ad-
judged not to be treasMi. Hie indictment is
the saaie, as if it had said, that the oath
booad to obtain annual parliazttents, &c.» and
thflvafay lo commit treason ; or to effect the
fabversion .of the established government, Ice.
and dierel^ to ceaamii treason. In short, if
we snstssn this indictment, we most declare
thai it: is tttason to obtain annual parliaments,
aad so on; or to effect the subversion of the
•alablisbed government, and so on ; we must
iind this to be treason, that is^ we mast de-
clare a new treason.
The case of Treailian is fiuniliar to us, I can*
not speak of dt so lightly as the learned judge
.trho apoke last. Tresilian suffiMred most justly ;
aad ot this I am sure, there ia not one of us
•but would rather suffer his punishment than
incBr his guilt. But the case of Sttafibrd, at
least, cannot be thus spoken of. He was im-
■peached and attainted, as we all know, of high
iaaason, for mdeaxmnug to wkvert the ancient
mdfim&mnfnl itmm mid ^pvermneni of hi$ ma-
j/m^MTttimt^t almost the identical words, and
vds otynnauXj the same import with those
x^ia^pn. to designate treason in this indtet-
We an know the result. The attainder
of lord Stsaffbid was reversed by parliament,
and whatever may be the opinion entertained
of the oondutt of that unhappy nobleman, I
brieve there never bas been but one sentiment
as ao tbe|ms|metj of this act of reveisal.' Now
the preamble of this act expressly bears, that
^ the late earl of Stnfibrd . wras impeached of
high treason, upon pretence of eadeavouriag
to sabved the tnndamental laws ; that he was
omdeanied uxin accumulative treasons, none
a# the pcetenaed crimes being treason apart.''
And for theae and other causes, the act of
attainder was repealed, revoked, and reversed.
Consider the two questions I have stated
«iid«r this head, combined togeUier, and you
'*ill sea that/we are .reduced to this dilemma ;
•itber we most find that this oath binds to
tamadi a capital ciimc^ when the prosecutor
tall vvbat tiut crime is» «r we must de-
i new treason* Sea bow your record
VOL XXXHL
will appear. A man is tried, convicted, and
executed, and for what? "Why for ad minis*
tertng an oath bindinj; to commit treason.
And what is the treason ? Why it is the trea«
SOD of obtaining annual parliaments ind uni*
versal suffrage by physiciELl strength oir force ;
or else it is a treason which the prosecutor
cannot describe — a treason without a name.
1 come now to the fourth question which I
propose to consider. This is the question
treated in the supplementarv information for
the prisoner. There is nothing inconsistent
in this argument. It proceeds on the assump'
tion, that upon the other points of the case
the prosecutor has been successful, and then
it is said this diflSculty remains, that if he have
sufficiently, described the oath as binding to
commit high treason^ then he has made out
that the administering suoh an oath is in itself
an act of high treason, and cannot be tried as
a felony.
Now, whether this indictment discloses a
case of treason, I cannot tell, as the crime is
not specified. It may, or it may not be trea-
son, and this is a very powerful additional
argument for the necessity of the prosecutor's
specifying and describing in his indictment
the crime, to the commission of which he
states that the oath imports an obligation.
Though the authorities on this point are
English authorities, yet the question is one of
Scotch law, and I cannot be permitted to say
that I am ignorant of the law of England on
this subject, for it is the law of Scotland also.
It appears to me to be a point made out, that
fblony merges in treason. As to this, the
aiMhorities in pa|[es 14 and 15 of the supple*
mentary information for the prisoner are con-
clusive, particularly Foster's observation on
the ci^e in Dyer ; and this being the law of
England, I think that, in cases of high treason,
it most be the law of Scothmd. By the act of
Anne, high treason must be tried in Scotland
in the same manner as in England. That
which is high treason may also be a felony.
But if it be tried here as a felony, the act of
Anne is violated* By that statute, any act or
.acts amounting to higl^ treason must be tried
as high treason is tried in England. The law
has in view what the crime », not what it may
be dmammaUd; and if the crime charged hie
treason, the trial of it must proceed in the
manner directed by this statute.. And further,
the law of high treason in England is the law
of high treason i|i Scotland. The law of high
treason is the same in both countries. But
the law of high treaspn in Scotland must be
altogether di&rent from the English law of
high treason, if an offence may be tried as a
felony in Scotland, which, in Eogland, must
and could only be tried as high treason. The
mode of proceeding, no doubt, in such a case,
in the two coi|ntries, is different. The case
supposes, that if the offence is charged as a
felony, consequently the procedure, in the
first instance, will be aooording to the law of
ielony in eacb country, and tbur law ol Mmy
2 L
A 15] ^7 GEORGE lU.
•8 different, although their law of high treaaon
be the same. Bat for this reason we are bound
not to permit an offence amoonting to high
treason to be tried here as a felony. The
thing cannot be done here in the same way in
which it is done in Engtand, but ttill it mutt
be done. In England, the trialy after it ia
begun, may be stopped. This is not so here.
But here, if the nets are disclosed as they
ought to be in the indictment, the Court
must thence see whether it be a case of treason,
and stop it if it be so, before sending it to a
jury. Keferenoe has been made to cases for-
merly tried here of sedition. I remember per*
ibctly well what was said on one of diose oc-
casions) br one whose name can nerer be
mentioned in this place without Teneration;
I mean the late president Blair, who was then
solicitor-general. It was the case of Gerrald.
I was counsel for the prisoner. I was then a
very young man at the bar, and the circum-
stance miule a corresponding inipression on
me. It was, in fitct, one of the first cases of
importance that I had been concerned in. I
stated that the Acts charged, if an]f thing,
amounted to high treason. Mr. Solicitor O^
neral Blair did not state that it was no matter
—that he was at libertr to proceed either as
for high treason, or as n>r felony, at his plea-
sure. But he stated, that if I could make \i
out to be a case of treason, he would be mudi
obliged to me, that he would take the hint:
that he would abandon that indictment, and
would proceed against the prisoner for high
treason a/ccordingly.*
T will put the case of an indictment for theft,
aggravated bv house-breaking, and that the
Acts disclosed in the minor proposition are the
attack and capture of the castle of Edinburgh
by an armed force, and the plundering it of
its stores and ammunition. No doubt this is
a theft and housebreaking ; but would we
consent to try this as a felony? or should we
not dismiss such an indictment? Such is the
case, independent of the terms of this act of
pariiament, the 59nd of the king, on which
this indictment is laid. But it is said, that
the last clause in this act excludes the common
law doctrine of felony mernng in treason.
This clause is in these words, pierehis lordship
read the clause/] This is the clause on whicn
tKe prosecutor founds his argument. The pre-
ceding part of the statute would afford no room
for arguing" that the doctrine of merging did
not apply to cases under this act as much as
to any other; and this clause appears to me
to go very far, though I doubt it it goes fkr
enough to support (he prosecutor's argument.
Tor what is his gloss on the clause ? He says,
first, that by this clause offiences amounting to
treason are made Helonies, or are triable as
felonies ; and, secondly, that by this clause
these offences may be tried and punished either
as felonies or as treasons. Now, if such be
the import and effect of this clause, jt must be
*— . . 1 _ ■ - ^ ^ ^ ^
. • Gerrald's Case, 2 How. Mod. St. Tr. 866.
M tfAndrtm M'Kmletf
1816
admitted thai h makes an immenae inroad*
both on eommen and statutory law. Further^
it must be admitted, that aU this is done by
implication merely . If this were the intenlion
of the legiriatnre, why did it not say so «i-
pressly ? First, it is said it deelares a treason
to be fekwy, or to be triable aa fekmT* See
how an act <^ the same sort is treated of by
the first authorities in the law, the first antho*
ritiesinoiir law, for the laws are the same
[Here his lordship read from p. 97, and p. 28
of the supplementaiy information, the act 3id
H. 7th, C.14; lord Coke's obaenratioQ thereon.
Lord Hale's P. C. pages 111, 260, 261 ; and
Foster, pages 200, 201.] Lord Coke and
lord Hale state the euaeting an oflfenoe to be
a felony to be a judgosent ^ muiiamei^t, ihA
it was not treason ; and judge roster laysy that
Hale's reasons for bare words not beiae an
overt'act of treason, founded on acts which
make the speaking those words felony or ni»-
demeanor, are unanswerable* For, heaaya^
if those words had been deemed o?cct-acts by
the statutes of treasons, the legislative coum
not with any sort of consistency have treated
them as felony or aoisdemeanor. And, he
adds, in a note to the same purposey I rely oa
those acts which make words folony or misda-
meanor. The prosecutor says, that that is
done by this act, which Hale says it cannot
be thought that parliament would do } and
what Foster says, it could not with any sort of
consistencT do. But, I admit, that, if the
words of the act were explicit, it would be of
no use to quote those authorities. The k^gia-
lature «Mgf dp that which Hale says it cannot
be supposed it would do, and which Foster
says it could not do with any seit of oonsial*
ency, and, if it does so, we must bend to.ita
authority. But where it has not done so ex-
pressly, and where by inference and implica-
tion such a meaning is to be extracted, the
authorities referred to, seem sufficient lo pi«-
yent our adopting sudi an interpretatiom
But there is another act which does make cer^
tain treasons triable as felonies, the act of die
89th and 40th of tlie king, which is quoted
in this information ; and see in what aaanner
it has proceeded, in order to aceomplisb this
matter— {Here his lordship read the act 3dtk
and 40th Geo. 3rd, c 98.]
But the prosecutor says, secondly, suck
offences are triable, and may be prosecuted,
either as felonies, or aa treasons. This ^^
pears to me to be the most extraordinary jpan
of the whole argument — In saying this, I look,
to the consequences that must inevitably
follow from such a regulation — 1st, as they
affect the safety of the subject who may thas
be tried substantially for treason, and punishaA
with death, although deprived of all those
benefits and safeguards, which, in cases of
treason, hare been deemed necessary for kis
protection. I look next to tiie safety aiaid.
dignity of the Crown itself. The greatftW
crimes against the Crown may thus escape IhMaa
justice. I put the c4se of an oath to providbe
4173
Jm Admiidtteniig wttcnifiA OiOkt,
■A. D. 1817.
l«I*
pouoB for the king^ or of a penon taking an
Mth to administer poison to the king, and that
the poison is actnal^ provided ; yet Siis peisoo
■ay be tried only 'for a tmnmrtable telony,
— may even be tried under toe S7th of the
kingy by which he can only be transported for
seven yean. It appears to me a very difficult
matter to put sooi an interpretation on this
act. I think tMs clause not unattended with
diffieuity; bur, oeT the whole^ I inctine to
adopt me exptanation which is very ingen^
oosly given by the counsel for the prisoner in
dM sopplemtetary information.
It b not, however, necessary for me, in the
view I have of this case, to determine tlus
'point. I have not got so for. I am clesoly of
epimooy that the indictment is not relevant on
Ibe other grounds which I have stated, and
that ileaaoot be remitted to the knowledge^
inasriae.
Lard ^'imtf/j^ — ^In forming my opinion
upon the relevancy of the indictmenl, I
md it neeessarylo begin by fixing the true
unport of the oathy for administering which
the indictment hiis been raised against
the prisoner at the bar. In considering this
pointy these are two questions to be attoided
to, one a ouestioo of foct, the other a question
of law. We must first fix in our minds, what,
in paint of foot, the acts were, what the line of
conduct eras, whidi the personi taking this
eaih were bound to perform and to follow ;
and next, we must determine, in law, whether
these UelMf and that line of conduct, would
have amounted to treason.
In considering the first of these matters, viz.
the hnpoft of the obligation, I agree com-
pictdy with the counsel for the prisoner, that
we are to consider, not what the administrator
inleaded, bnt what the oath itself purports.
Ike act of patiiament speaks of an oath put-
pBrtiRg or iiUaidmg ; and, as has been remark-
ed by lord Gillies, in that respect, this act is
dniinguished from the former act 37th George
M, which speaks of an oath purporimg or in-
At the same time^ this observatiqp is sub-
feet to a certain degree of explanation. The
net speaks of an oath pmrporUng or mtendmg.
Ihe woad '* mteudiiK,*' cannot be taken as
•iiphisBge. It must have a meaning different
•fien the meaning of the word ** purportmgJ'
The caae in the view of the legislature must
have been the case of an oath which is ambi-
guously or my*toriously expressed, the pmfori
ef which nunr not be clear to those who have
■ei the key, but the uUaUkm of which may be
muter of proof. In illustration of this, I may
nmind your lordships of a late trial for forgery ,
ift which we had a letter from an aooompllce,
.tothe prisoaer,*fvoduced, desiring him to send
'^^gooig^'* or ^ aaftyanh** meaning bjr this
»|weiiiun as appeared from the evidence,
f^ifffii notes. Mow this isas a letter nU^tdmg,
-MBgh notjuopor/u^a commission for forsM.
-haak.of.£i^land notes. This is the kind ot
whidi must have beenin the vi^w of the
legislature, when these words, jmrportrng or
mtemiing were inserted in this act of parlia-
ment.
It is evident, however, that this remark has
little practical application at preeent : For the
public proeecutor does not say that the oatU
given in the indictment had any secret mten-
tion different from its purport^ and he d^oes not
state facts on which such an allegation might
have rested.
I also agree vrith the prisoner's counsel,
that in considering the import of this oath, if
there be any thing doubtfot in it, the presump-
tion must be in fovour of innocence. I do
not indeed see that there is room for the ap-
plication of the maxim referred to by counsel,
^ id tmii^ pomumm fttod de jurt pouumm,^^
But we are not to presume giult because the
public proeecutor aUeges guUt We must see
guilt made out before yielding our belief^ and
until guilt is established, we must hold the
presumption to be in fovour of innocence.
In the next place, it is plain, that in cXin^
struing the oath, we must take the whole oadi
together, and consider it, as one part of it
bears upon another; not as five or six dif-
fSerent oaths, but as different parts of the same
oath.
Now, when this is done, it 'does not ap»
pear to me that diere is room for any douol
about the tsipori of the oath. The leading
proposition is, that the taker is to support the
same, that is, to support his endeavours ** to
obtain for all the people in Great Britain and
Ireland, not disqualified by crimes cf insanity,
the elective franchise, at the age of 21, with
free and equal represent|ition, and annual par-
liament^ to the utmost of his power, either by
moral or physical strength (or force), as ths
case may require." Here it must be observed,
first, that physical strength, or force, is directly
opposed to, and contradistinguished from moru
strength ; and, next, we must attend to the cir-
cumstances in which this great struggle was to
be made. The taker of the oath is to prepare for
the attainment of the objects, ** by endeavour-
ing to form a brotherhood of affection amongst
Britons of every description, who are consi-
dered worthy of confidence." Then he is to
make his endeavours to obtain annual parlia-
ments, and universal suffrage, ** by moral or
physi<»l strength (or force), as « the case may
require;" not defining or Umitingsthe extent
or nature of these endeavours, except by the
necessity of the case. And, having stated a)!
diis, he swears '' that neither hopes, fears, re-
waidsi or punishments, shall induce me to in-
form on, or give evidence against any member
ormemben, collectively, or^individually, for
any act or expression done of made, in or out,
in this or similar societies, under the punishr
ment of death, to be inflicted on me by any
member or members of such societies. So
jhelp me God, and keep me steadfast." Thus
the oath plainly refers to numbers ; to those
numbers oeing linked in associations in the
strictest confidence ; to their acts being such
519] 57 GEOftOE lU.
u might bring upon them trial and pnnisb-
nent, and reqnmng that they shonld swear
not to inform upon one another under pain of
death.
I have read this oath again and again, at-
tending, as I am bound to do, to all its parts
•—not sepaoiting the parts, but taking them as
they bear upon one another ; and it is impos-
sible for me to put any but one construction
upon it.
No doubt the introduction of the word
^* force," into this indictment strengthens the
case on the question of relevancy, but the word
** force'' does not appear to me so necessary
as it does to my brother. For, I take the oath
altogether. If the clause in which the woril
** force ** appears had stood by itself, the in-
sertion or omission of this word might have
been serious; but, taking the clause along
with the rest of the oath, Uie meaning of the
whole is clear.
It is in vain to say, that the oath amounts
to nothing more than if it had contained a
mere vague ehgagement to support universal
suffrage and annual parliaments, to the utmost
power of the persons taking the oath. The differ-
ence between such an oath and the one in %he
indictment is, that the former miglU compre-
hend all that is in the latter, but it would not
have necessarily done so. There would have
been room for the legal presumption of inno-
cence,
It is also in vain to say, there are roa^y
ways in which lawful endeavours, by moral or
physical strength, or force, may be employed
Co obtain universal suffrage and annual parlia-
ments; as making journeys; making speeches;
erecting hustings ; keeping off crowds, &c. It
is certainly true, the person taking the oath
may be bound to do these things, bat ts he
hound to do nothing more? What means the
brotherhood of affection— the oath of secrecy
— tlie infliction of death in case of revealing-^
if all that was intended was to do the inno-
cent things above-mentioned P It is impossible
for any man, consulting soberly his reason, to
think such was the meaning of the oath.
There is no presumption of innocence, no
stretch of charity, which can warrant such a
conclusion.
It is said, there are unlawful acts by which
universal suffrage and annual parliaments
might be obtained, which are not treasonable
acts, as arresting members of parliament, 8cc.
This is true ; and, as the particular acts to be
done are not defined in the oath itself, it is
necessary to take the whole oath, and to con-
fid er what is the true import of the engage-
ment. If there were any aoubt, I should con-
strue it in favour of innocence ; but I cannot
have any doubt, when, for an object that could
only be legally obtained through parliament,
phyf ical strength or force, with fill the conco-
mitanU mentioned in the oath, was to be em-
ployed.
. . .1 do not lake it in\K^ iiatb acconift in con*
sidepixg the caee, that i^ ohfect to \>e attmed '
Trial ofAndrm M*Kinleg
[59V
was tnnnil parliaments aadtrnvveml snfiige.
Ifa the mind of every eool inquirer, the efftoift
of universal suffrage and annual partiameata
must be deprecated ; but I put the case on the
same footing as an attempt to effect any law
whatever, llie difference is only this, that
the extravagance of the object here in view
shows more distinctly that the parties wara
determined to resort to strong measures. It
is the means to be resorted to for the attitin-
ment of an object of general ' oonoem— the
employment of physical strength or force — ^and
the whole circumstances referred to in the oath,
that leave in mj mind no doubt as to the na-
ture of the criminal intentions.
It is in this view that it appears to me thia
#ord '* force ** is not so important as has been
supposed. I shall just take the case that ha»
been put, for the sake of argument, in die veiy
able and ingenious paper by Mr. Monerieff. I
shall suppose that the oath might have been
binding in a court of law, and that the taker
were told, the blow is now to be stnack ; coift-
pulsory measures are to be used, and yoa mvat
join us in them. Is it possible to say that he
might answer, I will mdce speechee, and print
them : I will assist in putting up hustings, and
so forth, but I will do nothing illegal. ** Id
tartHim potnmna quod de nire ponumutJ* The
reply would have been. You are bound to do
the things you mention ; but if yon did not
mean to do a great deal more, you need not
have come under such an obligation.
Having said this much on the import of
the oath, the next question is an inqimyia
point of law.
Does the oath amount to treason ? Upon
this subject the authorities have been ao m-
quently referred to, so often quoted In yottr
presence, and read by us in private, and are
so well stated in two or three pages of die in-
formation for the prosecutor, that I shall
not detain you by going over them. The
principle is simply this : that an attempt to
obtain, by open force, such objects as were in
view, with- or without warlike instruments, is
the crime of treason. And I shall only take
this observation, that, even if the neasares
complained of by the parties to the oath wera
not sanctioned by law, yet it woidd be the
crime of treason to introduce new neasores of
general concern by force, and without the in-
tervention of parliament; and still more when
the attempt is to overturn what is sanctioned
by law. 1 shall just beg leave to read what
Judge Foster says, in stating the case of Da-
maree : ** If,*' says he, ** the meciing^hoiisas
of the Protestant dissenters had been eracled
and supported in defiance of all law, a ttsiag
to destroy such houses in general would have
fallen tinder the rule laid down In Kailing,
with regard, to the demolishing all bawdy-
houses. But since the *meetinig &nses of Pi^
testant dissenters are, ^y the toteifllSott act,
taken under the piptectien of the Urtr, Uut iti-
*farrm\6ii in 'tie prescibt «a^ wasilo be^^eo-
Mc^ iff a j^«be ^HkT&tkdft ly tala MbM
5SU3
fm AimMtUnrng uniUmfid OotiU.
A. D. 1817.
iaest
agaiiisttliBl ftkt» and an aitempt la render it
iMiectxial by nmnbers and open force ;'* an'
atlempl by force and violenoe to take law into
ibeir bands, and bring about a matter of ge-
netal ooncem.
WitboiU adding more on this point of the
caae» I am dearly of opinion, that the oath
pi^Kports and intends an. obligation to do cer-
tSEiP things ; which things, if dooey.wooki have
' ^ - Uw to the crime of treason. In
n, I fed all the consequences-
so eloonentl^ stated by my
^ that it Uie jury shall think
ffill differ from the opinion of
lis I cannot help— I am bonnd
on upon the rdevancy of the
n bound, in doing so, to judge
the oath. I do it conscien-
insy will do the same.
tion is, wliether the indictment
ccause it does not spedfy the
rhidi the peisons taking the
to commit ? This, I appro-
md entirelj^ a .question about
I of an indictment by the law
loes not appear to me to em-
» of the law- of treason what-
a qnestion of fonn only, and
ad by general prindples ap-
; cases, as well as to that of
3position does not charge the
•n. It charges the statutory
istering an oath, purporting or
imit treason. It is founded en-
tirely itpuu .. let of the 53nd of the king. It
■wfdy reeites the act; it quotes the whole
three cUmses engrossed in the act of parlia^-
What then does the mnot proposition do ?
First, it asserts, as is necessary in STery in-
dictment, that the panel is guilty of one or
other of the crimes charged in the major pro-
position. After making this assertion, it goes
«n to the assumption; and it mentions di»-
tiaetly the times when this is said to have
been done, the places, the persons to whom
the ottth. is said to have been administered
All this is distineily pdnted out. The
onnner of t^e criminal act is next an-
— nnced, in the best wav it could be done, by
•ogroesing the oath itself. The minor propo-
dtioB goes on to say, that the oath purports to
bind to commit treason. This is an infenmce
in law that is to be judged of from the oath
Hadf.
Thitmattermay be illustrated by an example.
Soppose an ihdictment accused a person of
mmikr. The minor pA>podtion must state
the manner of committing the crime, whether
it whs by stabbing, or poisoiiing, or otherwise.
To state generally the crime of murder would
nmdo; but the manner of oommittitig it most
be mentioned. But, if it were an inoictnent
Indtf the 5ted of the king, for administerfng
en oaih pniportine or intending to bind to
cemmttiiinhfcry and ht^o^k b^ve in general,
lirithont further spedfication, that the taker
was to murder dl wno shoul4 oppose him, it,
would not be necessary to doanv thing more i|it
the indictment, than just to libel the oath itself,,
and then assert in general terms that it pur*
ported to bind to commit murder.
It is said, there are many fekmies, and-
many treasons; and thelitis necessary therefom
to spedfy the kind of treason contemplated*
Cases were ingeniously pnt--one ef idooyv
and one of treason. The case of an oatk
binding to commit a felony was first stated by^
Mr. Cranstoun : the case was put of a perBon
bound to carry away a certain quantity of com;
and, it was said, the public proaeeutor codd.
not redte the oath, and then generaUy and
Tagudy assert, that it bound to commit a
felonv, as it might be one of many diffnrent
felonies. In the same way, a case was put of
a treason jtaid to be committed, by an oativ
binding the taker to deliver goods or monejr to
a person in France, which it was add might
amount to one or oth^r of various treasons.
But observe, there is in the cases put, not w
mere generd engaffement to do whatever mav
be required, as in die casein the oath libdled,
but an engagement to do a particular act,
carrying away com in the one case, and do*
Uvering soods to a person in France in the
other. In such cases, it may be, that the pub-
lic prosecutor should inquire about the par*
ticular felony, or treason in contemplation, and
explain it in the minor proposition.
But there appears to me to be, independent
of what has now been observed, a dedsive
answer to this objection to the indictment under
consideration. The jeb|ection is, that tbein-»
dictment ought to have spedfied the particular
treason which the takers are sdd to oe bound
to commit. That without such spedftcatiott,
one tt more jurymen may have one kind of
treason in view, an<i^ ofters may contemplate
other treasons.
Now, it is admitted in the information foi
te pane), and no lawyer could venture to
dispute it, that the case midit have been laid
ahemativdy as an oath binawg to commit one
spedfted treason, or otherwise a different kind
of treason dso spedfied, and so on throngh the
whole catdogue. The words, of the pandas
information are, ^ The informant is not
at present advised of any objection that
could be made to an indictment in this court,
which Idd the case aUematkefy, as an oath
binding to compass the king's death ; or oiher^
ioitt, an oath binding to levy war ; or otktrwH
an oath binding to conspire to levy war, &c.^
In short, the pcd>lic prosecutor had nothing te
do but to enumerate all the difTerent kinds of
treason. He mig^t have taken the range
of aU the treasons known in the hiw ; and,
it is admitted, that this wodd have been a
relevant libel.
Now, I vrodd ask, what better information
OQidd have been given to the prisoner by sncb
an indiotmem, to enable him to prepare for his
tria^ or to us to judge of the relevancy ef the
5031
57 GEORGE III.
Trial qf Andrew M'KinUy
[4(04
dictmenty what is the crime set forth? The
crime there set forth, so far as regards any
acts dotie by the prisoner, is merely that of
administering an oath. There is no other fact
charged against him. The single solitary act
charged is that of administering an oath of a
certain description, viz^ an o&th ** purporting
0T intending to bind the person taking the
^ame to commit any treason, or murder^ or any
felony punishable by law with death.''
The mere act of administering this oath^ is
the crime charged. And for the tri^l of this
charge there are jost two points which this in-
^dictment brings under the consideration of the
tribunal which has to judge of the guilt or in-
nocence of the prisoner. It is to be considered
first, whether tne act was done — ^whetlier the
oath was administered ? and secondly, whether
^be oath be of the ^jniption alleged in the
indictment P The pnr{>o8e or intention of the
party, except that ne intended to administer
the oath, is not charged here. Whether his
intentions were guilty or innocent is not stated,
and is therefore excluded from our inquiry as
not essential to it. From the beginning to the
end of the major proposition of this indictment,
you will not find any thing alleged as to the
criminal intention of the prisoner further than j
what the charge necessarily implies, namely, '
that he intentionally administered an oath of
the description there mentioned.
Such is the charge stated in the major pro-
position of this indictment* and I need hardly ;
observe to' your lordships, that this charge
cannot be extended or rendered broader by !
any thing contained in the minor proposition,
or subsequent part of the indictment. In this
partof.it. the prosecutor's allegations must be
confinefl to the charge contained in the major
proposition^ and to such facts as may be proved
in support of that charge, and in so far as they
go beyond that charge bis allegations must be
rejected and dismissed from our minds in
judging of the present case in all its stages.
In the minor proposition of this indictment
k >s stated^ that the panel ** wickedly, malici-
pusly, and feloniously administered, or caused
to be administered, an oath binding,'' ^. in
the terms there set forth.* The word '' traitor-
ously * ;vvl)jch stood in the former indictments,
is omitted -here, and the omission is certainly
a proper i^ne; but the act is here said to have
been done wickedly and feloniously. These
words are very property used with reference
to the statute which declared this act to be a
felony, and prohibits it v^^^er the sanction of
a capital punishment, byt not In reference to
any thing extraneous to^e statute, which the
purpose and intentions of the party, except that
he intended to administer the oath, certainly are,
If the crime be described as it must be, and
IS set forth in the major proposition, the pro-
secutor is entitled to prove that the prisoner
intended to administer the oath ; that h^ did it
intentionally ; and this he justly calls a wicked
and felonious intention ; for, it is so, because
he intends to do, and does, that, which this act
prohibits and punishes with death as a capita
crime.
The circumstances stated in the minor pro*
position, of doing it at secret meetings, &c.
turther than explanatory of administering the
oath, are extraneous, as they are not ingre-
dients of the crime charged in the major pro*
position. If murder be chaiged in the major
proposition of an indictment, a proof of mali-
cious intention stated in the minor proposition
is allowable. If sedition be charged in the
major proposition, you allow it to be proved
that the party intended to excite disturoance,
as that is an essential ingredient in the crime
of sedition. But here the crime charged is
different. The mere act of administering a
certaju oath constitutes the whole crime, if the
oath is of the description alleged.
I observe it stated, in the ingenious pleading
for the public prosecutor, that the intention of
the parties anci not of the oath must be consi-
dered, and that it is absurd to ascribe intention
to an oath, " As if there were any sense in
personifying an oath and giving it the powers
of the understanding and the will.^ But an
oath, or the words of an oath, may be said to
intend, wiUi the same propriety as they are
said to mean so and so, and there is no per-
sonification in the one case more than in the
other. What the legislature refers to, is the
intendment of the oath and not the intention
of parties. They refer to an oath binding to
do so and so ; and this is clear from 9 fprmer
act of parliament in which the words employed
are ^* purporting or intended)." In th^ major
proposition of the indictment, is any thing
saia as to the intention of P^^ except as to
administering this oath ? The intention of the
panel to dP any other thing than administer
the oath is extraneous, and is not charged
against him.
Whether he can be allowed to prove that
his intentions in what be did were innocent is
another question. I must hold he is so enti-*
tied, because we cannot convict any man
whose intentions are proved to be innocent.
The words of the act of parliament say nothing
of the intentions of ^rties ; not that the legis*
lature held that where intention is innocent,
any person is to be punished ; but the legisla-
ture may hold, and seems here to hold, that the
criminal intention is to be presumed firom the
commission of the fact which it prohibits —
that there is a presumption that any persom
who administers such an oath is actuated by a
wicked and felonious intention. The view of
the case which I have now taken, is supported
by the terms of the indictment itself; for crimh*
nal intention, except as to administering the
oath, is no where alleged ; and this is right, as
nothing else is comprehended in the major
proposition.
This brings me back to the major proposition,
what is'the<«rime? Administering an oath.
What else is included in the charge? Only
the nature of the oath or obligation. It most
be one purporting or intending to bind the
for, Admimahriftg unlawfid Oaths*
pcnoos taking the tame to commil tseason.
Assuming the fact, as to the oath being admi-
nisteredy which in this stage of the proceeding
we are bound to assume, nothing remains for
us but to interpret the oath said to haye been
administered, and the purport of wliich is set
forth in this indiotment. This we must do, in
judging of the relevancy, and a most delicate
task it IS.
Is it, or not, aii oath purporting or intending
to bind to commit treason ? We have no al-
ternative; we must re^m an answer to this
question either in the negatiTe or affirmative —
the former if we reject, the ktter if we sustain
the relevancy of the indictment. And What is
the consequence of a judgment to the last efiecl
sustaining the relevancy of this indictment?
By that judgment we dedare, by our deliberate,
opinions, that the oath i« of the import alleged
in ibe indictment, and declared in the statute.
And what is the consequence ? — that the ad-
ministrator of the oath ought to be punished
with death. I do not question ih4 right or
power of the jury to return a verdict of not
guilty although we find the indictment relevant,
and although the fact of having administered
the oath be proved ; but such a verdict would
diredlv contradict our judgment. ITie Court
finds the oath purporting or intending to bind
to commit treason, and the jury says it is not
of that import. Tlie case is different from
other trials, where the direction given to the
jury forms no part of the record. If we susUin
the relevancy of the indictment, we put an in-
terpreution upon this oath ; and that intetpre*
tation is to be contradicted if the fact of aomi-
nisiering be proved, and the jury find the
panel not guilty. The solemn judgment of
your lordships, pronounced under the sanction
of your oaths, is to be contradicted by a verdict
of the jury pronounced b^ them, under the
sacred sanction and obligation of their oaths.
Such is the situation in which we are placed,
and it is one peculiar to ourselves; for in
England there is no such proceeding as thb
— there is there nothing analogous to the
proceeding in which we are now engaged,
nothing analogous to our judgment upon
the relevancy, We are, as in former times,
when by special indictments, and special find-
ings upon the relevancy, the Court usurped
the power of the iui^. Cfertainlv nothing could
be further from the intention of the leffislature
than to occasion this; but England being
chiefly contemplated by them, such is the
effect of the statute in question, that by our
deliberate recorded judgment, declaring the
administration oX the oath to be a capital
crime, the jury cannot, if the facts adminis-
tering the oath be proved, find the panel not
guilty, without directly contradicting the jo^
iemn recohied decision of the Court.
\tt9, charge of Sedition, I sustain the rele-
vancy without minutely or critically examin-
ing the words charged, because I send the
whole to the jury, who judge of the seditious
intention a^ well as of the nature of the words.
A. D. I«i7«
[«06
-In Sedition the essence of the crime is
intention ; . ai^ as the jury is to jud j;e of that,
the Court can seldom reject an indictment
for sedition. Here the question is otherwise.
All is before us that goes before the jury.
The intendment of the oath is to be collected
from the oath itself^ and the intention of the
party is out of the question. I can well con-
ceive^ as was pointed out by the public prose-
cutor, that an oath might be framed and
administered, containing words in a different
sense from the commpn one— a terni might
be used to denote .war, and another to desig-
nate the king, ^. These terms might be
explained by proof. But here there is nothing
of that kind alleged. Here the natural and
necessary puiport is charged. There is here
nothing to be supplied but proof of the
administration of the oath. The words of the
oath, taken in the natural sense, are said to
import an obligation to commit treason. We
are to say, whether the words, as set forth
in the indictment, do so or not ; and in thb
we are soing into the proper province of the
jury. The Court and jury are united in fact;
and a judge who sustains the relevancy of this
indictment must be prepared to say, that, as
a juryman, if the fact of administering the oath
be proved, he would return a verdict of guilty.
Am I then prepared to return a verdict of
guilty in this case? This is a very serious
question, and, permit me to say, it is an
awful and a difficult question. As to the oath
itself, I agree with lord Hermand in saying
it is abominable and shocking. It is impossible
to look at it without -suspecting, and thinking
it probable, it imports an obligation to commit
a capital crime. That has l^n, and is my
impression. But the presumption in favour
of innocence is not to be redargued by mere
suspicion. I am sorry to see, in this infor-
mation, that the public prosecutor treats tliis
too lightly; he seems to think that the law
entertains no such presumption of innocence.
I cannot Ibten to this. I conceive that this
{)resumption is to be found in eveiy code of
aw which has reason, and religion, and
humanity, for a foundation. It is a maxim
which ought to be inscribed in indelible
characters in the heart of every judge and
juryman ; and I was happy to hear from lord
Hermand, he is inclined to give full effect
to it. To overturn this, there must be legal
evidence of Ruilt, carrying home a degree of
conviction short only of absolute certainty.
Here suspicion is not sufficient, there must be
sufficient proof that this oath imports an
obligation to commit treason, to entitle us to
sustain the relevancy of this indictment.
With this, I shall proceed to the consideration
of this oath, for that is the principle upon
which I am bound to proceed.
Since this case came before ps, a veiv
material alteration has been made upon this oath
or its purport. In Uie two former indictments
against the panel, the word ** force** did not
appear. Here it is introduced, and does, in
^►a?]
S7 GEORGE III.
Trial o/Andren M^JOdiey
{SM
tutioQ of this kingdom by unlawful and Tiolent^
means/'
In this part of the minor proposition of the
libel, the public prosecutor eonnnes his charge
to the panel having administered an oath, *' pur-
porting or intending to bind to commit irea-
soHf** without defining orintenditig to define
the particular species of treason which the
oath bound him to commit ; and, he then gives
his own commentary upon the oath which
was taken .
The minor proposition then gives the tenor
of the oath.
This being done, the libel then states the
particular instances in which' this oath was so
administered, and the circumstances in which
it was administered by the panel. It specifies
that it was administered, and at secret meet-
ings, at Hugh Dickson's, on the 20th of De-
cember, 1816. ^y, At William Legget's on
the 1st of January, 18ir. 3<%, At Niell
Munn's, on the 4th of that month ; Athfy, At
the house of John Robertson, on the 5th of
February; and lastly, that ^e prisoner was
apprehended at another meeting held for the
same purpose, and that on that occasion he
assumed a ftdse name.
This is the indictment we are called upon
to judge of; end, upon it, three questions
have arisen, upon which it is necessary that
we should have distinct opinions.
In ihtjirtt place (and' I agree in consider-
ing this the main point at issue), — ^whether
the oath be of such a nature as to come within
the statute?
The Kcond question is, whether the indict-
ment (supposing the oath to be such as to
. make room for the application of the statute)
be drawn widi such precision as to warrant it
to be sent to a jury ?
And, the latt is the new question eloquently
argtied in the supplementary information. It
is here assumed that the oath is sufficient,
and the specification complete; and it is
argued, that, upon this supposition, the oath
must have purported or intended an obligation
to commit the species of treason, known by
the name'of levying war against the king;-^
that such oath must be an overt act of treason,
under the head of compassing or imagining
the death of the king, and actual treason,
under 36th George dra. c. 7. as compassing
to levy war against the king, or overawe par-
liament ; that, therefore, Uie panel cannot be
' tried under the 52nd of the king, but for trea-
son only ; because, according to the maxim
of the English law, which in treason is the
law of Scotland, the felony merges in the
treason. These 'are the three points upon
' which it is necessary to form our epinions ;
and, upon eadi of them, I shall make a few
observations.
The first question is, what is the import of
the oath here administered ?• Upon this sub-
est, my view is so obvious, that it could not
1 to TC anticipated by the judges Who have
already spoken ; and it ha» been anticrpated
br lord PStmilly. ' Bat, because my view is aa
obvious one, it is not, upon that account, the
less likely to be well founded ; for, I conceive^
that in such questions, the most natural view
is the most likely to be that which is correct.
When the crime consists in the language em-
ployed, the most obvious meanhig of that
language is the safest and fairest to apply to
the situation of the panel. Crimes are gene-
rally committed by persons in the lower ranks
of life; and we must consider in what sense
the language employed m^ust have presented
itself to their muds when they employed it.
Your lordships will never allow the public
prosecutor, by forced construction,' to infer a
criminal meaning, where tiie words are obvi-
ously innocent. But on the other hand, as
litde wiM you allow the counsel for the panel,
by ingenious refinements, to make that inni>-
-cent, which, according to the common meaning
of words, is, in the minds of impartial persons,
criminal. In such case, your fordships, first,
and the jnry -afterwards, u^il fsdl to mediate
between the different parties, and draw an
impartial condnsion from the whole circum-
stances of the case.
Here, I conceive the purport or intention of
the oath nnist be Ifeiken chiefly fh>m the terms
employed ; bat I do not ooosider it is wholly
incompetent for the public piosacntor, in thi^
case, to have recouise to circumstances which
do not appear esfide of the oath. I think
he is. not to be confined, to the pitecise words
of the oath. Here, there are two words em-
pldyed, pi&porting or uUendmg, ' On looking
vito the dictionary, I find ^t ^ to purport**
is ^ to intend.'' If the word Intend, haa not
been ased in the statute, I should have under-
stood that purport and intend were to be con-
sidered as syttbnymous ; but the statute uses
both words, and I conceive that it must have
employed tiiem as having different meanings;
I appralnad^ that,< when both are uMd,
we oxastoen^ider their difference. SupposHe
;the imrtiea'had Osed a dpher, and that it
(badttumtted m theiAse oc oommon words,
witfa^. another meaning, it would .be com-
petent, i nnder. tim act, . to libel this oath,
and pii^ve'whai was. tmCsn^. bythe cipher.
The prosecutor might havelibetted that the
mUntim wsiS:<irimiiial, though the woods of the
oath /were Mafm^ innQcent. He might have
dotae sb nodes the word f intend," in the act
.o£ parliament. As the two words must be
understood to^have differeitf iOieaningt here, I
ihaUd 'f puipoit*' to .denote the -common mean-
iast of . wonis, and f^ intend/' any meaning
attached to the words by the parties, though
diffeteni fipomthe senie generally nven to them.
. In thatTiew, I consider the pubac^proseeutor,
in thie<eaeej» is entitltd to lU>eiaQdor(iv»circam-
stanoea indicatitre of. intention. lie has libel-
led, and is entitled to prove such mdieim of
intention, as,, that the oath was administered
at flaeret^meelings, and to great niunbeta of
persons.
Buty in the present case^ in oider to asoer-
«39}
Jar AdntittiAeriiq^ unbaefid Oaths.
A. D< 1817.
[530
tpdntbe kBport^and intentioii of this oath^
there ie no oeceelon to go beyond the terror
•mpl^ed in it. To understand the meaning
of ihe oath^ it is just requisite that a person
shall read it from beginning to end, and say
what is the meaning it conveys to his mind.
It is iupossibie/in my harabie opinion, ta
Nad it with no other object than to ascertain
tlie meaning and intention, without being con-
▼iaced that it was highly criminal. It implies
Aat there was to be an association consisting
of many peiaonSy bound by an oath — that
their ijiroccedtngs were to be kept secret-*Hind
aU this under the sanction ot the deadi of
inlbrmers, to be inflicted by any member of
the association. The object in view was to
Imng abonty by physical strength or force,
wha^ if brought abottt, wonld have been a
oompleCe subyersion of the present goyern-
nent — annual parliaments, and uniyersal soff-
npe^ ** the electiye franchise at the age of 21,
fpith free and eqnal representation,, and annual
IMrliaments."
That is the meaning which the oath con-
f^js to my mindy on reading it with no other
view than to discover its meaning. But, t
hove no objeetion to analyse the oath in parts.
The obpotion I have to the argument for the
panel w, that it considers tho oaUi as com-
Miedof different ioAo2es, capable of standing
OJ tbeniBeWes ; whereas there is only one
ooih consisting of different parts.
I shall, however, consider them separately.
T^tt oatbi sets out with taking' the parties
l^onnd to *^ penetere in endeayouring to fomv
^hiocherhooi of affection amongst Britons of
oteiy desenptiooy who are' considered* worthy
o^ oonfidenoa." To fomt such brotherhood of
aflhction under the sanction of an oath is not
Ma itself a criase, but there is something so
feealiar in this, that it mast excite attention.
One would imiuix^ir what was to be Uie mean-
m% of this brotherhood ? Could aoob a brother-
iKMd be formed ibr the mere purposes of
ohaii^ and benevolence? Would there
be the formality of an oath for any thing
d this kind? It might be innocent, but
vaodld be unintelligible^ We think what is to
ioUow. It is enough to excite attention and
suspicion as to the ^ject. For this, we must
go to tho next clause : . " I will persevere in
mj endeavours to obtain for all the people in
l^peat Britain and Ireland, not disqualified by
«nm«s or insanity, the elective franchise at
tile age of 21, wiUi free and equal reptesenta-
lioo, and annual parliaments/' The object,
therefore, was clearly political. It was not an
institution for charity or general acts of ffiend-
•hip; but, it was a political institution. Poli-
tico alone were in .the view of the parties ; and
nhat was the species of politics in view ? The
object was,, to bring about annual parliaments
mUd uniyersal sofliage, which all sooer-miuded
penoos coiiider as a complete subversion of
tb» gofefBOMD^ and quite inconsistent with
mf u<wuJ ideas of liberty,. Such was the
ohieat of thi« biQjiheKhood wlm (9raiedi .
VOL. xxxto. ^ * I
Even this might not have been matter of
accusation against the parties, if they bad
merely confined themselves to speculation and
discussion. There might have been nothing
to find fault with, if they had confined tliem-
selves to mere philosophical speculation on the
different kinds of government, and given the pre-
ference to that which i« stated in the oath. But
associations were formed ; not one, but many, in
order to bring about the change in the govern-
ment. They were treading upon dangerous
ground ; and it would depend upon the roeiins
they were to have used, whether their conduct
was to be considered criminal What were the
means they had in view } See the next para-
graph: ^* And that I will support the same to
the.utmost of my power, either by . moral or
physical strength (or force), as the case may
require. I say here the object waa to be
brought about by illegal means. It is illegal
to bring about this complete change and sub-
version of the constitution, by physical forqe.
The association wa» formed for a political
purpose; the object was, to introduce what
was dangerous wad irrational i and this was to
be done by illegal means.
And the consciousness of the parties thera-
selvesi that they were to act illegally, appears
from the last clause. The meetings were
secret. ^And I do further swear, that neither
hopes, fears, rewards, or punishments shall
inaoce me to inform on, or give evidence
against any member or members, collectively
or individually, for any act or expression done
or made, in or out, in this or similar societies,
under the punishment of death, to be inflicted
on me by any member or members of such
societies. So heip me (jrod, and keep me sted-
fa«tl" Here is complete demonstration that
the parties engaged in this business under-
stood the means to be employed were illegal*
Their conduct was illegal, and they were
conscious of iL Else, why had they recourse
to an oath of secresy ? This clause aoews, too,
that many people were to be engaged, and
various associations formed, and all to be
united together under the sanction of the
oath. And to whom was to be given the right
of punishing by death a breach of secrecy ?
To any member or members, not only of that
particular society, but to sdl members of any
other society of the same description. So that
they were all to constitute one society, and
the power of life and death was to be given
to any member of the association.
1 say, therefore, that, considering the oath
either as a whole or in parts in subordination
to each other, it i» clearly illegal, and it pur-
ports and intends to do that which the parpes
Uiemselves knew to be illegal.
. All this would have been' highly criminal,
suppose no aot of parliament had been passed.
All this would have been a high crime ,at
ooflimon law. pqt here* w^are caUed to
judge of a particular aet of parliament, and to
judge whether this crime is whM is meant by
tbfit act of pariieii^wt« The act of pirUament
2 M"
S3Xj 57 GtOJlGE ilU
l^fial qfAndrmM^Kudey
C533
makes ibe cfxmt consist ip tbe oath ifself y** abd
it entitled the public prosecutor to apprehend
persons^ aud to deal with them as gxiilty when
Ihe oath is taken.
In order to understand the character of the
oatby I must figure to myself what are the acts
the oath led the parties to commit. If the
parties had not rested upon the oath, but had
gone into action — if they had been successful,
what would have been the consequence? They'
must have overturned the government and the
present constitution of things. We have not
at present universal suffrage and annual par-
liaments. And tlie parties must hare effected
this change l^ those means which they kn^ew
to be illegal. Had the prosjecutor waited till
they attempted to carry their plans into
ezecotion, and were unsuccess^l, what would
have been their crime? Treason — levying war
against the king. I conceive this is the
species of crime of which they would have
been guilty. It is -impossible to go with tmy'
minuteness into the kind of conduct they
might have adopted. Had they been allowed
to act upon the oath, and been unsuccessful, their,
crimes might have been charged as compass*
ing and imagining the king's death. The facts
charged lead necessarily to such conclusion.
And therefbre, under this statute, I can have
no doubt, that what is stated here amounts to
the major proposition in the libel, and that this
is an oath pttrportino^ and binding the person
taking it to commit treason. I therefore
answer the first question in favour of the
public prosecutor^ that the oath is sufficient
to bring the parties within the act of parlt»-
ment.
* The next question is, how far the charge is
snfiiciently explicit; and this is the only point
upon which I have ever entertained difficulty.
I first supposed tKe want of specification' of
the species of treason, inust have east the
- itidictment altogether. I am now of opinion,
^at it, does not. Though still the case app^rs
to me not altogether without difficulty. In 'no'
case will impossibilities be asked of a public
|)rosec(itor. In the present case, the libel is
cm this act of parliament. You cannot oblige
him to charge any overt act beyond the act
itself. The act entitles him, after the oath is
administered, to consider the crime completed,
and therefore, all that can be asked of him, is
to charge the tim%,' place, and circumstances
in "Miich the oath' was administered, and the
treasonable nature of it. That is all that can-
sbsolutely be demanded of him to do ; and
he has done this in the present indictment.
'He has S]^i<ie4 four different meetings, at
which the oath was administered, and a ^fth
fbr th^ pur{>08e of its being administered.
He hat mentioned' the places aikd the circum-
etances "in whieh tiheoath was adtiftiristered. H*
has ihentidned- that it w^ -administeted at
secret meetings. He hac, therdbi^ in the
lA&jor pi^^tioa, staM f^ eiime *wblch he
«Wt«*»^ aadlh th^inittor all ^' filM trithin
bis k«a«r}e4g(> ; ^tf d tbere^sre, 1 Urn «tf <]|Aiiioti^
helitadone every thing which he was l>6und
to doi He was not bouwl to State inference^'
more than he has dode. 'He has stated all the
act rtsquired of him; although nothing was
done in consequence of it.
• At the same time, that does not altogether
free us from difficulty ih this cise. I think the
public pi1)secutor has done everything which'
technically he was bound to do. He wae
bound to state the specific charge against the'
prisoner. He has fairly cited the cbuses of
the act of parliament. In the miilbr, heliar
stated all the factii consistent with his know*
ledge. I at first thought he dught to have
done a little more, though I now incline to
think he was not bound to do more. Tlie
crime consisting in adminislering an oath )Mir-
porting or intemlingto bind to comniit treason/
the public prosecutor could not allege' that the
oath applied, at once, to all the classes of
treason. The statute applies to the whole'
range of treasons ; but, when any individual
oath comes under consideration, the prosecutoi:
might state the particular species of treasba
apparendy contemplated. ' I catee to' thi^
conclusion the more readily, that this was just
the process of reasoning by which I came t9
be satisfied, that the oath is within the act of
Sarliament. When I read the oath^andre^
acted what was the crime intended to- be'
committed, unless I had been satisfied that'
the parties were bound to commit some indi-^
vidual kind of treason, I could not have been
satisfied that the act applied to the case. I
read the oath, I then reflected what would havtf
been the crime if the oath had been acted
upon. I thought the fair inference from it
was, that those who* took it bound themseltree'
to commit treason, by levying war against the
king. Therefore, I first thought it was the
duty of the public prosecutor, if be fbllowed'
the same train of reasoning I diift, to state 'the
result of that reasoning ; but though thii might
have been done, I now thinU it is net required
to be done in the technical foralation of an
indictment on this statute. This is a statutorjr
offence, and the public prosecutor is not bound
to be more specific than the statute 'itself is.
In the minor proposition he states all the facts
within his knowledge, and is not bound to
state evenr inference that occurs. I should
have liked the indictment better if it had
stated the species of treason in Tiew ; hat T
cannot think it irrelevant on account of its not
having done so.^ The objection at best is
merely technical ;^ and the publio prosecntef
has not failed! to de any thing he was techni-
cally bound to d\(h
The. only other question is, how fur the
felony merges in the treason. By the dbmraon
taw of England, if I understand it, the inf^irior
always merges in the higher denomination of
crime. Trespass is drowned in a felony, and'
on the same principle felony is ditnv ned iar
treason; and there is netMn^peaiiiartodk^'
law of treason in this respect. On the ooier
haod| it^-iit clear, that the law of Scotland ie
533]
Jot AimtAdtring ladav^l XhAt.
A. D. 1817.
[534
directly the msene. Ther€ it no such mergiog
in oar Ww of the inferior in the higher crime,
amd the public prosecutor may always choose
. "which he pleases ; he m^ take either the
lower or the higher species.* It is easy to see
the reason « of this difference between the
practice of the two countries. In the one
.country there is a public prosecutor, and in
the other none. I shall not say which institu-
tion is best; both are well administered, and
answer well the purposes of justice.
There are two questions which naturally
arise h^ie. The first is, whether the '.common
iaw of Scotland, in this respect, was put an
end to bv 7th queen Anne, c. 21. Into this
point I do not think myself bound to goat
4^at length, as the actof parh'ament, ou which
the indictment h fouaded, fixes the matter ^
to this indictment. With all Mr. Grant's in-
genuity, however, he has not convinced me
that the common law of Sootland here is put
fkn end to. Its preamble proceeds on tlie ex-
pediency, f'that the laws of both parts of
Great Bdtain should agree as near as may be,
especially those which relate to high treason,
andr.the proceedings thereupon; as to the
Aatore of the crime ; the method of prosecu-
tion and trial ; and also the forfeitures and
punishments of that offence, which are of the
greatest consequence to the crown and the
subject.'' It then enacts, that the same acts
should constitute high treason in both parts of
the kingdom, and proyides for the appoint-
ment of a court of oyer and terminer tor trial
of higli treason in such manner as is used in
£iiriand.
£ this to beheld by implication to put an end
toa oominon law principle previously existing,
or of jUie public prosecutor having his choice of
charging the higher or lower denomination of
offence as may appear to him to be proper?
1 am not prepared to sav so.
1 felt more difficulty from Mr. Grant's able
fmd ingenious commentaiy on the third clause
o£ the act, which provides, thai ** the justice-
court, and other courts having power to judge
in cases ef high treason, and misprision of
high treason in Scotland, shall have luU power
wii authority, and are hereby required to
iaquixe, Inr the oaths of twelve or more good
and lawful men, in the shire or stewartry vHiere
the courts shall ait, of all high treasons, and
Busprision of high treason, committed within
the shiies or atewartries; and thereupon to
proceed, hear, and determine the said offences
whereol a^y person shall be indicted before
them,- in such manner as the court of QueenV
bench, or justices of oyer and terminer in
igyfatkdjD»yAo»**
' If I had understood that, in consequence of
thia dause, part of the power of the public
moaecutor was oonferred upon the Court of
Joaticiary, to find out when treason is com-
initted, and not merely to judge of cases
soming bef<we them, then I should have
« 3 Hume, 276.
thou^t our judges should prtfeeed as the Eng-
lish judges are said to do. But I do not un-
derstand this to be the meaning of the clause,
but that it is merelv following out the first
clause, establishing the same form of process
in the two countries. I do not think it would
entitle us to qi^ash an indictment, or discharge
a jury once impanelled, as Judge Poster says
he would have done, so as to make way for a
second trial for the same facts, under the
denomination of treason ; and, I do not think;
it is to be implied from the statute, that the
public prosecutor's power of choosing his
libel is taken from him.
But, in the tecond place, the case here is
simple, and all difficulty is removed by the
act of parliament on which the indictment is
founded. I am not able to appreciate the
value of all the authorities quQted by Mr.
Grant on this branch of the case. I am bound
to understand them as well as in my power ;
but, I must admit, I have not been able to go
far in an examination of them. They seem,
however, to amount to this, that an exception
to the common law is not to be extended
beyond the letter, and that this holds particu-
larly where the law is taking away something
favourable to the subject. I am vrilling to
hold that the statute upon which the indict*
ment is founded, shall not be held by impiicatiom
to make any change in the law on this subject;
biit, at the same time, its terms must be at-
tended to, and fair play given to them. When
I look to the enactment, it applies to amf treason.
It is " any oath.or engagement, purporting or.^
intendinfjP to bind the person taking tlie same
to commit any treason,'' &c. It is by implica-
tion only that I am to exclude the obligation
to commit any species of treason where the
obligation comes up to treason itself. The
oaths are all stated as of one description, and
as coming under the act.
But this is not all. It is not merely left to
implication. The statute § 8, has evidently in
contexnplatioo that the saipe facts which should
give rise to a .prosecution under it, might,
independent of tne statute, have been treason
itself, so that though felony merge in treason
in common, this cannot be held in such a case
as the present. It provides, ** that any person,
who shall be tried and acquitted, or convicted
of any offence against this act, shall not be
liable to be indicted, prosecuted, or txM again,
for the same offence or fact, as high treason
and misprision of treason."
I cannot suppose the act here mesns any
thing, but that a party might be Ugalli/ ac-
quitted or convieied under this act, who, but
for this act, might have been tried for treason^.
It is declared that if tried under this act, he
cannot be tried as he might oUierwise have
been. The legislature- was aware that an
offence under Uiis Bfii might be treason inde-
pendent of it.
^e same observation applies to the other
branch of the clause ** that nothing in this act
coatained shall be ^sonstnied to extend to
5351
57 GEORGE III.
Trial ^Andrm M^Kikle^
prevent any person guiky of gfey «ffMiee
against this act, and who ^all not b« tned for
the same as an oflfenca against this aot, ftmsk
being tried for the same, as high treaBon, or
misprision of high treason, in such manner as
if this act had aot been made.''
The legislature was afraid that it might be
held that, if any person had been gnilty of
what is described as criminal io the act, it
took away the power of charging the same as
treason, and it does not say that a guilty
person shall not be tried otherwise than under
the act ; but that if he had been tried imder
the act, he shall not again be tried in any way
for the offence. The legislature thus guarded
against the inference ttiat the power of
the prosecutor to choose his mode of trial
<was taken away ; and also provided^ tbat no
repetition of trial should take place in any
form, for an offence as to which a person has
once been acquitted or connoted. It is clear
to me, therefore, that (he legislatnre had in
▼iew, that the same aet migbt be a subject for
trial under the statute, and likewise a subject
for trid as high treason ; and that therefore,
here at least, felony does not merge in treason.
Jjfrd Jmtiee Clerk, — I am as fuUy convinced
as any one of your lordships can be, that, in
considering the indictment in this case, w^ are
called upon to perform a most important and
delicate duty. Important and delicate, I feel
it to be, in reference both to the panel at the
bar, and to the public at large. I am as much
impressed as my brother on my left hand
(lord Gillies), by the situation in which the
Court 19 placed, from the necessity which is
imposed upon us of deciding on the relevancy
of this indictments but, as this necessity is
one inmosed upon ns by th€ law of the country,
to whiiH) we are bound to give obedience, it
is impossible for me, for one moment, to
he:ittate, or shrink from the performance of
that duty. Looking to nothing but the dis-
charge of my duty, I am at all times prepared
to perform it consdentiottsly, whatever may be
the consequences.
The indictment in this case is the first which
has been brought before this Court, on the
statute 59nd of the king ; and, considering the
ability, the ingenuity, ihe intelligence, and the
learning of those, who, in this case, have ren-
dered their united services in support of the
defence of this unhappy man, it is not suiw
prising that objections nave been stated to this
charge, both with regard to its essence, and
to the form and character of the indictment.
These objections have been %iade the subject
of most eloquent and learned vivi voce plead-
ings } to which it is impossible to do justice
without declaring, that, in point of ingenuity
and ability, they have not been exceeaed at
any period of the history of this Court. The
argument appeared to vour lordships, in re-
ference to the nanite of the case itself, to be
of svich grave and weighty importance, as to
deserve to be embodied in ipformatjons.
t88«
These an now htfare «s; and as to
the ability and leamiBg with which ihqr faafvc
been prepared, I enliRly conoar in the opi-
nions which have been expressed l^y your loi4-
ships.
The ohjeaioBS are of a fourfold nature, f
shall mention them in the order in wbidi Ih^
are presented i^ us in the informations, tha«fh,
in delivering my opinion, I shiil feel it my
duty to proceed, in ikefitt place, to the eon-
sideration of the third of these objections.
The objections are, fret, that. in this case,
founding upon this act of pariiament, it was
necessary for the public prosecutor to speeify,
in his indictment, the particular treason vrhi^
he alleges the oath purported or intended tp
bind to commit. In the eeeond plaoe, that^
whether this be his duty or not, he has nndei^
taken to perform it, and has done it in an im-
perfect manner, having specified and defined
no treason that is known in tUs kingdom.
The third objection is, that the oath itself is
not one which comes up to the sanction of the
act of parliament, or which yon onn sustsia as
sufficient in the minor preposition, end noHt
to a jury. The Jwrth and last otjectioo, and
whidi has been brought befoee us in an able,
persptottOtts, and aigameatative manner is,
that supposing the panel wrong in these thne
nbjeetioos ; and taking the case as submitted
by the public prosecutor, the principle that
folony merges in treason must apply to this
case, with all the consequenoes whidi woold
attend it in England.
1 shall proceed to consider the third of these
objections, because it must be obvious tp dl
of your lordships, that, if the oath, which is
the whole essence of the diarge befoie'yoQ, ha
not of the description which the pnUie ptnse*
outor avers, namely, an oath pnrpocting 9t in-
tending, in itself, to bind t» the oommission of
treason, all the other inquiries aao-sqparfinons,
and it would be uaneoessary to cansnom your
time with any consideration ofthsm.
In considering the meaning of this oath, it is
proper to keep in mind, that the act of psrtiai*
ment upon which the indtotosont b laid, 'an4
on die terms of which alone it is reslad,
was preceded by the statute 87th ot the khsg.
The words of that act ase before ns* Yonr
lordibips will see, that, for the pnrpoee of fm^
venting the evils which then «ckted in tba
country, that act was passixl, <declafiag ithsU
the administering or takinff any oath ^ puiw
porting or intending to nind the paiaofla
taking the same, to engage in aaymntiaaas ar
seditious purpose; or to disturo 4ha pnbHc
peace ; or to be of any society or .coBfedasacj
formed for any such purpose, 4cc. should ba
held to be arfelony ponisbahia widi tMmspett»-
tion for seven years.'' This statute, ike 371^
of the king, had, till the year 1812, been 0011^'
sidered by the legislature as suffioient to meet
the evils intended to be remedied ; b«l.ik an
happened, that, in 181t, prooeedingi toA
place in England, in the very heart of this
kingdom, of such an akrming complaxiQn,jui
sanl
for AJbmlmsterhg wdatgfiil Ogihs.
A.D. 1817.
[1186
te cafl for ilie Mibtnite attCBtioii of partis-
ia«Dt ; ^icb wm then led to consider tiie 'ex-
isting state of t&e law, aod provide a naedy
for the pnhlic safetf . The act, the clauses <n
^ich have been referred to in this indictment,
was aocovdingij passed, proceeding on the
preamble^ that *' it is expedient that more eflec-
tnal provisions should be made as to certain
oaths." This is the way in which the statute
under consideration was introdoeed, and made
a part of the law of the land. Th6 act pro-
ceeds, ^ Be it therefore enacted,' Ice. that
every person who shall, in any manner or form
whatsoever, administer, or cause to be admi-
nistered, or be aiding or assisting at the admi-
nistering of any oath or engagement, purport-
ing or intending to bind the person taking the
same to commit any treason, or murder, or any
felony punishable by law with death, be ad-
judged guilty of felony, and suffer death as a
felon, without beneiit of clergy," &c. The in-
dictment after reciting this and other clauses,
proceeds to state, that the panel is guilty of
the said crimes, or of one or more of them, actor,
or art and part ; and it goes on, in the usual, re-
gular, and tedinical mode, to set forth the
oath, which the panel is averred to have ad-
ministered, at secret meetings, to a great num-
ber of' persons, amounting to several hun-
dreds; iad which Oath the prosecutor avers to
be an oath, ** purporting or intending to bind
the- persons taking the same to commit
treason, by obtaining annual parliaments
and universal suffl-age by physical strength,
(or force), and thereby effecting the sub-
version of the established government, laws,
and constitution of this kingdom, by unlaw-
ful and violent means.*' Your lordships are
therefore under the necessity of giving your
opinions, whether this act which is so set
forth in the minor proposition — ^the act of ad-
ministering a certain oath at the particular
times and places therein mentioned, and to
the individuals alleged to have taken the same,
and, with regard to which, the public prosecu-
tor undertakes to satisfy you and the jury,-~
ia conform to the major proposition, and is,
or is not, of the description given of it by the
public prosecutor.
In determining this question, I think it riglit
to say, I am of the opinion expressed by your
lorduupa, that, by the words of tins act
of parliament, as well as in reason, and ac-
cording to the rules of the common law
sqpplicable to such a case, it it only to the
words of the oath itself we have to attend ;
and that we are not in a question as to the
pmposea or intentions of the administrators, or
takers of the oath, in so tax as they cannot be
made to appear' upon the face of the oath it-
self. As to the assertion, that it was admi-
aistered to numbers, and at secret m'eetings,
iipon that part of the libel I poncur with the
able argmnent for the prisoner.
It appeait to me necessary to come to a
dter viid#rstanding of the rules of interpret
latlon, ivbich we arfi to (pply in entering upon
ynsiiiquify. lam (tf ofuaipi^ thai it Is ant
by for-fotched, abstruae, tntrieste, or subtle
rules of ooQstraetion, yoor lordships are
eatitled to jndge of the mrwntng of this oath.
You are to pnt upon it the pbum meaning
which the words, in which tt is conceived,
would liave conveyed > and must be held to
have conveyed to persons of plain mdersland-
ing, dealing with that oath. I am further of
opinion, that you ave not entitled to listen to
refined criticisms on die terms of the oath ;
and for less to listen to any aUegations that
mere suspicion or conjecture might offer as to
what was the real object of such an oatli.
It appears to me, however, to be indispen-
sable, mat the whole of the oatii, from begia-
ning to end, should be taken into consider-
ntion. We ate to take, not a detached pert of
this oath here and there, and extract a meaa-
iag from it—- we are to comfaiae die whole of
it, and take it as one single instrument, and
putapon It merely a plain, common sense,
legitimate meaning, laying aside every thii^
like refinement in extracting vrfaat is its true
unport.
I feel myself bound, where the oath may be
of a doubtful or uncertain nature, to let the
doubt lean in forour of the accused ; but, on
the o^er band, if the words be plain, aad
convey only one meaning to my mind, I am
called upon to give effect to that meaning,
without paying tlM slightest regard oa the one
hand, to its bringing the prisoner within the
law ; or, on the other, letting; him escape, if
he was truly guilty of a violation of it.
Keeping these considerations steadily in
view, and taking the whole instrument into
consideratioo, I agree with my brother on my
right hand, that in looking to what is the true
purport or intention of this oath, particular at-
tention must be paid to the solemnity with •
which it is introduced and concluded. An in-
vocation in the most solemn manner to the
Almighty, is the commencement of the oath ;
and the conclusion is, ** So help me Ood, and
keep me steadfast." A more solemn and de-
libemte call upon God, in entering into an en-
gagement ; one which is attended with every
thing that can render it awfully impressjve on
the minds of administrator and taker than this,
it is impossible for me to figure to myself for
a single moment.
The oath then proceeds, ** I will persevese
in m^ endeavours to form a brotherhood of
affection amonpt Britons of every description,
who are considered worthy of confidence.*'
That this brotherhood which the taker of the
oath binds himself to persevere in endeavour-
ing to form, can, upon any fair or .legitimate
principle of interpretation, be supposed to
allude to the case of such abrotherhooa of affeo-
tion as was ingeniously put to your lordships
at the vwA voce discussion of this case, appeass
to me to be negatived by another part of the
oath, which refers to the penalty for the dis-
closure of any thing done by the brotherhood.
I For these two pasaaget taken logethar most
539J
57 GEORGE III.
Trial ^Anir^m M^Kudey
tatiafy vftrf (air, candid, and impartial miad,
that it wa« the formation of brotherhoods, as-
sociations, or bodies of men united tog^ether
for one common purpose,-*-not a brotherhood
of affection amdng all mankind in general, or
all the people of this pountry in general, bat
among those only who are considered voorthf
of <m^idehu. Look to the subsequent part of
this oath ; «to the sanction of secrecv as to the
proceedings ; the punishment of death to be
inflicted by any member or members of such
sooiefifs ; which affords the clearest evidence
that there was to be a union of numbers ; that
these numbers were to be nnited together in a
- variety of different societies ; and then say if
it is possible in common sense, or giving fair
play to language, to suppose that a brother-
hood, with innocent pnrposoB, was really in
view ? There is a positiire obligation to form
an union of indiTiiiuab, composing different
societies, linked together in this solemn and
deliberate manner; it is therefore quite im-
possible to suppose that a brotherhood of af-
reetion was alone intended.
The obligation of secrecy, of absolute con-
ceaiment of eVery thing that was to be done,
of ereiy description whatsoever, in or out of
these societies, is a most remarkable feature
of this oath ; and I have no difficulty in stating,
that this has appeared to me, from the very
first moment I deliberately considered it, to
be one of the fairest and most unexceptionable
tests in order to ascertain what is the true
purport or intendment of this oath. The
words are, ** And I do further swear, that
'neither hopes^ fears, rewards, or punishments,
shall induce me to inform on, or give evidence
against, any member or members, collectively
or individually, for any act or expression done
or made, in br out, in this or similar societies,
under the punishment of death; to be inflicted
on me by any member or members of such
societies.'' Suppose an oath to have been ad«
.ministered, containing in it nothing but what
I have now read, and without its having dis-
' dosed upon the face of it the object of such
secret associations as are here linked together,
is there any one of your lordships who would
not l^ve pronounced it to be a criminal oath,
and inferring a criminal purpose in the view of
both administrator and taker ? I apprehend
that not a shadow of doubt could exist upon
the point.
But we are at no loss to discover what was
. the object this oath contemplated. For, af^er
providing for the formation of this brotherhood,
your lordships know in what m^ner the ob-
jects of the union are disclosed in the passage
■ 80 often read, relative to the engagement to
persevere in endeavours to obtain the elective
tranchise to every person in Great Britain and
Ireland, not disqualified by crimes or insanity,
and annual parliaments f— '' and thai I will
support the same to the ttmost of my power,
either by moral or physical strength (or force),
as the case may reqntaK." In putting upon
these expressions thk tmnning which .fairly
[640
Attaches to them, it b impossiMe fbrine to
bring my mind to the interpretation .whirii has
been endeavoured to be impressed upon/your
lordships — that this engagement to use physical
strengtn, or force, ,is referable merely to the
securing of annual parliaments and nniverMl
suffrage after they snail be obtained. It is im*
possiSe, upon any principle of construction
that I am acquainted with, to put this forced
and unnatural meaning upon tnese wocds. I,
on the contrary, must infer this engagement to
mean, that all endeavours, by monu or phy-
sical strength, were to be employed to obtain
these objects, as the case might require. But
even if another construction was adopted,
namely, that the above mentioned words were
to be held to refer to the whole preceding
members of the. o^th, then, as there is no limi-
tation, no confinement of this co-operation of
efforts to any of tho^e whjoh are ^called inno-
cent proceedings, your lordships must still be
left to draw the same conclusion of physical
strength, or force, being pledged to be resort-
ed to, as the case miffbt require. It is ma*
nifes^ on the words of the oath, that Uie party
administering, as well as the party taking it,
had their attention most particularly cail^ to
the distinction between the two kinds of
strength, or force, that are here to be Htaoited
to. This is marked in the most en^phatic
manner by the words, ^ oi ike cote mcy rtqmrei*.
the obligaHou being to use the one, if the case
required only that one, but to betake them-
selves also to the other, if tlie case should re-
quire its aid.
Putting upon these words, then, the only
interpretation they can iustlv bear; holding
that there is no room u>r the innocent con-
struction that has been pressed upon your
lordships ; and taking into view that the oath
binds numbers to the obligation in question ;
that it is averred that it was administered to
great numbers ; that various societies were in
contemplation ; and, above all, that the clause
of concealment to which I formerly alluded^
has a direct reference, not only to exprfuwm
made use of by any member or members, but to
oc/ff done by them *' in or out of this or similar
societies ;*' the conclusion cannot be avoided,
that it was in regard to the endeavoura to ob-
tain their objects, that recourse was to be had
to moral or physical strength, as the case might
require. If there was, therefore, in the pre-
ceding parts of the oath, any doubt, any am-
biguity, any difiiculty whatever, your lordships
have it completely removed hj this most re-
markable and emphatic part of it. Indeed, I
well recollect, that the good sense of the senior
counsel for the panel, while he was endeavour-
ing to give his view of this part of the case,
prevented his grappling with this part of the
oath, nChich he admitted, in unqualified terms
(and in so doing he has been follow^ed by. the
learned counsel, who draws the injformation for
the panel), did contain criminal and dangerous,
matter. But, I apprehend, this most dan-
gerous and criminal part of the engagemeni,
Ml]
far AttAudttinQ yoAatj^l 1kikt\
A. D. 1817.
\B»^
is that whtdk your lordships may jttstly rtsoit
to as a test for tfyi&g the other parts of it, if
there does exist any diffieulty in regard to
their tme- meaning. This passage of itself
goes "Ar to remoTe any doubt which could exist
as to the criminality of this oath; When was
it erer heard' of, that an obKgation to perform
only innocent acts, to engage in nothing but
lawrol proceedings, was enYeloped in snch
terms as we have here ; and that ttie mere per-
formance of the bounden and sacred duty of
eveiy nfember of this association, who might
be called upon in a court of law to disclose
the truth, was to be followed with the punish-
ment of death ? That the obligation must be
held to attach even to the persons who should
give CTidence in courts of justice seems clearly
d^inced by the words used. A more tre-
mondous obligadon can hardly be conceired,
than that of binding a person by a solemn
oath, not to give evidence as to the proceed-
ings of an association, under the penaltr of
being murdered by any of its members. That
part of the osth alone, therefore, renders it
altogether impossible to doubt asto its purport
and intendment being of the most criminal
nature.
If this be the conclusion which, upon a care-
ful consideration of this oath (and sure I am,
no case ever met with more anxious attention)
we must come to, the nextquestiou is, whether
an obligation sudi as this, to resort to the use
of physical strength or force, -in endeaToorinff-
to obtain annusd parliameofs and uniVersu
suffrage to the subjects of this country, does
come up to what the indictment states it to be,
— ^<m oath or engagement purporting or intend-
ing to bind the taker to commit treason ?
' I take: this opportunity of . stating, that the
Tiew which I have taken of this case, is the
same that it would have been, had this oath
been presented to your lordsMps in the shape
which it first assumed. I concur in opinion
with lord Pitmilly, that the use of the words
physical strengtli, in the clear and marked
manner in which it is manifestly to be employ-
ed on d)e face of this oajth, would have been
sufficient to satisfy roe as to the purport of the
oath, independently of the addition of the
word^/Me. But, at the same time, I agree
with my brother on my left hand, that if there
be any doubt as to the word strength, it is en*
tirdy removed by the wojd force being used
piromiscuously in one and the same sense.
That universal suffrage and annual partly
ments make at present no part of the consti-
tution of this realm (and that they may make
no part of it till the end of time, must be the
devout wish of every man who has the interest
of his country at heart I) is a proposition vrhich
cannot be disputed for a single moment. That
the obtaining and accomplishing these objeots,
by the use and application of physical strength
or fbree, by ntunDers united, mid associ^ied
B^itMi by sudi an obKgktion as is now be-
fbre ifv; that the effectiriff,; by such means, the
establislmient of universM s«4rsge and annuel
pariiatnents, and, conse<{aenfl^, OTMikminfl^
the present constitution of the kinmoms, would
clearly amount to high treason, I presume no
man breathinff can doubt. i
That the obtaining of an aHeratidn of law*
by numbers, and the employment of physical
strength and force to accomplish it, does con-*
stitttfe high treason, none of your lordships,
or any one acquainted with the law, can hesi«
tate in betieving. Tbe authorities on thissub-*
^ect are distinctly brought before your lordshipe
in the information for the public prosecutor^
p, 10, 11. You there find cited the authorities
of Hale, of Foster, and of lord Mansfield, ja
announcing the law in the case of lord George
Gordon; which authorities have since beenr
referred to by every judge who has had oce»-^
ston to address a jury in any charge of treason^
and their opinions, I will sayi (altfaon|^ »
slight was thrown out as to the weight due \»
him), have been ia a most accurate, satis-i
factory, and lawyer4ike manner, summed u|»
by Mr. Hume. Looking to these authorities,
there cannot be the slightest doubt, that to ac-
complish such objects as we are now considers
ing^ by means of numbers and pk^ical strength,
would be high treason, as an actual levying of
war against the king — ^in the words of jfidge
Foster, who wiU he admitted to have given a
correct account of die law of treason. Ibat
^ these objects are of a public and general nature,
cannot be ouestiooed \ and that die accom-
plishment ot objects, which are of that descripr
tion, and not private, if sought to b^ brougnt.
about by a rising of persons, and the applica-
tion of force, even vnthout any of the pageantry
of war, is high treason, and a levying of war
against the king, is tbe united import of all
the authorities which have been referred to ;
no lavryer having, indeed, ever doubted that
the rising of a number of persons for efiectine:
public purposes \s§ force, is high treason ana
levying vrar.
As this oath contemplates events to be kc-
complisbed — acts not doing or done, but to be
committed — ^wUch would amount to high
treasoir, I think yoitr lordships, in considering
the import of it^^aie bound to look to the con-
sequences, as demonstrating what it purported
or intended to> lund to. Having said this, I
most take leare to say, that I am not in the
slightest degi%e conscious, . that, in holding
this opinion^ I am about to establish any new
treason — thst I am giving any countenance to
the establishment of constnictive treasons — or
that I am transgressing any decision of par-
liament or courts of justice — a hint which haa .
been held out, as if ia terroran to your kosd-
ships. I am persuaded, that the learned gen-
tlemen vrho have Vesorted to this mode of
argument, did not purport or intend to make
the allusion, by way of warning to your lord-
ships, or to convey any. thing like a supposed,
picture of Uie consequences that are likely to
tbllow ftom the decision we may be called
upon to pronounce: If I were capable of
thinking such was tbe object of the quoutions
8431
57 GEORGE III.
Trial ^Andran
Cl4i
i aHncb-te^ I can only say for myself that I
AoiM htn^ ticated tkcai with Um seotB and
oaataaqpt tbey iinn. Sittiof . kara^ i» the
discharge of a most iiiifOTtaDt and dalieata
ftnctte, I kB0V .tlw daty I have to> perfonn.
I har» to perfovaa k accofdicg. to ny ooBcep-
tioft ol tfaa nilaa of laiap^ aad &e conviotioB of
my iran aonacianaa ; and I da so withoal tha
lUgfatatt ragaid to those conseqiieDoas whidk
BHLy he floppoaed to he alhided to in Uie p«B-
aa^a to lAmh I lefatf. Bat I maat do tha
gawdaiactt the jastice to sappoae,. tl|is waa
ataaad -wadioat any saoh Tiew. But baring
• heard it alao in- the awd voce pleadings, I have
iiit it inoaaaheat oD-aoe to mahe these ohser«
vatioiia.. If aay man can pennade me, by
aofeer and legai asgnment, by a reitrenoe to
aalbanliaa to which I am hoand to pay obe»
dieacey that the opiaioQ I have fonned haa a
tondenoy to estaUish a tieason, by amhiguons
aad geneial weida, ^ as aocroaehing of loyal
peiwoty sahrertiag of faadamcntal iaws^ and
the liftuB^'' I woaU listen to the ailment. But
I jnai say, in one wnd«^Let that wan show
Mtef qpan ike aathority of any judge or lawYer
in Bngland, th^ what was manife&y intended
tO" be done on the face of Uiis oath— the alter*
iag the established lawsy and constitution of
piuiiaiDent^ by physical strength or force— if
McompliahiBd^ is not high treason^ and I will
give the aalheciiy ohedienoe.
• H aw^ iian- oe the tnie import of this oadi^
tiier qiMBtiofi lemaina for ^t lordahipe to
determine^ whether tke'pubhe proaecutor^ rest-
ina his ehaage on the act of parliament, and
aubauning in tiie miaet pcepositioB that the
panel is gpsilty of thai change, oy administering.
this oath to a vasiety of persons, on various
oocasioBB^ aad at ieeret meetings— has shaped
the mdicttaent in each- a manner as to wariant
ua to femit it to an assiie ?
'Shia toads to the ol^eotiona aUnded to^that
it was the duty of the public prosecutor, to
define- the treason which neaMeges the purport
of the oath was to bind to commit ; and that
the attempt he has made to do so is abortive.
In* refuence to these objections, if it were
at all time, as ia stated in th^ information for
the paneiy that the praaecotoi' is here asking to
obtana the chance of a verdict from a jury,
upon vague infisrenee from facts inapplicabto
to the natore of the charge,- and without fully
expiaining himself to nr or the jury, it wonld
he the du^ and instant inclination of your
lordships to chedc each an attemptr You are
hound to take care of the interest of the
public at huge, and of the party accused, by
checking' such attempts, and nndingthe charge
iirelevant. But the facts of this case, as
appeariag oa the face of the indictment, wap'
rant ne such asanmption, »
It thtnk it'neoeasary to notice, that I cannot
OODCOV in one poaition of my learned fiiend
who drew the mfbrmation for the prosecutor
—that, ia a ease oi this despription, we can
|ive*any credit to the public proseeutor aa to
iheaiMiiagaf theoath) aales»webeaataified
ouflseivef, icpea the ftice of the oafth,- that the
meaning which he states is eorrect. If secb
he his steteasent, I' beg to say I difier frott
him. Ia the majos proposition^ the indict-'
meat, xefereace ia had to the act of parli^
aaent ; and it ia for us to say, Aether the
&ct^steted in the miaor proposition come up
to the major propoaition.— Lsee, however, the
public prooeeutor doaa not mean to oarry his
argument to that length. »
But, supposing the objeets of the parties m
the oath were to be prosecuted by levying war,
it appears to me, that, in order to make a re-
levant charge, it is not necessary, on any
principle of tow, nor is it required by thia
statote, that the public prosecutor should enter
into a definition of the precise treason which
he avers the oath purported or intended to
bind the parties to commit. I say sa, under
this qualification, that he must aver and show,
on the fiiee of the oath, that it purports or
intends to bind to commit treason.
• I cannot enter into the idea, that, to fooM
a legal charge under Uiis act, which refers to
three distinct species of oaths, binding to
commit any treason or murder, or any felony
punishable with death, it would be sufficient
to narrate the act, and not say whether the
oath bound to commit some particulai^ne or
other of these species of crimes. I am for
the prisoner, as to this point ; and I think, on
the principle of fiiir detding, the apeciea of
oath imputed to him, should be aistinctly
stated^ But, having arrived at that condusion,
I am tiiea to say, whether or not there ie
any thing in the nature of this act of parlia-
ment, and charge that is made under it, whicb
requires the prosecutor to go fiirther, I must
beg leave to say, with all deference to the
opinion of my brother (lord Gillies), Aat it
is possible to figure cases of oaths uponwhtcb
ohaigea under Uiis act might accurately be
laid, and as to which it is impossible to eon-
tend thatf the public prosecutor is bound t^
specify and denne the treason. I allude to
an oath whidb professes to have in view, any
alteration of the law, for instance. If such
shall appear to be the object of the oath, and
there sn^l be, on the face of it, words which
clearly purport or 'intend to bind the taker t»
persevere in the accomplishment of the object
oy any means whatever, and to peiaevere even
in ireoMmable means if necessary, I contend,
that it vrould be sufficient for a prosecutor to
say here is an oath in violation of the statute
52nd of the king, intending to bind the tdiers
to commit treason. I take for granted, that
the oath' binds to persevere, by the use of all
means, not excepting treasonable means.
Could any man aoubt, here is an oath in
violation of the act of parliament f Then I
ask, what is the duty the public prosecutor ia
caNed on to perform^— To define the treason
which the party at that time taking the oatla
had not at the time hittiaelf defined? Hehad
aierely hoand himself te the parfonnanee' of
treaaonabto acts^ whiok ia a violataon of xbe-
«45l
fat AdmhikUring unttnffld CMhs.
A.D. 1817.
i6*6
•ot oi pMlisM^Bl, In this iasttiice, il is an
•bioluto impMiibility to say a correct special
ileiMti«D of tfa» tMMon coold be given. I
abirays eay this, under the quaJification to
'whieb I Ibnaei^ alluded^ that the oath itielf
aball l^ oae which purports or intends to bind
<• tbo oommistioB of treason at least. If it
^neve oo«ched in such lanftiiage as no Mortal
oa«M nndentsM* it woold be jostlo hold it
not sufficient that the preaecntor thoofht it
bawd to eoouBit treason ; bat if this appears
ott the tee of the oath itself the charge must
be bekl to be seleTantly laid.
I go a Utile ftirther $ for it is not merely in
refiBrenee to treseooable, but to nraiderons,
and MIODiotts oaths^ that this observation would
be fomd strictly to apply. I take the case of
an oalb, as was pot bf lord Pitmilly : not that
Ihere is an obhgatioa on the face of it, to
nmrder an individual, bat to preserve secrecy^
and to persevere in endeavouring to aoooin»>
plish oertam. objects, and even to put to death
all those who should oppose t(ie accomplish-
BMDl of then. Here is an oadi which might
be jchtfged as in violation of that part of the
net of pniiiament directed against oaths pniw
noidng OS intendinf to bin^ tooommitmnr-
dev. The pfoseeulor quotes the oath, whidi
eentains saah an engagement as I have stated,
to pessewre, even to the ride of putting to
deadh those who shaU oppose the ;aoooaip]ish<-
ment of the end in view. If the praseoutor
were ealtedon to deine the species of murder
wbieh Ms- oath purported to bind to commit^
would there not be the same impossibility
ntteapted to be imposed as in the case formerly
supposed, as to the species of tiraason ? The
pesdes themsdfes had not designated whom
they inteoded to murder, or the manner of
dmng so, esoept seoeially those who should
oppoee them ; and therefore the public pro-
seentor could not describe, in the charge, the
partienlar sort of murder, as that does not
appear on the fhceof the oath itself. But, if
he nsitatesthe act of parHaiDeiit,and cites the
oatb^ he does all that is iDcnmbent upon him
nnder this act of parliament. I say the same
as to an oath bindiDg to commit felony. Sup*
eie parties (and nothing is more common, I
r, than associations in some parts of the
kingdom^ of perMns to commit felonies), enter
into a combination to commit a capital feloa]^
and have resorted to an oath binding them**
selves to seise on the whole bullion in 'the
eoffers of the bank of England, or to possess
diomselves of the regalia in the Tower of
London. The prosecutor discovers such an
oodi, and libels upon it as purporting or
intwading to bind to commit a felony punish-
aMe witii deadi. I think, on attending to this
nd of parliament, and to the circumstances
mder whidh such im oath must have becoi
ndninbleiad or taken, it would not be neces*-
any to -apeeifo ttid define the- obligation as
on* to ebmnt the crime of buigla^, or any ^
pHtienkreapitalfolony; andylf such aebarge
mm raised here, it woold not be ttfoessenr to
VOL.XXXIIL
staile thai theobjects ware iq be accomplished
by means of theftand himse-breaking. It would
be suiiciwi to state, that the act of parliament
was violated by such an oath, bearing on the
face of it an obligation intending to bind to
commit a felony punishable with death* The
prosaentor cannot be eaUed on to define mose
pieciselyy what it must be impossible for him
todo.
If the oath itself beam the coastruction
whidi is alleged of it, and if the relative
cjrcnmstances of .time, and place of adminisr
terins, be set forth in the indictment, the pro-
secntor has done all that is necessary for the
advantage of the prisoner. The prisoner
sufiem no harm from i|s being stated in the
indictment, that it is an oath intending to
commit treason, for, if he can shew that suck
is not the proper construction of the oath, and
that it does not so purport, his defonoe remaim
entire. That he suffers no hardship firom the
indictment being so framed, appears to me to
be quite dear. An admission Was made on the
part of the panel at the bar, in dear terms^ by
Mr. Moncridl^ that this indictment would
have boen relevant if it had narrated all the
difiamnt treasons ahenativdy, as bound by
the purport of the oath to be oemmitted by
the takers of it. This is a truth of which I
have no doubt whatever: But, if so, is it
possible to say any benefit would have resulted
to t^e panel from following such a proceeding?
But, it has been said, that, erto, it is not
incumbent to define the treason in an indicl-
meoton thisstatate; yet te prosecutor has
undertaken the task, and has not performed
it ssitishctonly.r— Now, we are all agreed, that,
in a trial fon treason, die particular ^eetes of
it srast be speeifioally set forth.; but, I oq»-
ceive, for one, that the present ol^ectiott for
the prisoner proceeds altosetber on a mistake,
and that thsn is no such uiing, as is alleged,
undertaken on the phrt of tlm public pnia»-
outor. The panage founded on, is not to be
found in that part of the indictment where
you would have expected the prosectMor to
have made such a diarge. The words termed
vague and unsatisfactory, are merely expres-
sive of the proeecutor*s opinion as to the
nature of the oath; I shall not fotigue your
loidships by reading that part of the Indict-
ment— I rcfor to it as fonuliar to all of your
lordships^ The prosecutor goes on to deicrihe
the oath as an obligation tq obtain annual
parliaments and nnivemal suffirage, by physi-
cal 'strength or force, and thereby ^ectinr
the subvenion of the govamment, laws, and
noQSlitution of tUs kingdom, by violent and
unlawful means. This is clearly descriptive
of the •oelh, not of the tteasoa ; for them im^
mediately follows : ^'Whiefa oath or engage-
ment, or obligation, in the form of an oath,
was'inthe following terms/' On this part of
the case, it is- obvious to me, that 'tha* which
is alleged to have been an iinpeifect «^ecution
of a task undertsken by the pibUciiraaeontor,
Ms entimly to the gioond; for the public
2 N
>• «
«4'ri
57 GEORGE nr.
Trkt ^AnAmt
[648
prosecutor has not entered . into any wioh
undertaking — ^he disclaims it ; and the words
of the indictment show he had not pledged
himself to any such task. Agreeing, therefore,
with the coansel for the panel, that, if this
were a trial for treason, those wwds in the
indictment would not be sufficient; I say, the
rule requiring a specification of th^. tnaaon
does not apply to the present case, and has
not beetf attempted to be acted upon \xh tiie
piblic prosecutor. The case is quite dimrent
from that of lonl Strafford. Without at all
interfering with the law of treason, or asking
tis to find the indictment relevmnt, as charging
treason, the public prosecutor midLCS the aver-
neat, that the oath here is one purporting or
intending to biod to commit treason ; and he
says it was so by obtaining annual parliaments
and universal suffrage by pb^ical strength or
force. This is his description of the oath,
and we are referred by him to the oath itself;
and if we are right in our oonstmction of it,
it is an oath purporting or intending to bind
to commit treason, because it states that phy-
sical strength or force was to be employed in
the accomplishment of those objects; which
never can be accomplished withom producing
those consequences which the prosecutor
states. Those words of the indictment are no
more than the enlarged view the prosecutor
giTcs- of the consequences of his aTerment as
to the nature of the oalh itself. That they
are not descriptive of the means to be
employed, is obvious. Neither are they
descriptive of the objects in view ; for these
are annual parliaments and nnivenal suflh^^.
They are no more than an amplifled detail
•f tiie evil result of the accomplishment of
ttiose* objects, which cannot taketyff the effect
of the treasonable nature of iIm oath. . That
the words, *^and thereby effecting the sub*
version, of the established government, laws,
and constitnlion of this kin^om,. by nalawfol
and violent means/' cannot therefore be
viewed as any thing like an attempt to deBne
Ihe treason, is to me quite obvious. Suppose
the indictment had specified the treason of
levying war, and then these words had
followed, ^ and thereby effecting the subver-
sion of the established government, laws, and
constitution of this kingdom, by unlawful
nnd violent means *r will i^ny one maintain,
that the addition of these words, which are
merely descriptive, could vitiate the rest of
this indictment? lliat view of the import of
these words is decisive, that the use of Uiem
iothis case cannot emount to a vitiation of
the diarge, or render it in any reepect
irretevant#
In all cases, of this naturey it is right for
•the public prosecutor to* deal foirly with the
accused, ana to put him in possession of wbait
Jm bottoms bis charge upon, sneeiiyiBg- the
•time, manner, circumstances, and individoals,
'With regani to which the guiHy ads are said*
to htive been ooramitted. When I look to
4hit indictment, J find all this is done. The
major proposition cites llie .act of pmrliament.
It IS then charged, that the pnnel was goil^
of having administered an oath, the terns <n
which are set forth ; the places^, persons, and
nature of the meetings at which it was admin*
istered are detailed; and the psoceontee,
having done this, kas done all that ean be
demanded ef him, according to any principlea
with which I amr acquainted, for the focmatjm
of a criminal charge.
But there does remain another objeetiea
which has attracted the attention of all year
lordships, as brou^t under our oonaideratios
in an aignmentative and learned manner, in
a supplementary information for the paneL. I
have no inclination to find any fault with tW
course of proceeding; for, it was otliecwise
impossible to do justice to that argument^
because it proceeds on the supposition that
the other argument had altogether failed. But
I have humbly to submit to your lordships a
view upon this part of the case, iriiidi has not
been uken by any of the Court, and whiek
has appeared to me, on a thorou^ considera*
tion, to be deserving of great attention. For,
independently, altogether, of the weight of |he
answers which have been made to the pre*
Uminary objections, it is obvious. that Mr*
Grant's argument is bottomed on assuming
this fact, that the administration of the oaili
itself, now before your lordships, does amount
to an overt act of treason under the statsUe
36th of the king ; that is an overt act of that
particular treason of compassing or imfigining
to levy war for the purpose either of compdU
ing the king to change hb meaeuies, or. to
over-awe either House of Parliament; and
that administering to numbers at secret meet-
ings such an oath, i» to be hdd as a substan-
tive overt act of this particular treason. Beferu
I can, bowever, amve at this conclusion^ it
must be made out to me, in a more satiefoctory
way than has hitherto been done, that, by
giving mv sanction to this assumption, I am
not, in met, proceeding to establish a con*
structive treason. Your lordships will peroeive
that what I allude to is this, that it is india^
pensably necessary, to the pennitting sueh aa
oath as this to be received as an overt act of
the particular treason to which I have referred^
under the statute 36th of the king, that the
conspiracy, the compassing, imagining, and
devising to levy the war should be matured
and specially directed to the levying of war,
at a certain time, and at a certain pUice^ and
for a certain speeial purpose, ^ch as the db-
jecU stated in Ais case--the obtaining annual
parliaments and. universal snffirage, or any
alteration of the law. This to me is dear
from the principles we find. ap|iUed to thf
sUtute of Edward 3rd; 4Aft> before, a^
particuhur fact shall he founded on ae an evert
act of a compassing and imagining the ds^tk
of ■ the -kiogf or tevying was, it is neQa»-
saiy to.make out satiMactoriW that there wne
euehuconspracy devised and matasad. TV*
is a clear prin«i^ in the In^ of treason, wd
44»]
fit Adimtmiering nkbnjfid (kUkt*
A. D. 1817/
1550
I thtll be tki last man to interfete with it.
To make bb argament on this point apply to
the piwent case— tp entitle him to taiie the
€|ttestioii, whether we can in this way 4ry what
is in itself « irmunf it is incnmbent <on the
peael at the har to assume it as proved, that
there was this matured, spediied, fixed, and
deliberate eonspivacy .and plan formed to lery
war. This he must assume, before he can
avail himself of the argument which his
eotesel'has suggested* It is material, howeDSc,
to bbserre, that the indictment does not itate
this to be the fiact; and I ask, vRbelher there
is any one of your lord^ps, upon the piin«
dple which has been so strongly impressed
upon yoo by lord Gillies, who can take this
important (act for granted ? I, for one, am not
prepared to do so. In my conscience I am
wmnd to say, that, though there appears on
the shewing of the indictment to have been
ancontemplatioo, that which, if accomplished,
would hare amounted to high treason, I
asust give the parties credit in believing,
that there was not a digested, specific, de&
bttrate, . fixed plan for a rising. And, having
tint dear oproion, and having seen nothing
to ibtkt it, ue whole basis of Uie argum«it in
thii part of the case fiills to pieces, and there
veniains no foundation for stating, that you
hanre here an oath founded on in support of a
charge of a capital felony whieh is itself an
•vert act of high treason.
The object of the statute of the 52nd of the
king, was to guard against the state of sub-
serviency and subjection of men's mind to
the influence of leaders, some of whom were
even concealed from the persons who were
eoacemed, both -in taking and administering
these oaths. It was to prevent the con-
sequences of such dangerous influence over
the minds of the peop^, and of their blind
sttbmisBiottto these leaders. It contemplates,
theiefoie, the cases of prospective conspiracies
not yet matured, not brought into the shape
«f actual coneert of rising into rebellioo. It
vfueto guard against those evils that the act
was firamed. It has a reference to what is
Is be eoaunitted, not to what ti comipitted.
If this be a correct view of the true intent
of the act in question, that it was made to
prevent the creation of such undue influence,
and the sutijeotion which seems to have been
the object of the administrators in regard to
tboee who took the oath ; then it follows, that
it is relevant, in forming a charge under this
act, for the public prosecutor to set forth that
this is an oath purporting or intending to bind
to cosamit treason, in violation of the act of
parliament. But, being of opinion, that it
bas not been made out in a clear and satis-
foctory manner, that the adminiltering of this
oath, as charged in the indictment, is an overt
act* of the nature taken for granted in Mr.
Gtant'sargument, I have here nothing to do with
the pfopositioa that felony merges in treason,
even if there were no sneh clause as the last one
of the statute in question. - .
7
la
As to the doctrine in general, that, without
precedent, case, jot opinion of any lawyer of
authority, it is to be held at cnce and decided
in this case, that, by the act of queen Anne,
which renders the law of treason the same in
both countries, we have imported the whole
principles of the common law of England in
reference to such a crime, it is a proposition
to which I am not prepared to accede. Your
lordships have alreaay seen one marked disitinc-
tioQ between the systems of the law of the two
countries, which renders it impossible to hold,
that the whole law of England has become a
part of the common law of Scotland. I should
nave wished to have beard any authority given
to your lordships, from which it could possibly
be held that any judges who ever sat in this
Court, could permit any man who has been
sent to an assise on acharse of crime founded
on an allegation of certain facts, to be remitted
on the same facts to another assise, to be tried,
for a crime of higher denomination, without
the express authority of parliament ? I never
can go any such length* This is one feature
in our law which must show that we have not
et embodied into it the rules of the common
aw of England. It is clear, from Foster, that,
if in the course of an investigation, as to a trial
for felony, he, as a judge, should discover
treason, he would discharge the jury^ and
direct a new indictment for treason to be raised.
Such proceeding is, however, impossible, ac-
cording to the law of Scotland. No instance
of it has been produced to your lordships — no
authorities hAve been founded on to establish
such a rule ; and I am certainly not prepared,
to adopt it here: If I understand the princi-<
pLe, it goes to the length that a judge should
discharge the jury, whether they were about ta
convict or acquit the panel. That we sliould
adopt so extraordinary a rule, without autho-
rity, is out of all sight ; and, at present, I can
only say, that I entertain the greatest doubts of
the doctrine of felony merging in treason,
being applicable in this Court.
I am happy, however, to think, that from
the view I have taken of the act of parliament,
and the oath in question, there are on the face
of this statute, the most invincible grounds for
holding that the indictment which has beeu
5 referred ought to be remitted to a jury, and
lat we are, in fact, left no discretion by the
legislature itself. The clause upon which this
part of the case is rested, I need not again
read ; but I think it necessary just tp advert to
one circumstance which was strongly pressed,
and seems to have had great eflect upon the
opinion of my brother, lord Gillies.. I refer to
the course of procedure which parliament is
supposed to adopt, when it makes any deviai-
tion from former- statutes, as is supposed to
have happened in this case. Tlie statute al-
luded to, was the 39th and 40th of the king.
Mr. Grant, after referring to the statute 9 Geo.
1st, goes on to state, that it was not thought,
that by this act, the shooting at the king oould
be prosc.'Uted as felony. lie goes on io recite
541] 57 GEORGE OI.
Trutaf^mbtm H^KUkj/
f
e«rtain parts of the 39th and 40tfc of the kitagy
and then calls your attention to the express
statement in the latter part of the act ; ^ that
none of the provisions contained in the several
acts of the 7th year of king William 8rd, and
the 7th of queen Anne, respectively) touching
trials in cases of treason, eoc. shall extend to
any indictment of high treason, in compassing,
fcc. where the overt act shall be snch as afore-
said; but, upon conviction, judgment shall
nevertheless be given, and execution done, as
in other cases of high treason, any law, statute,
or usage to the contraty notwithstanding."
Tliis reference to this particttlar statute led me
to look to the act itself; and, I think, when
your lordships attend to its tenns, yon will
ind there the clearest and most invincible
reasons for those particular dsuses being in-
serted in -it. ^Vhat is the tiUe of the act ?
*^ An act for regulating trials for high treason,
and misprision of treason in certain cases.'' It
then proceeds to enact what is stated in the
panel's information, and concludes with pro-
viding, that nothing in the acts touching trials
for high treason, &c. shall affect that statute,
because there is a new n^ode of trial prescribed ;
and that wherever the chaige is, Unt of com-
passing and imagining the death of the king
(the most detestable of all treasons), and the
overt act, the actually shooting at him, foe. it
shair be lawfol and competent to proceed to
try those guilty of that offence a» jbr murder,
and on the same evidence as in trials for
murder. Such is the object of the act of par-
Hament. That, however, clearly, was not to
do away the crime of high treason and make it
a felony, but to regulate the mode in which
such acts of high treason might be tried ; and
the enactment is, that they shall be tried ac-
cording to the form of trials for murder, and
upon the same kind of evidence. Seeing this
was a new regulation for the trial of what was
actually hish treason, was it not njecessary,
having mMe this new provision, to declare,
that nothing contained in the two former sta^
tutes, with regard to trials for high treason,
should be oonstnied to extend to this act of
parliament? This was the only coarse whidi
tould be followed, vrheki a new regulation was
to be made ibr the higheM spedies of high
treason. The whole weight and effect of this
authority, therefore, is done way, npon looking
to tlte act itself and its tme object, which was
to make a new ^tem of trial for certain acts
of treason. Such being the tnie object of the
statute 39th and 4<Mh of the king, it was neces-
sary to subjoin that part of the clause which
has been founded on, as so decisive in tins
ease.
.- There is another view thttt may be taken of
this act which appears to me to iJford an un-
answerable reply to the statement made on the
part of the panel, as to its being absurd and
incredible to suppose that the legislature, in
pastsing the statute 52nd of the fringy conld
have contemplated the poasibility of declaring
that to be a capital (elpny wkioh amoitttf to
hightitason. That ad, 89«k nisd 4«(h of the
king, was passed, in order to regidate^ as I
have just s«d, the trial of the highest degree of
treason which it is possible for « suhieet to
commit. It enacts, that where the overt aot
shaH be even theaetnal assassination of the kiag^
die trial shall neHrtheless proeeed in the same
manner, in every respect, and upon the lika
evidence, as in trials for mnrder. The ad
then inserts the dense founded on by Mr*
Grant, and concludes With dedahn^ ** Jwdg
ment shall, nevertheless, be given, and
tion done, as in 4>ther cases of high
any law, statnte, or usage, to the oontoary new
withstanding." What, thee, has tiie legisla-
ture here done ? It has declared, that, in re-
ihrenoe to this, the highest and most aggravated
spedes of treuon, all the privileges oftrsasea
trial shall for ever be taken from die eufaiect,
and that he shaU not have the usnal benefit
attending trial for treason. Where the everi
act diarged is the assassination of the king,
the aocitfed may be tried as for a
murder, and be eonvieted npon the
dence as in a trial for mnrder. Here is a de-
daration of the legislature in regard !• the
highest species of treason; and yet it >praB
pressed npon your lordships, as the aieet oh
credible and absord of all piopooitioos, diat m
reference to other treasons, .as vreU as to this^
the legislature should ever have intended to
declare, that certain oaths, purporting or in*
tending to bnad to commit treason, should be
dedar^ a capital felony and liable to punish-
ment as snch ; -and that there would be the
utmost danger to the sofajects of this eountiy,
and to the person of the king himself, by the
adoption of any such construction as is here
contended for on the part of the preaeonler.
This very act, founded upon by the paoely
affords, however, a satisfoctoiy proof, that,
whenever the legislature thinks it necenaiy to
to make an alteration of the law as to
it does so without hesitatJNm, If it thinhs
alteration is for the benefit of the pnldie hft
large ; and we see that it aoeordingiy providea^
not only that the cases of treasotoaMe odhn
and prospecdve treasons, but -of Overt nets •£
die highest kind of treason diemsdves, may h«
ti^ed as capital felonies.
But thedansein the 52nd of the king leaven
no donbt as to the conclusion we oedit to
draw. Admitting the correctness of Mr.
Grant's statement as to felony meiging iti
treason, I say there is an anthotity beHMe your
lordships to which we most bend, and as-eo
which we have no discredon. It is said to \m
an ambigttoos elauie^ but we are bound to givo
a meaning to it: and I think it has dedarad
expressly, that a feet, orantBlfoiioe, wliiehiMy
be diarged inTiolation of diis act of pariio*
ment, may be diarged as an ^ct of high tren-
son ; under this qualification, hovpeVer, that
the accused has not been brought to trial before
for the lesser offenee. I cannot hesitale, or
doubt, that the English tewyen who drew this
actof parliament, mwt hssnft Ind in^ioir the
1
fiof MmmUlerit^ unlaftfml Oaths*
possibility of o«iIm being adimBisttte4» wbich,
m certain drounsluioeay nigbl amount to
bi|^ tTsaaon ; for. they most have had before
lihcm tbe statute 36th of the king, as well as
that of Edward aid.
Having sobmittad to yonr lordshiiM those
obsenratioMy at neihape too great a length
(but in juitice to ue panel at the bar, to the
law of the country, smd in discharge 6f my
duty, I wished to deliver my opinion fully and
ezpttdUyX I hanre no difficulty in saying, that,
upon attending to every thing that hu been
urged with so much ability for the panel, I
Iwve no alternative but to find this inoictment
lelevuntf and remit it to an assize.
There will, no doubt, remain an important
and sacred duly to the juiy to perfonn, and
which they irill discbarge, i hare no doubt, as
Qprigfatly and carefully as we have endeavoured
to peribnn ours. Hiey will have to take the
wbUe case into consMleiation, and make up
their minds upon the oath, as the Court hu
done, and will have to say whether the panel,
if ooBcemed in administering it, is guilty of
the crime laid to his charge. It is possible
the jury may differ from us as to the import of
the oath, but I feel that as a difficulty of no
magnitude in the case. There are many oases
where we are bound to give our opinions to
juries on the subjects upon which they have to
return verdicts ^ and I should be the last man
to wish that thc^ should feel themselves in the
least degree fettered in their judgment by our
opinions. It is my duty, after stating the facts
of a case, to explain my view of the law, and
Irequentlv to pronounce my opinion as to the
import of the facts, after they are disclosed in
evidence. In a late trial for sedition, I was
called upon to state that there was sedition
upon the face of the speech, in that case ; but
I, at the same time, told the jury that they
were to make up their minds upon that point,
and decide for themselves. Suppose the jury
bad found for the panel in that case, should I
have felt any uneasiness.' Being confident
that I had done my own doty, I should have
given them credit for uprightness and integrity
in the discharge of theirs. Having performed
my duty, to the best of my abilitiesy I care
nothing, in any case, for the consequences.
A. IX 18IY*
[U4
*^ The Lord Justice Clerk, and Lords
Commimioneis of Justiciary, having ccm-
sidered the criminal indictment raiswl and
pirsued at the instance of his majesty's
advocate, for his majesty's interest^ against
Andrew M'Kinley» panel, with the infor-
mations given in for the prosecutor and
panel in terms of « the order of Court,
dated the 2dFd day of June last, and be-
fore recorded, and the supplementary in-
formation given in for the said Andrew
if ^KinUy, a]«o before recorded ; they re-
pel the ol^eetions stantd to the relevancy
of *th6*indiatmeBt: fifad the indictment
vdtv ast Id infer the paios of law ipodfied
in the act of parliament libelled on; but
allow the panel to prove all facts and cir-
cfumstanoes that may tend to eaoulpat*
him, or alleviaite his guilt, and remit the
panel with the indictment as found rele-
vant to th^ kaovrledge of an assite.
« D. BoYUi, L P. D." ,
Lord Adoocati.'^'To mmmm is Saturday.
Although I do not anticipate a very long trial;
yet, to avoid unnecessary discussion to morrow,
which might eventually lead to an encroach-
ment upon the next day, I wish to know now
if any ground for fbrther delay is to be stated ;
and what witnesses are to be examined for tha
paiiel.
Mr. GnoR/.— The agent for the panel informs
me that the witnesses are not all come forward.
Lord Juttioe Clerk. — An application was
made to the Court, on the part of the paneL
to know whethec, supposing the retevi^cy of
the lodictment to be sustained, we should pro-
ceed next day with the trial ? and we stated,
that, in that event (as to which, however, we
could anticipate nothing), we should be pr^
pared to proceed.
Lord Admcaie. --^ I am entitled lo have a
list of their witnesses the day before the
Truating, however, to receiving this Jist
the deimces (which have not yet been lodeed)
in the course of the evening; and to &eM
being no discussion on any of these prelimi-
nary points in the morning, I should still beg
leave to suggest that your lordships should not
meet later than nine o'clock.
Lord Justice Clerk, — Gentlemen o^ the jury,
I have to repeat that the Court r^rets ex-
tremely this ^case has been productive of so
much trouble to you. This had been from no
fault of the Court ; and, I trust, yon will not
grudgre giving yourselves a little further trouble
m A case of such importance to the panel and
to the country.
** The Lord Justice Clerk, and Londa
Comm'ssioners of Justiciary, continue the
diet against the panel, and whole other
diets of Court till to morrow morning, at
nine o'clock, in this place ; and ordain all
concerned then to attend, under the pains
of law ; and the panel, in the mean tirne^
to be carried back to the castle of Edin-
burgh.*'
HIGH CbUET OF JUSTICIARY.
July 19, 1817.
present.
Ht Hon. DtM Bo^ Lord Jurtice Clerk.
Lord Hermaad.
Lord GiUies.
Jjovd Fkanlfy.
Lord Re^on,
<(4ULl .^7 GEORGB Ul.
Commtfit ike Oroitm.
Rt. Hon. Akxmider Maannochk^ of Mettdow-
banky His Mijesty's Advocate [afterwards
a lord of Sessioii and Justiciary, with the
title of Lord Meadowbank.]
Jonei WMuhimt Esq. Solicitor-General.
H. Bom Drumnumi, Esq. Advocate-Depute.
Commlfor tkt PmmL
Jokn Clark, Esq.
Geo. Crtautaim, Esq.
IHbof. HWmisofiy Esq.
. Frmick Jejfrw, Esq.
J. F. Gnm<, Esq.
J. A. Murrmfp Esq.
JoHiei Moncritffy Esq.
flimry GsofcdrNy £«i.
Jfubw jnCm/ey was placed at the bar. '
lord Jdvocofe.— Before a jury is impaneled
in this case, I think it right to state to yoar
lordships, Uiat one object which I had in
view in laying this indictment upon the statute
upon which it is founded, has been accom«
pufhed. Your lordships by your decision
yesterday, hate promulgated to the people of
this country, thai the offence with which the
panel is dbarged, is one - of the most aggra-
TOted description, and that the lives of the
gi^tj are forfeited to the law. I trust most
sinoerely» that your lordships, by this judg-
ment, have opposed a barrier against the
eomrolssion or this offence in future, and
lh«reby put a final stop to a crime so utteriy
-mihvenive of the puMic tranquillity.
In this reliance, and considering all the
circumstances of die case, as well as yielding,
I hope not improperly, to the dictates of my
own feeling, I trust that I am doing what will
not meet with the disapprobation of your
lordships, when I state that I mean to restrict
this indictment to infer merely an arbitrary
punishment.
At the time that I do so, I trust I shall be
permitted by your lordships to make a single
observation on some of the pleadings for the
nrisonen, in whidi, I apprehend, 1 have been
brought more penonally forward than is
usual in the ]>leadings of this court I regret
the circumstance, not on .my own account,
because I can receive such insinuations as
they merit, trusting that a conscientious dis-
charge of my duty will suflBciently protect
me against them, however injurious they may
be; but I sincerely regret that my learned
friends on the opposite side of the bar should
have advisedly insinuated that I have been
Juided by ^'an over-heated zeal,'* by **a
esire to take away the life of .the panel upon
undigested notions which I could not define."
And yet these, and many other insinuations
of a tfimilar ■ nature, iiave- been made in the-
broadest manner i^nst me, which, I must be
allowed to think, it would have been in
better taste had my learned iheDds thought
proper to avoid.
In like aanatr, it w^mm watX straiige, that,*
without any o^pect in which their clients can
have an interest (or rather the interest which
they have lies directly the. other wav), and
when by the form of pleading, I had no
means to refiite it, -a proposition has been
maiatained by the learned centlemen, utiertv
unfounded in law, and whidi nevar vras heard
of till it appeared in this information. The
doctrine I allude to is, that the remedies of
the statute 1701 are not competent to a
prisoner incarcerated upon a charge oC
treason. • This doctrine, I say, never was
before maintained. It is utterly unfounded,
and in opposition as well to the terms of the
statute itself, as to the. concurrent testimonies
of all the lawyers both of England and Soot^
land, since the Revolution. For the same
statutes that have suspended the writ of
habeas corpus in matters of treason, have also
suspended the operation of the act 1701, in
the case of persons imprisoned on sioular
charges, and on these alone.
I hope it will not be deemed improper that
I should thus have repelled what I must hold
to be a libel on the law of Scotland, especially
when it seems to be so much the fashion to
traduce it. But I shall trespass no further
than by giving in a minute restricting the
libel.
Mr. Oottsfotcn.— I have just one word to
say, in consequence of the address which we
have now heard. I confess I am totally un-
aware of the allusions in either the verbal or
printed pleadings, with regard to which his
lordship has now addressed the Court. In so
fer as I was concerned, I had no intention to
reflect upon him.
Lord Aioocatt. — ^I do not allude to you,
and I refer chiefly to the printed proceedings.
Mr. Cfwwtwn,'^! believe I may say the
same thing for my learned brethren as for
myself. We viewed the indictment in one
light, and his lordship did in another; but it
never was our intention to oMke personal
imputations upon him.
If there were to be any discussion in this
matter, there are some observations in the
information for the crown which bear hard
upon the counsel for the panel. It is stated
in that information, that one of the prisoner'a
counsel had bestowed a panegyric upon the
association of thpse persons who took the
oath founded upon in the indictment,— which is
an entire mistake and misrepresentation. .
With regard to whether the act 1701 applies
to oases of treason, that has not been argued
in either the written or verbal pleadings. ' Per*
haps a doubt may have been thrown out oa
the subject, and all that I. can say is, that
none of the prisoner's counsel have made up
their minds one way or another with regard to
it, nor do I know that any judgment has ever
been pronounced ^ upon the point. • Th^
prisoner has. perhaps. aktady run his letters.
a&n
Jvt Admbtkkiiag mte^l <hMt.
%. D. 1817.
IM8
I am sofTf if woj expranon hat been madr
vie of^ that could gnm di^eaaure to the lord
.advocate. No penonal impntatioos wbateter
were inleiided against hiai.
Bir. GroNi.— I rather think I ana called
upon, and in a manner Tery unnsnal, to make
a few obaeryations ; and it ia by dint of
recollection of two words whidi the lord
advocate employed, that I think it is the last
paragraph or the second information for the
prisoner, which waa written by me, that has
-excited his lordship's animadversions. I do
not ■ know that I am very strictly in order
before yon at present ; all I can say iSy that
this paragrai^ runs in these words : ^ Accord-
ing to the construction which the prosecutor
would put on the intention of the legislature
in passing the statute on which he has laid the
present indictment, he would impute to the
legislature this inconceivable injustice and
a^rdity, that on the one hand the highest
and most dangerous species of treason,
involving a meutated attack on the life of
the sovereign^ sanctioned by the solemnity o£an
oath, and extendingas is alleged in this case,to a
conspiracy of hundreds or thousands of
perMus, threatening, as is here also alleged,
10-. effect the subversion • of the establi&ed
government, laws, and constitution of this
kingdom, by means which involve the whole
nation in bloodshed and in open war, may be
tried as arfelonyy punishable only with transpor-
tation ; and the mdictment, being once . pre-
ferred, whether by a grand jury in England,
or the public prosecutor in Scotland, no
remedy remains bat the offenders must be
for ever discharged by this means^ from all
farther consequences of their guilt. And, on
4he other lumdy by the contrivance of the
ofictrs of the crown, the subjects of thifi
.eonntry may be brought to trial, and placed
in haiafd of their lives on a state prosecutipn,
with the whole weight and influenoeof govem-
Boent to .oppose them. The overheated teal
of its officers exoited, perhaps their interest
and reputation at stake on the issue, as well
as the passions of the factious, the terrors of
the timid**— The passage being written in
the heat of the last paragraph, the terms,
perhaps, are not so eloquent as they are
muBerons. It goes on,— 'Mhe just indigna-
tion of the wefi-affected against crimes id-
Tolvins; the common safety, overpowering the
natural disposition to clemency and deliber-
ation, all combining to deprive the accused
of the security which, in ordinary cases, they
posseas for a feir and impartial trial, while
they are, at the same time, stripped of the
sai^uaid which it has been the ceaseless
endeavour of the law of England, from the
•Bioot aneient times, even in the. midst of
tytanny and disorder, to provide for ^the
•pvotection of the subject against that oppresi-
-sion and thai danger. to which it has always
.felt and acknowleged him to.be in. thes^
idrcnnili^ices . exposed- . The prisoner will
oikly add, that to ptitsMh a eoHstmcHioD upon
these acts of parlianent would not be. to
expound the Imts, but to libel those who
made them. At yonr lordships* hands he; is
certain there is no danger of their reoeiviag
such a construction, eq^ly disposed as yon
feel, at once to protect the sulfiect frooi
oppression, and to vindicate the necessaiy
iostice of the country .'' The lord advocate
hints that he individually is accused of over-
heated zeal, and that tlie paragraph is directed
against his lordship. I beg to assure the
learned lord that no such view occurred to me,
and that what I stated I intended as a general
proposition, without particidar application to
any individual.
' Lord Advocate, — I am quite satisfied, in so
far as I am personally concerned, and I am
exceedingly glad that I mentioned what oc-
enrred to me noon the subject.
- LordJuttktCUrk. — I am pleased to see the
introduction of right understanding and har-
mony, which I trust will be iiniatetru{iled
throughout the trial.
The following minute was then read : —
^His majesty's advocate. represenWd
that one of the objects which he had* in
view in laying the present indictment for
a capital punishment having now been
accomplished by the judgment of the
. Court sustaining the relevancy, he now
restricted, and hereby restricts the in-
dictment and the wns of law to an ar-
bitrary punishment.^
: (Signed) . Alxx. MacowoeviE.
The following persons were then nai^ed^as
Jurymen:
Jkmd Qro^y of Snipe.
Jame$ Mutter, former, Longstde.
David Thomiony former. Wester Cowden.
John Andmonf of Whitburgh.
Jamet WiimHy former; Bolton.
WiUiam WUhe, of Magdalens.
John ThonuoOf fanner, laneravon.
James M^Kenzie, goldsmith, Edinburgh.
Robert Green, watch-maker there.
Pa^k Main, painter there.
Thomat Edmonstone, ironmonger there.
Archibald M'DawaU, merchant in Leith.
James Ogilvie, wine merchant there.
Robert Strachan, merchant there.
Robert BnaUon, merchant there.
• Lord AdoooBte* — ^The witnesses who are ^e*
signed as prisoners in the Castle of Edinburgh,
were oonnned separately, and I directed that
when brought down they should. be kept in
separate apartments.
Lord Justice Cterk.-^Tht rest of th^ gentle-
men who had been summoned as jurymen will
consider themselves as discharged, and the
Court has to express its regret that they have
.been put to so much trouble, and probably
expense, in consequence of their attendance
Biff] 57 G£ORGE m.
fcr thai trud. Tim vontx be awart ihu ihk
Ad not origpnat* mm any telt of «in ; and
tilt dvlf fbr wUch thay wara tummonad baing
• pMblio and a« imporum oaa, and the dalay
tet hai takan |daea anavoidable, I tratt that
iIm^ wil tka less ragrel tke ineonrawaaaa
whidi tiMy hxv aufi^rad.
fdi, Jeffrey. — A3 the persons we may find
it necessary to adduce at evidence on the part
of the prisoner include those cited on the part
of the crown^ and as it has been impossible
for us to get access in order to cite those who
are in custody^ the lord advocate will not ob-
ject that we should cite them when they come
mto Court*
Lprd ilrfrwirrfe.-- Certainly not ; I can have
DO ofcjections.
Mt.JMty. — ^I observe that my learned
frtendy Mr. HamiltoOy and others who are
eked at witnesses for the pubKc presaeutor^
are in the Court. I should object to their
lamatniDg in Court, The official gentlemen
are, of course, above all suspicion ; but I wish
th^ should not be present till they are ex-
ammed. Let them withdraw from Court, and
aueh of lliem as are cited for us will leare
word where they may be found.
C0ttri.-^They maygo into the Robing-room.
Mr. Jeffrey, — ^I observe Mr. Salmond pre-
sent, who was cited some time ago as a
witness on tbe part of the prisoner; and I
state generally, that eireumstances may occur
in the course of the trial which may render it
iry for OS lo eaamiue that gentleman.
ndri» M^'Kimhy
and these may appear to the Court of a nature
wbieh ffligbt render it impsoper that Mr.
Salmond mould have been present. Ha is not
a Crown agent ; he is in an olScial siloation
at Glasgow. We could not pravant Jlilr. War-
rendar, perhaps, from being present throughout
the trial ; but we have it in our ppwer tp say
to our witness, Mr. Salmond, who belongs
rather to the other party, that he shsdl not
bola intercourse with the prosecutor.
Lord Jdvocate.-^! beg to state, that Mr.
Salmond is crown ag^nt in this prosecution.
I have received great benefit from Mr. War-
render's assistance in this, as I do in every
case ; but the fact is, that the person who has
conducted the present proceedings is' Mr.
Salmond, who is, in law, one of tbe officers of
the crown in the inferior Court. He has taken
tke manageoMnt of these casca firom the be-
ginning; and you might u w^l ditect any
other person oondueting thr trial on the part
of ^ crown to withdraw as tkat geatlensan.
I have no objections that he be examined 1^
the other party; but as he has been employed
as sgent,.and is now acting as agent in this
trial, I object, therefore, to bis being excluded
'firom Court.
LoriJvMtkx Clerk**^ln a case of fliis parti-
cular description, v^here tbe prisoner's counsel
Cseo
states, that certain aridenca, thai nay be of
advantage to tiM panel, saay be expected from
this proeurato>4bcal el Glasgaw,Mr>8alaBomi,
the panel has a sight to insist he shook! ka
excluded if he thinks his presence would be
disadvantageous to kioa. Mr. Waisender is
in a different ait«alio»-**ka could say, kers I
am in my place, «nd you nri^t aa well remove
any members of the Court as aqrseif.
. Lord Bemumd. — Could Mr. Salmond be ex-
amined now f
Mr. Jeffrey, — ^Ha is eited as a witness for
the prisoner, and can only be enamioed when
the prisoner comes to examine ^vritnesses in
defence.
Lord Adw>eate»^'NLt. Warrender l^ never
been recognised by the Court as Crown agent.
Your lordship's predecessors have uniformly
refused to acknowledge any such person. He
is no public officer. The procurator-fiscal is
a crown officer.
Lord Jtutice Clerk, — Mr. Warrender is per-
foctly well known to be crown agent.
♦
Lord Gi^.— The rule is general, and there
can be no exceptions.
Lord Advoctite.^l submit to the Court, thai
there is, at this moment, nodding offi»red to be
S roved by the prisoner's counsel hf the evi-
enee of Mr. Salmond, to lead the Court to
deprive me of his services. There is n^^ing
but a broad averment that his evidence may
perhaps be necessary. What they propose is
oeyond what has been done in any ease ; and,
at all events, they should state what they mean
to prove by his evidence.
Lord JmHee CMb.-^They s«r he is a neea«-
saiy witness for the defonce. I tiink it proper
to remark, thai Mr. Saknood, as pioenraioiw
fiscal at Glasgow, would he considarsd as
Crown agent at the Cireoits there; but, Mr.
Warrender is Crown agent keie^ and not Mr.
Salmond.— Call tbe witnesses.
Irond Jdvoc0te. — As the witnesses hare not
yet arrived from the Castle, I suppose there
will be no objection to t)ie declarations of the
panel being now read.
Csttrf.— There is no objection to diis beings
done*
Mr. Drummottd, — Call Mr. Hamilton. We
shall first prore the declarations oC the prisoner
emitted before the sheriiTof Lanarkshire.
Mr. Jeffr^, — In order to save the time of
the Court, we admit the dedaratioos.
Ccurt, — Give in a aoinnte to that effect.
Lord Bermand. — I sbonld wish to oonsidefe'
a little more tk^ okjeotion as lo Mr. Salmond
beinff present in Court. With consent of th^.
panel he might remain in Court. • It is ad^
matted, that Mr. Warrender, as Crown agent,
could not be inclosed. HoWy Mr. SaiffloM
Mil
for Admnisierbtg wdao^ Oaths,
A. D. 1817.
[soft
acts m Crow* agfint on tlds o^casioii ; and I
doabt whether he can be inclosed.
1 should be son^ to do any thing against
the panel; but let his coiinsel state more ex-
plicitly their reasons for wishing Mr. Salmond
to be exdnded. I suppose the panel as an
dgent here; H the crown oonwel were to sav
lie ravsC be ineloeed (by which the panels
defence might be prerented hom being made
ont), oould that be listened to f
Lord GUUa,-^! thought the tnatter bad been
disjposed of.
Lord Jmtm €lerfc.«-When a witness is cited
Ibr botk puraner and ddendcty he is some-
times allowed to be examined for the defender
immediately after his examination for the pur-
suer. And the qnestioa here is, Can Mr.
Salmond be now examined for the panel f
Mr. Ji^ey.-^Without prejudicing our de-
fence most materially^ we could not examine
Mr. Salmond now. The necessity we may be
under of examining him ^ all is but contin-'
l^ent, and depends on a certain part of the
propfy if broQgtkt out on th^ part of the Crown.'
- Lord FiimSUy, — If the ootmsel for tfie panel
had consented, it would have been very well
to havtf allowed Mr. Salmond to vemain in
Court ; but, as Mr. Jefltoy says, this might be
prejndiciid to tii0 defence, it cannot Im ad-
nitted.
Mr. Jeffi'ey gave in the following minute : —
« The eotinsel for -the panel admits thAt
the declaratioos of the panel libelled on,
weie emitted by him vohintarily and
fraely, of the respective dates diey bear,
and that the panel wis then* sober and in
his eo«Md scsQses/'
The following Declaratiops were then read
by itie Clerk of Court :
FIRST DECLARATION
or
AHDRSW M'KIKLBY.
At OWsgow, the 28th day of Februarjr* 1817
years — Ip presence of Robert Hamilton,
Esq. Advocate, Sheriif-cjcpute of Lanark-
shire ; and in the petition apd complaint
S resented by, and at the instance of,
reorge Salmond, Writer in Glasgow,
Procurator-nscal of the Lower Ward of
' ^Lanarkshire for the public interest,
Corapaaved Andrew M^Kinley, present
prisoner in the tolbooth of Glasgow, who
being jfudidally euunined • and interro^
• gated, declares, That he is a native ol
Ireland ; is from, the county of Aimagh ;
" ^mamjimv to this eonntry in the year
1709; was bred, aad has since followed
•floriha trade of a weaves ; is married ;
lia» seven ohildien, asd his wile is near
.. • *liet delitfaijr of aaother ; That the de-
VOL. XXXIII.
clarant snbeerlbed the Calton refonn peti-
tion> bttt the dechirant cannot say what
became of that petHio^, or whether or not
there was a committee* appointed to for-
ward it: That the dedasani has been for
the last foortaen years n pifvate in the
volunteers and local. lAiKlis in thas place»
and he was always very regular on duty .
Declares that it nefrer was propoaed to
htm what should be done in case of par-
liament not grantine Ae prayer of the re-
form petition ; andhe never was connect*
ed with, or beard mf: any association or
brothefffaood, who were to take me«is for '
obtaining the desire of the petition by
moral or physical forte ; no? of oaths of
secrecy being taken under the punish-
ment of death, not to reveal the proceed-
ings of snoh associations, or inform on
the members thereof, either individually
or collectively: That he never had any
copy of the Irish rebel oath, and hodoes
not know its terms : Denies that he was
ever at any meeting in Niel Munn's,
Ingram-street, or in James Robertson's,
in the Oallowgate ; Deelases that he does
not particularly seeolleet where he was on
the night of Saturday hist was eif^ days,
but he thinks he was in Arthar Armour's,
taylor in Bridgegate-street, and different
Ather places, looking for a chat to one of
his children, but he cannot be certain that
this was the case: That he cannot say
positively whether he saw that night John
Buchanan, Andrew Sommerville, James
Robertson, Hugh Dickson, Teter Gibson,
James Hood, James Finlayson, or Hugh
Cochran, who were taken up with him on
Saturday last in Hunter^i, in the Old
Wynd of Glasgow : That oq the last Sa-
tusday evening, the declarant celled at.
Honier's house, and told the mistrsss that
he snmted a mom, and he and John
47ampbell who was with him^ were shown
into one ; but as the deolarant's foet were
wet^ she seon afterwards showed them
into anoUier o«e, whefe there wu a fire ;
That this miglit be about six o'eloek, and
tiiey were soon after joined by some
others who Mrs. Hunter showed into the
room, but what they wanted the declarant
cannot say, for he left the room soon
after he went in, and went away in quest
of the coat for his boy, and he did not re-
tarn till about ten minutes before the
Sheriff and party came into Huntei's, and
apprehended thara all : That the declarant
knows of no other sftotive which oould in-
duce tliese people to have nMt at Hitnter's,
than that of providing ftxnds- for enabling
them to carry on the case relafelve to the
poor's rates, or cause M'Innes against the
barony Kirk-session at Glasgow : Denies
that -he was at Canmnnnock on any occa-
• sion lately, and especially that he was
.there witlkH r. James Finlay son , jun ior, and
had a conversation with David Dryburghi
2 0
sea]
57 GSORGE III.
BfAmdf^ M^Kmky
1:064
the^bkooliiMilerintbatpiace: Thtfwhea
he was appfoheoded in Huniir's as above^
dficiarad tOy he called himself Andrew
Brothentone ; hui this was done fiem no
ill inienty and meielv to prevent, in case
of his being detained^ the landlord of his
house, to whom he owes the last three
half years' rent, attaofaing his furniture,
and exposing his fninil^t ; ' but though he
heard Peter Gibson, another who was
thto taken up, call hilnself John M'Kinley,
yet he is not acouainled with his motives
for doing so : That tfae'dedarant nevef
was at Cambuslang, end he does not
know rightly where that plaee is. In wit-
ness whereof, Iec*
(Signed) Avoebw llf
R. Hamiltom. «
iMavxiisw Bunys, witness. «
Jajus TaeiisoK^ witness*
i»E€OND D£CLAAATION
OF
ATfDREW M'KINLEY.
At Gloigauf, the Ath JIfordk, 1817,
Compeared Andrew M'Rinley, present
prisoner in the Tcdbooth of Glasgow, who,
being enained and interrogated, and his
dtekuration of the 28th ult being read
over to'him. Declares and admits, that
he was preseot at the several meet-
ings held in Niel Mann's, in the beginning
of the year ; in Fyfe's^ Wilson^treet, on
two occasions, some time lafterwards, and
in Robertson's, Gallowgate^treet, on Sa-
twday night, Uie ISth ult. That he was
also present at a meeting which took place
in one JLeggat*s, corner of Centrenitreel,
Tradeston, on the first day of the year.
That die objects of these several meetings
he cannot rightly describe, a desultory
cottvenation having generally taken place,
partly about the refonn petition, and
partly abont the poor's rates. That his
reason for denying, on his former exami-
nation, that he attended these meetinn
was, that he was averse to bring the
keepers of these houses into trouble, or
expese diem so as tbey.might be deprived
f|f their licence. That he knows two or
three of the people whose names- are sub-
scribed to the |Miper which is marked as
relative hereto, vis« James Turner, to-
bacconist,. Aleicander Kennedy, diange-
keeper, Bogie, John Ogilvie, Robert Kerr,
manafiMtnier, and Alexander Ridimond :
Ibat he knows these people, some of
them merely as members of the reform
committee : That he also knows Lang Uie
printer, having called on him about hand-
biUs connect^ vrithahe Calton reform
peUtion; and .with this addition, he ad-
heres to his fonner deelaratiook
(Signed) Asdeew M^Rimlet.
-< Oav. HaiiiLTov.
Joanra Rsin, witness.
John Leslie, witaess,
(THIRD DECLARATION
OF
ANBRBW M«RI1IL£Y.
At Gkujgaw, the 5th Marck^i^\7,
Compeafed Andrew M^Kinleyr present
prisoner in the Tolboolh at.Olae9Q>Wf who,
being examin(Mi and inteivogatnd, and his
deUntions emitted on .the 28Ui of Feb.
last, and yesterday, being read over to
him, he adheres thereto, with this varia-
tion, that he was at Carmunnock with
James fidiayson, abont atetnight ago,
and was with Daxrid Dryburgh in his own
house there : Declares,' ^hat he knew no-
thing of Dryburgh before, and tliat Fin-
layson took him there, having raised him
out of his bed, in Calton, that morning on
purpose t Declares, that the first time he
saw Finlavson, was either in' Roberta
sonS, or the Gallowgate : Hiat his first
gurticidar acquaintance of him, was at
Robertson's, where they met about the
barony process*; and rinlayson saiif at
that meeting, that he thought that a jost
canse, and wished vrell to it; and the de-
clarant does not know what else could
have brought Finlayson to that- meeting ;
and the purpose of the meeting vfas to
consider now they might raise funds lo
carry on the process: Declares, .that he
did not use the name of James JUack,
nor did any one else, to his know-
ledge, to obtain admission to that meet-
ing : Declares that there was no discus-
sion at that meetingr or at Hunter's,
about annual parliamemts and universal
sufirage. Interrogated, Dedaies^ that he
did not know for what purpose Finlayson
wished, to go out to Carmimnock, nor why
he wished the deaarant to go with hijn :
Declares, that be thought his health would
be beoer of the air, and that he had some
oonversation with Dryborgb about woHl,
which was also an object he had for going
there : Declares, that he. had no conversa-
tion with Dryburgh about initiating peo-
ple into any secret association, nor had
Finlayson to his knowledge: Dedarasy
that besides the meetings iliove-mention-
ed at Hunter's and Robertson's, he was
present at another in Robertson's, and
one in Munn's, as fbrmeriy mentioned :
Declares,, that the object of all those
meetings was the same ; and it was the
declarant's opinion that trade would h&ve
been better, if they conld have sncoeeded
in thai process,:. as the poor's-rates would
make tne aentlemen: exert themselves :
Declares, Siat any- person might come
into those meetiims who had an interest
in that nrocess : ^That the meetings were
net publicly called, as they could not get
the use t>f the bell, bat every one warned
another : That the greatest nnmher pre-
sent never exceeded twen^, and that he
fi65l
Jkxr AdmhrUkrh^ wAmfitl (Mhi.
A.T>. 1817.
lias Been the b^ cklllhe people for tUch
a purpose, and not a dozen attend : That
he can give no reason why so much
greater a nnmber 'were collected the ^blj
3iey vent to Dr. Boms frith a petition.
Interrogated if he fferoembers, if M*Lach-
lane, Campbell, Dickson, Hood, Bu-
chanan, James Robertson, and Peter
Otbson, and SommerriHe, were present
at some of those meetings. Declarer, that
he does; and declares posHiTely, that
there was no other bnshaess-at any of
those meetings, except what is abdre-
mentioTied, and nothing secret of any de-
«cription. In witness whereof; fcc.
(Signed) Andexw WKivLvr,
Hugh Kxrh,
FOURTH DECLARATION
OF
ANDREW M'KINLEY.
< JfGto^^w, tlMMahA,t817,
In presence of 'Robert Hamilton, Esq.,
Sheriff-depute of Lanarkshire, compeared
Andrew M'Rinley, present prisoner in
the tolbooth of Glasgow, whose dedarar
tions emitted on the 28tfa ult., 4th -and
5th current, being read over to litm, he
adheres thereto, and being further in*
4errogated, declares, that he is acquainted
^rith a Mr. Kerr, a manufacturer, whose
place of business used to be in GibsonV
aCreet, in Gallowgate : That Robert Paul
and John M^Lacblan, sometime ago, told
the declarant one day, they were looking
for Mr, Kerr to ask him for money to as-
sist in carrying on the barony session
plea, but whether they found him, or got
money ffbm htm, the declarant cannot
tell: That in Leggat's, on 1st January
last, there were present the declarant,
fiagh Dickson, Peter OihsoD, James
M'Ewen, John M'LachUm, William Ed-
•gar, and a man from Long Goran, whose
name he does not recollect : That a paper
which the declarant gave to Edgar was
read over to the meeting, but disapproved
of: Thai the tenor of what the declarant
ao gave Edgar was in substance, that the
persons subscribing should bind them-
selves to keep it a secret among them-
selves. Whereupon the Sheriff-ezaminator
•warned the decuurant, as his duty, he said^
directed him, that the declanfot was not
«rged to disclose any circumstances which
B%bt alfect him in his d^ence, to the
^tff serious cnmiasd charge vrhi^li was
brought against him ; and he, therefore,
left it entirely to -his own diseretion to
meak forther out or not as he thought fit.
Whereupon the declarant said, that he
was Mcb alfedied by the distress that his
fiiiilily was in, and he hoped that mercy
would be shown him and them, and that
he would then state every particular he
WM acquaiated w>ih« 0ql the sheriff
C5d6
freely and explicitly sfait^ to him, that he
could give him no assurance of any kind
whatever, and that the declarant must
just, therefore, conduct himself ks he had
already pointed out. The declanbit then
declared, that he was afraid he had been
led into measures which were highly wrong
and illegal, and ihki he never would have
thought of any thing of the kind,'had they
net been broached to him by John
M'Lachlan : That John Camnbell,^ be
thinks, informed him, that Mr.^err^bove
deohtred to knew of the secret association
that was set on foot: That he was to
assist at, and do what he could in gMng or
getting money :• That he heard otte John«
stone, a weaver in Bridgeton,ina meeting
which took place in'Fffo's, WilsonHrtieet,
say> that therevrat a* ohib of honour, of
gentlemen, or something of that kind,
whidi was existing'in Glasgow, who were
friendly to' their ^measures, and that this
body was numerous, and had existed for
nine months ; bu tupon recollection, de-
clares, that he cannot say whether the word
club, was mentioned or not That some
names of such persons nny have been
mentianed^ but he does not now reoollect
any of them*: That at a aieetifig at Niel
Munn's upon the 4th of January^
JSI'Dowal Peat and James M^Bw«n pro^
posed and said, that they would so out
next day, being Sunday, to David Dry-
burgh, schoolmaster at Caimunnock, and
initiate him into the matter, and M'Ewen
said he was sure he was a Oneod, and >that
he had been long aoquainlad with him.
And at the next meeting which was held
at itobeitsen's -upon the Itth, James
M'Ewen and Peat reported to the meeting
that they had initiated Dryburght De-
dams, that upon a Wednesday, about four
or five weeks ago, as he thinks upon the
ISth of February, James fiidaysoa and lie
went up to Caimumuwk before broak^t
to David Dryburgh's. That this was the
first time he had seen Dryburgh, aiid they
found him in bed, but he got \k]f and got
breakfost for them, and Uie said David
Diybuirgh he yesterday saw and recog-
nised in this room. That he immediately
found Dryburgh to be an initiated man,
and Dryburgh shewed him the copy of the
^ath of secrecy, or obligation of the
initiated, which had been left with him by
M'Ewen and Peat, with their names sub-
scribed, and the places where Drvburgh
would find them. That the object of
Finlayson and him in going to Dryburgh,
was to learn what progress he had made
in the matter of initiating, and Drybtirgh
told him that he had given the oath of
secrecy to two ; and he wlded, that all the
Carmunnock people vrere friendly, and
that it was to no purpose to petition par-
. liament. That when Frnlayson and h%
went to Carmunnock, they fir»i asked" Dry.
507] 57 GEORGE ill.
Tml^fAndrmM'Kk
burgh if he had got ft letlor frofti lohn
Buchanan^ the pefsoB now a prisoner in
Uie Tolboolh of GJasgow^ and Diyburgh
hafing said that he had got sodi a letter,
they theieupoii begaa to eommiuiicate
tipoB the bttsfaMSB they had eome upon.
Toat he has spoken to Robert Kerr above
declared to in Younf*8 beamitig-shop,
where he saw him upon some business
abou^ webs, and he would know him if he
saw him agaiA : Dedaves, that be knows
James M^Tev^ who has his school-room
in New'-streety Caltoa. That the said
James M^Tear, he knews, gave the use of
his school«ffoom for the purpose of potting
together the petition for reform from the
CaitQDy prevKMis to its being sent away,
and he presumes that M'Tear was afdend
to that measure^ by his having so given
the use of bis room. • That it was talked
of, among them» that they would certainly
get money from some of these honourable
men, as they were called, in and about
Glasgow, who were said to be so friendly
to them; but he cannot say that any
promise of money was actually made, nor
can he fondescend upon the names of
any of these. That at the last meeting at
Robertson's Campbell, who used to be
saying that he would get money, stated,
tiiat he had had a communication with
some of the honourable persons above-
mentioDedi but that none of them would
come fiNrward with their assistanoe but
one, and though ha did not mention his
i«une, the declarant cot^tured that it was
Mr. Kerr that he alhided to. That John-
eton in Bridgeton, above dedaied to, he
believes is brother to the Johnston who
was tried and imprisoned for the weavers'
combination. In witness. Ice.
(Signed) Axnasw M^Kmuir.
R. Hamiltov.
JeeuPB Rbib, witaem.
Mavtsew Bimns, witness.
FIFTH DECLARATION
or
ANDREW MCKINLEY.
. At EditUfurghitSth March, 1817.
In presence of the sheriff-substitute of
Edinburghshire, compeared Andrew
M'Kinley, present prisoner in the Castle
of Edinburgh* and the declaxalion emitted
by him beiore the sberiff^epute of La-
narkshire, at Glasgow, on the 11th day of
March current, being read over to him,
he declares that said declaration contains
the truth, with this exception, that he is
certain of some things which in that de-
claration he only said he supposed. De-
clares, that he knows that Mr. Kerr
promised to get money, or to use his en-
deavours to get money, in the declarant's
presence, on the occaiiion meniioned in
>aid declaratioiL That Campbelt said it
would take eight or ten pounds, and ICerr
said he would endeavour to get that sum.
Declares, that-after going to Hunter's on
the night they were appr tended, the de«
daranty Finlayaon, and Campbell, went^
out of the maettng to Mr. Jkerr's ware-
house. That the declarant had never
been there before, and he and Finlayson
waited a considerable time at the bottom
of the stair, while Campbell went up and
talked to him. That Campbell then came
down for them, and th^ all weiU up to-
gether, and then the conversation alK>ve-
mentioned passed about the eight o» ten
pounds. iW Ken spohe about a ]»aper
which he declined shewing at that time ;
but said, that he would allow Campbell
to come in upon the Tuesday following,
and take a copy of it. That the declarant
understood from what pa^s^y that the
paper was some sort ot constitution, or
rules for the formation of a dub or sodety .
Dedaresy that this paper was to be for the
use of the same people who met at Hunter's
with the dedaxant; and Mr. Kerr said
that he had this constitation at the time
they were in his warehouse. Dedares,
that John Campbell told the declarant,
and Hugh Dickson also told^him, th^t
Mr. Kerr was in the knowledge of their
meetings. That Campbell asked him if
he would come that night, which he
declined upon that occasion, saying^ he
would give them all the instmotions in his
power, but, being a maa in busiaess, it
might hurt him if he attended mectiDgs.
Dedaresi that Mr. kerr eertainlv must
have known the cath that was taken by
the people that attended at Hunter's.
Declares, that Campbell wad Diduon
told the declarant that Kerr had been
iuiiiaied, and certainly they wopld not
have gone to him for moosy if he kid not
Dedares^ that a fortnii^t before tiia, at
one of the meetings at Robertaon'9» urtmv
there was a conveiaation about aUownooea
to delegates for going toCanaaniiocfc and
Paisley, three shillings mid iwopeiiet was
allowed to M'Dowd Peat, and M<£wen,
for going to Carmunnook to initiate Dry-
burgh» but there was a difference of oninion
about an^ allowance for Campbett and
John Buchanan for going lo Paisl^, and
Campbell declined taking any Hon^ or
going to Mr. M' Arthur to obtHQ five
pounds, which CampbeU said he was to
give him a bill for the loan o^ as his going
there might be changeable to the meeting.
Deolares» that he believes ^e m&oay
wotthi have been got fiNm Mr. Kaif on
the Satorday foUpwing their apyrahanaiop.
Interrogated! dechues, that he never hieard
any thing about arms Ifom imy ponoa
whatever, except James Robertson, sairiog*
that he had heard that there ware eome
arms somewhere, which sMue pemons had
been keeping mm tht ymx 1793, but
for Admkild€rmg.mMta9jfktOUhs.
oOOS
B«lfeTlafMi wr«r ■nmiiwiBlHtea^nw of
mny penoa or pkie»| 9mA tkt dedmnt
floei Bo4 b«ii8V« th«t 1m kooirft of any-
partioikur plao8| uid coosidefod whai b»
aM^tobeanemiuBMNtf* Deototesylbal
1m does not knoiw the aamM of any of tb^
pemooa refeiMd to in the Mh page of #h
foaer deolamtioa above-BAentioaad^ and
doet not know who can tell Ihe aa«ei^
udIbm it bo Aleaandor Riohnrnd. D»*
Clares, tint Campbell told the dodbiaai
that Campbell and Buchanan won to
attend the meetingsy but that tbegr father
wisbod that Buchanan shonki not be pio*
sent, aa they did not consider bini slrndy
ononili. Declares^ that he never saw
Edgar, eaeept at the meetiag at Leggat^
Ihai be knew of, and deelaies that IMgar
was aot present at .tuijr of tbe other
meetings when the declarant was present)
«nd all this he dedaras to be tsatb. In
witness, fcc
(Signed) AiinaBw M^Kwlbv.
Jambs WiLeon.
Ab€«b. Scott.
"MiT.'Dnanmond. — Maccr, call John Cfimp-
bell.
i&;D. itm
[tmt
Mr. «KB^iey.-^Tbi8 is one of tbe wtin
who is desefibed in the indictiMnt by no
other designation than as present prtsoner in
the ea^e of Edinburgh; and we think it
nfjtii to state to the oourt, that thia is not a
desigaation sufficient for the information of
tbe priBoner, and |hat circumstances have
concnned with the &ct of his being a pri«
scmer tbere, wfaM ealitte ns to object to his
being received as a witness at all. Tbe tet
isy and we ean estabiisb it by evideneey Ibal'
Injiiinft seeainad only das intimatiQii el the
condition or quality of tbe peieon wtmtA upon i
ae a witoesa, we took sMpe te Mbrm oar-
eelree of Ana iadrridnai penon^ vad to'
nabe tbe ether iieeeeaaiy sn^oMes, wiA a
vmiw to wbscb, tbe law Ws ptroteded that a
Ust aball 1» fhren to the ptiioner of tbe wit-
MC^wi to be addneed against him at Us tnal ; <
bntweweroobAnictad eniwely in tbe pnose-
cntien of Aeee ini|uiiMB, and wete paeveated
fiomTMieiasng anjsortof benefit or advin-i
uge from tlust l»t of witnesses as to tbis
pBvsoB* We are retdy to instnict, that this
person was net ia that enstody in which per- <
sons addneed as witnesses in thla court, and
designed as pwisougis, e»e usuaHy fsund. We
coold-on^ get sooese to this witness by trpply*
iog to nM&tary authority; and, in nbsanoe of
tbeyreenwxrf tbe castle, "we were veferrad to
tbe K»it4naj<*<; «ad on appliOMion to hbn, we
were ottmis Vot pereeoptorily told, that be
taadteeecved otdets to aAnittKA>ody to the
priaenttr tuntess by pefeaisfion of the <!rown
agent* Aocordingly, ihe dgent for tbe prt-
aooet^ nfter rsceiting this answer, -made a
legttlar aoplieation to tbe crown ag^at, and
also> to ike pii|i>lic pnostciitor, bis mi^esty's
adboaa^; Silting ftiBtktKe ibela tiMck I ba'?e
already slatedy tbaitbis pesson waa among the
list of witnesass designed as priaawem in tfie
caaHe of £dinbnigb| tbat application had
been mfede isr ntceee to the witnesses so
deagned^ in order to learn who tbey were,
and lo pttt sncb-qnestiQnn as law allowa to be
Ct to wiiaeseos, and ' tbat appiieation had
en made to tbe iert nsiyor^ who retnoMd
the answer winch I have joat mentioned. To
thia appbcalion an answer was returned,
stating^ that, in tbe CMrcumsttneas of the case^
the lend advooale relaaed to nire access to* the
prisoneia in the flaolie» and declined giriag
amhoBtjr to tbe agedt for tbe pnaoncr at tbe
bar, seeing the witnesses aaentloned in tb« list
seiTOd upon the penel*
TUs is tbe shape of the ease. Weare-now
brangbl to your har b^ the public prsseontor,
'9^ prodaees against lu a witness, as to
wbesr we have not tbe benefits intended na by^
tbe iawv wfaieb requires a list of witnesseo to
be serred f and ■although the fact is, tbat this .
penon'a nnme dons sttnd in thv ^t served
upon ns» yet, to- all iatents and> parposes^ the
case is the sasaa as if an indiridttal^ of whose •
ntme we had ns^er beardi were to be ok- •
aauoed against ue;
In diis court, whenr sncb eubetaotial and
important iiitet»sls axe cosMemed, if •• the
serriag of a list is accompanied with wch
acts as prevent us from getting any benefit
from it. It is the same thsag as if tbe list had
not been served at all ; aad as itis not a neie
matter of fi»rm that a list should be served
upon a prisoner, but is intended to enable
him to prepare for his defence^ so, whea the *
public proaeentor holds lyot a list, and (hen
interrupts all .the advanta^tf that coohi be
derived from il, tiiat onst be a bar to tbe
eaaaainadon of tbe witneeees.
What ie die purpose wUeb the law ten*
tompUtsa ia providing that a pwaonts; ehafged
tridi acrime^ shall have a list aafoed vpenmm
of tbe vritnesses who are te be addweed
agmnst bim at bis trial ? fflisl, tbmbe should
satisfy himself who the witnesses are. Hmtc
may h9 filky peesous of Uife saaae name ; and
it is n Andt in tbe list itseti; if it do net
contain such a desciiptjron of the wtlnessas as
to 1st «s discover wtw tbe indiwdoal is. 1^
in point of fact, the description has been so
dencient as not to enable tbe prisoner
to discover who tbe witnesfos are, it is n
suiBoient objeoden to their being euanined ns
witnesses. Now, this witutis was sbat up in
tlie casile of Bdinbuigb, and vpon making
apf licatien to the eivil and nwltaify poweie «
we were dented access to bim. Yon have
found that a dMcription of m Meoo as resi**
ding in a certain itieet in Glasgow is not
enoegh ; or of a person as following a par-
ticntor profession in Hhe town; and is it
sufficient then to say of a witness, tbat bo ' is •
a prftponer in tbe castle of Edinburgh ? It is
not a snilcient speeificsUon^t hi only tbe
beginning of pne, Wbat fuvpest did it aerw
571] ^OBOiEaEIlL
t0 tdl «s M was &B the cufl* of Sdiabiufhy
if hk was not to be eshifaited to Hm priaonerl
The pronaitor prevenlad us fifom iaeotifyiog
tlie witness. How can we know who the wit-
ness is ftom eny thing yet told vs ? He is a
man shut up ill asealed Msket to whom we etn
bant no aocessl He iestillaneggintheshell|
and is not to eome out until the proper proeess
of incubation be gone thioogh b^ his maiesty's
advocate. The pubKe prosecutor has been
hatehiog this eridence in the castle of £din»
bur^^ and it is not yet disclosed^ If we go to
the castle, and approach the sentinels- to ask
admission to the witnesses, they ask, who
|mes there, and preaent their muskets to us.
we then go lo the more civil fbrt-maior, who
tdls us to go to the crown agent. He felbfs
us to tte lord advocate. His lordship declines
civing US access. Have I thus any benefit
nam the intimatien of the witnesses name in
m paper presented afew days before the trial?
There are now five men, women, or children,
in the castle of Edinburgh who are to be
produced as witnesses against the panel, and
whom we shall see for the first time when
they are produoed in the witness's bos. For
any substantial ^purpose whatever, do I
feoeive any one part of the benefits intended
by law, by the serving of a list of witnesses ?
1 4o not know whether, in point of fatst, such
n person as the witness proposed to be
adduced, has been in the casUe or not; and I
have had no opportunity of inquiring what
sort of a person this witness may be.
I oifer to establish by evidence what I have
atatnd, that, although we took ali the regular
means to get access to the witness by repeated,
respeetfiil, and earnest applications, they were
all resisted by the anthority of the public
ptoeecutor, who served the prisoner with the
list of witnesses. This is apenKHul nception
to the public prosecutor, independent of the
fact that we have been prevented from iden-
tifying this person. If we had been prevented
by others from getting access to the vritness,
the proeeootor might have said, that the law
wontd have aflbrded redress ; that we ought
to have had recourse te him; and that he was
not to blame. But here it was the prosecutor
himself who prevented -us, the same person
who presents a list containing the name of the
witness, and at the same time tells me, he will
not give me aocess to him.
Can, then, the public prosecutor act thus ?
Can he prevent me from identifying the wit-
nesses P Can the person throurii whose direct
atf 1 1 am deprived of the benefits intended by
law from the serving of a list of witnesses— can
the poblic prosecutor, who, while he mocks
me with the ostentation of the witness's name,
prevents me from inquiring who he is, and
making other inquiries material for my
defence— can he be allowed, after such con-
duct, to examine the witness f
Without inquiring into the purpose of all
this, I am entitled to say in law, that the
witness ha* not been sufficiently tdentified.
l^M^AninrnM^Kbte^
cwa
nither by deseripliett or othemise. But the
cesodoes not rest merely in that Even aftsr
YOU hare identified the witness, and come to
know, out of the hre thousand John Camp-
bells inhabiting this Celtic country, who the
witness is, and what kind of chanicter he
bears, the law still allows other privileges to
the panel. It is an unqoestionaDle prmlege
of a pfisooer, by himself, his counsel, or
agent, to converse vrith vritnesses, and learn
mm them what they have ^get-to say. They
cannot be compelled to answer; but, from
intercourse with them, the prisoner mieht
have had an opportunity of explaining what
might otherwise appear to his disadvantage,
or might get evidence to meet ialse state-
ments. But the public proeeeotor has, in
this instance, denied him access, even under
any precautions which might have been
thought proper.
It is true, that under the interposition of
this Court parties may^ have aocess to pri-
soneite who are to be adduced as witnesses
against them; but in this case, where there
was a peremptonr denial of aocess by the
prosecttlor himself, who had sequestrated ike
witness in a garrison, I submit that I had no
occasion to apply to the Court, because I have
been obstructed in the exercise of the privi-
leges which the law allows me, by tbe lord
advocate himself, who served upon me the list
of witnesses.
It is not enongh to tell me, that I might have
got the better of his repugnancy by other
means; it is sufficient that be opposed my*
accem, and that I have been prevented by him
from identifying tbe witness, and firom learning
what law presumes would havis been bene-
ficial for my' defonce, by hearing Ae state-
ments of the witness, preparing materials to
obviate what I might thank vrrong, and redar-
guing the statements by other evUience.
^ I am readf to establish by evidence what I
hare stated vrith regard to this and the other
vritnesses, who are designed as prisoners in
the castle of Edinbuigh. • My statement yon
will take for granted in -the argument, no
description of the vritness is incomplete, and I
was prevented from access to him. The pro*
secutor has here, in. reality, fonnded upon
evidence vrfaich was not to be heard oi or
disclosed, till it appeared at the trial, and I
have thus been prevented from ascertaining
the facts that would have guided me in
bringioff counter-statements in defence.
Mr. Vnmnnond, — ^You have heard an ingo-
nious statement on the part of the panel; but
it cannot give your lordships great trouble in
diaposing of it. Two things are alleged -quite
distinct uom each other. One of them ceiw
tainly is an objection to the admissibility of
the witness ; but, as it is obvious that, standing
S itself, it cannot be listened to for a moment,
r. JeSftej has mixed it up vrith what is not
an objection to the witness at all, but a com-
plaint as to the impossibility of preparing tbo
defence, which is quite out of place nere.
/(7S]
f<^ AdmhdihntigyiJmifidOtdkt.
A. D; 1817.
L574
Ai to th« ol^lflbtioiiy tHai tha witetM is not
suAciently described by. beiog designed
** priieni pnsoner in tbe casUe of £dtnb«rgb/'
Mr. Jefiinj uid, tluU tbert is a great number
oi peieeos of tbe name of John Campbell ;
but the qneation is, whether there is any
other John Campbell, present prisoner in the
castle of Edinburgh. If there Are other pri-
soners there of the same ^ name, from whom
this witness is not distinguished by the de-
scription that is given of him, there may be
something in the objection. There is, how-
erer, no such statement made ; and your lord-
ships need not be told, that it is the daily,
praetice of the court to design peiaoas ^B
prisonefs in such or such a tolbMth.
As to the other point, it is noC an objection
to the admissibility of the witness «t all. It is
n complaint that access has not been had to
the witness for the pufjpose of obtaining in-
formation, as to what is to be said bv him
herein evidence. But this objection MMwld
bare been stilted by the panel in a motion for
delay of the triaL It was said, thatthe loid ad-
vocate had the, witnesses shut up, and that he
eiduded all persobs fioom having access to
tliese witnesses. He claims no authority of
die kind one way or another, either as to
giving access or lefosing it. In that place of
confinement, the prisoners were under your
lordships' authority. Upon appUcation to you
from the panely it was for yon to say, whether
his counsel should have access to the witness ;
and they did not know their duty, if the^ did
not brmg forward this to the Court in a
pievuNis stage. of these proceedings. It is
said, that the witness was in the castle ; but
that is'the same thing as if he had .been in the
common tolbooth. The oiBoers there, under
wboee custody the prisoners are lodged hj
' the warrant of your lordshipS| act as
iindet your oiders.
This is not a new case. If the panel's
counsel bad looked to the case of Nairn and
Ogilvie,* they would there have seen that
vsiUieaMs were oon&ied by authority of the
Court in the castle. The confinement tktre
was to prevent the witnesses from being tam-
pered with, not by mv learned friends, or by
any person conneoted with this court, but by
<Mlier persons of a difierent description ; such
as tbe memben of that society or brotheihood
mentioned in the oath quoted in the indict-
■sent. It was to guard against the witnesses
heing contaminated, and nrevented frrai telU
ing die truth, that they have been confined
aeppMAtely and closel]^ as was done in the case
above-mentioned.
The'Miiel should hate presented a petition
to the Hi|^ Court of Justiciars, as the wit-
nesses stood committed by a Justiciaiy war-
rent, and an order would nave been ffiren for
ndmission to them, if such a proceeding had
appeared proper, in presence of one of the
* maceis of court, or other fit person, in the
• 19 How. St. Tr. 1235.
ssm6 ^y as' admission was aUoved to the
witnesses who were confined in the case of
Nairn and OgiIvie« He has been too well
advised not to be informed what steps to take
in Older tb obtain accem, if it had been thou^^t
of advantage to him, and he had been legally
entitled to it ; snd the bringing forward this '
objection only now, is obTionsly to prevent
tbe case going to the jury at all» as the same
objection wouhl apply to all the witnesses. If
it nad been wished to serve the ends of justice,
and allow the facts to be completeljr disclosed,
whatever way they may tend, this objection
wooid not have been reserved in this manner,
but would have been stated in a proper stagn
of the busim
Lord Advocate. — My legmed friend has giv^
a conclusive answer to the objections, and I
shall not detain your lordships by enlarging
on the subject. It is proper, however, for me
to state the concern I have had from Uie be-
ginning in this matter. When th«M persons
were first imprisoned, I thought it my duty to
relieve your lordships, at the expense of much
trouble to myself, from the fatigue of constant
applications from friends of the parties for
admission to visit them ; and I intimated, that
if the names of those wishing access to the
prisoners should be communicated to me, I
would grant my consent or not as I saw
cause; and if I refused to afibrd it, it wis
competent to apply to your lordships for re-
dress. Accordinglv, when an application was
made to me, that the counsel or the agent in
this case should be admitted to the witnesses,
I thought it my duty to state, diat I did not
mean to consent; and thejr then had the means
of applying to your lordships, the imprisonment
being on your lord^ips' warrant, and not on
mine. I stated accoroingly, in point of foet,
that these individuals being imprisoned upon
your lordships' warrant, application might be
made elsewhere, if they considered themselves
aggrieved. But no such application was
made. The prisoner, too, has been at this
bar at difierent times, when he might have
stated his wish; and no application having
been made, it Im now too late to bring the
objection.
Lard JmOee CferlL-^Have yon any thing to
say in reply, gentlemen ?
Mr. Jeffrey. — ^I shall trouble you with a werf
few words. If I understand the argument for
the prosecutor, it is, that our objection, so far
as substantial, is not to the designation of die
vritness, but to the obstruction to the prisoner
in the preparation of his defence. It is true,
that is the ultimate ground of the objection ;
but is not that always the ultimate |[rou'nd of
ol^^ection to the production ef any witnesses f
— 4hat as to the witnesses, in some way or
another, the conduct of the prosecnt^ Jhas im-
properly narrowed the power of d^enceT
The ground the Court l|as always aone upon
is just, whether the prisoner can make out an)
K75] ^7 COUSfUBE III.
ofoMbb aw of inni^^ 9ttknd
iafnfotmg his dciwict.
Is it right to say, I should httve ifpind to
'IlioOoiirtf iliaiiiotI«nlM«d,«rtMiiawitaMB
IB ^fodiioed^ to still 407 thing in the cooduot
of the pvUic proMcvlM' by vdhich obBtPootioa
*fi«s Ihrowv VI th« way of pnpariiig the de-
-feneet Is itmifieient to teplyi it is not time
v^pir 10 mdke die clijecdonf If the fwhlic
' proeujtM hat done toy 'dilng mmmf^ and
oattlinuet ilvp to the d^ of tffwd, ii k eMmgh
•oeaylocteiltboold hare gonetotheCoort
aoeiterwith toy eoanpMntf He isnot entitled
•to pndh « plea, if the prisoner tbiDke the
ieadaet.of the pdblie pvoeecntor gtvet hita a
right to object to testimony agahiat hint, he h
jiot bound to Temedy the 'blunder or impro-
priety of the public prosecutor. And^ the
proper time for mtking the olijectiou is, when
the witness is brought forward.
.' Tben^ wfaatis the olgection? The pbjectioo
is, ilut, in consequence of the ^ct of the
. wUoass beii^g a nrisoner in the Castle» I hare
been Drerented by the public prosecutor fiom
identi^ring thai witness, or getting. at the
jtatea^ynt he is to make against me. What-
ever directiops'the public prosecnitpr may have
givep. Ml. Warreoder in his letter, says, " I
.am directed by the lord advocate to ad^now-
•iedge the receipt, betwigct ten and eleven
o*cl«ch last nigbV. of your letter to him of
.sestarday, app\yixigy as agent for Andrew
M'Kinley^ io ff/A access to Hugh Dickson,
Peter Uibsoi^ John Mliachlan^ William
Simpsoi^ and John Campbdl, prisoners in the
CasUe of JEEdinbuighf and James Hood, pn-
aoner in the tolboota of Glasgow; and, at the
same time, to aconaint vou. iKai Ait lardMn
ioymr gffUmgpdiiiMun to themper$tms
** Ihey are all in custody, under charge of
. being engaged in ofiences against the state,
and thcgr have been already cited as witnesses,
. to jave evidejice on the trial of Andrew
M'KInley. Upon both ihese accomits. there-
(bie, the brdtStvocaifi dum» it buwrnenion him
to wUhhold his coment, §s pAlic»ps^eutorffiram
Jkar having atijf caamnmicaiioB wuUevcr viSi the
agentioftne fonely Mhovld oiny other^gtepi bt^takgn
to obtam thai object.
Our awmeot it, thai we teotited a pe-
remptory refusal of acoam. There «*e bo mo-
dification or hint that we ipight apply to the
Court, but it was a peremptory and positive
refesa], the officer hating preriousbr told us,
ihitt, without an order fi^m the lord advocate
tft the Crown agent, we could not obtain access
to the prisoners^ The custodiar did not say,
he must have a warrant from your loiijtkAiips,
bpt, ex(fept upon tin order frpra the crown
^ agent, heirouid tiot admit us. And w« went,
' therefore, to the only quarter to wMdh we were
' referred by the actual custodier of the witness*
, •-^T!ie hfit is, that, w)ien the agent applied
fo ihe eustbdiar^ he wtis Aewp'a letter, de-
' strinff an exclusion of eSl penons except tliose
^ eomnig with a warrant mdi the Gtown agent,
Trhl tfAiam» U^
1578
whoiiepresetrted the loid adhneeate,— «iid he
gave a peremptory refusal.
If we had been prevented from teeing the
witness in consequence of the opposition of a
thiid party, I could nnderitand tne propriety
of applying to your lordships ; but, if the lord
advocate, who incarcerated the witness, and
who was referred to, as the only person who
could grant liberty of access — if he refused it^
he gave an illegal obstruction, by his own ad-
mission ; for he admits, that, if 1 had applied
to yoa, I riioald have obtained the access.
JUird AdaocaUj^ admit no such thing.
Mr. Jejfrey, — ^I am entitled to have ncceiB
to all the witnesses in the list served nnon the
panel. If I have no access to them, they are
witnesses against the panel, without the natoK^
and advantage of tM premonitien to him,
which the law reqairas. The testimony de-
pends upon words used by thoee individuai»
moolhs ago, and we ehould faaVe been entitled
if you had power to grant it, to have had
acoess to those peieone. If yon are of opinion,
I had right to see the adtneseet through die
intervention of your lordshipe, and if the lonl
advocate, to whose authority I was referred
by the custodier, barred my aocess to them,,
that I might not have the means of casting his
evidence ; — in eoasequeoqe of his eondoet be-
fore the trial, he is not entitled now to brin^
forward diose vritnestes. Such an argument
as that of tiie psoeeeutor is not alkiwed in a
eouft of law. Suppose the faot wein, that,
instead of the Castle of EdiidMirgh, in cust«fy
ofamiHtKPfotteer, nnother witnem were noev
locked «p in a etMll oellar of his majesty's
advocate in Qneen-etraet. f knock at tile
door, «nd «A (he servant to admit itoto 4m
prisoner ■ he refere me to-lds mntttr nnd'Ho
reftms the aeoete tequirtil— ^oald it ho
enough, afterwards, to say, i should have
made application to the Court Y Is It enough
to say, there ie a remedy semewheie, pre-
viously to the trial? It is enoQgh for me to
tav eo (he wrosecntor. yon mu^ mo €hm hasnvd
OMronriuennessy and yon ennnot oppose dtfll-
odJtieefo sse and tell me they niiQr be o^
Visled hy4ipplieailon in anethor quavter.
As to iflie case of Waiin and Ogilvie,--»ia the
list of witnesses there given, there was nobody
derfgned as prieoner ia the Cattle, How then
^mn that case be parall^ to the present, wfcau
«H ^I am told of the witness is, that ho ia a
ptisener in theCastle, and wlmn I go there,. I
find the gheet ef the lord ndvoeateotandinf «t
the prison bars, and nelbody bnt tholotd ad«
vocate can get admission to the witneat f I
askeibis'lentw to see the ndtnew, nnd he ro-
■foseS me. JEt is quite unn^oessaiy to onqniin
whether I might hnve olrtninod admission hy
npp^ngto the Court, and givea up the
nefit of my stating the ol^ottion noe
proeecutor took upon him toveAmento^
to die vritness, and I found my ohjoetien to
the evidence of the witness upon that letost.
Upon all tho'prineiples of kw^ this is an ob«
am
Jot Aiffdmsitring unlav^ul Oaths*
A. D. 181Y,
[578
jection to wYiich no*'an»w^r can be 'made.
The fuhdam^ntal principle, #hich requires a
list of the tritnessea -to be farnislMd • to the
panel, would be defeated, if the person who
tperres it coirid take such measures with' regard
to the witnesses as to prevent the panel from
identifytuf thein.
Mr. Dhanmond. — As to the . case of Nairn
and Ogplfie, I did not say it was parallel to
the present case, or that any witness was there
designed *' prisoner. in the castle/' I stated
it as a precedent, to show, where access could
not be had to a witness in the castle of Edin-
burgh, the course which should have been
followed by the panel's counael.
Mr. Jeffrey. — But here—
Mr. Clerhf—'MT. Home Drummond is veiy
willing to make a reply himself.
I have just a word to remark on the case of
Nairn and OgiWie.
In the present case the lord advocate de-
scribes the witness as prisoner in the castle of
Edinburgh, Wbat is the principle upon which
yoo receive such a description } It is, that it
IS in the power of thcpanel to go to the prison
to see the witness.
In the case of Nairn, the lord advocate did
what was regular and proper. He designed
all the witnesses. There was no objection to
the descriptions of them. Tl^ey were impri-
soned, in the castle, apd the parties were left
to apply to your lordships to. get access to
them.
But, it that a similar case to this, where the
lordr advocate gives no- designation or means
to distingiiish the witmts ? . for though .he . de-
aigns him as -prisoner in the castle, he shuts
bimsp there, to prevent us. from knowing
who be.is;~-and, secondly, he prevent us
from examining the witness.
There is no resemblance between the, two
cases. Nothing is done fairly here — theie is
no description of the witnesses, and the panel
is debarted from access to them. If there has
been any thing illegal in the conduct, of the
loid advpcate, he eanno^ cpcamine the witness.
Lord Hermand,~'li would be very fortunate
for the panel, and I should rejoice at it, if this
objection were well-founded, because the
Court would immediately ad|o«m^ * and the
trial oouUI not go on.
A case occum to me as. like the present;
amd it is this-^tliat an objection is purposely
kept vp, and {which does not apply here) for
tlie very puipose of defeating the «Bdis of
JoetiCe. Where exhibits are mentioned in an
indictment, it is always stated, these. shall be
lotad io -due time, so as to-be produced in
evwenee.' I mnember the case of Lyal, in
1811. There the articles wesa. sealed up in
paeketi> Kiid«:Aey-'camewiiho«t making* ap-
]^liaition teethe Omit upon the trial, and said
they were not lodged indue tine, as they-wera
slm^iip'wd could not be seea;* What did the
Couft do ^ . Theyiopelled theohjeotioh. >The
VOL. XXXIIL
same thing happened in the case of 0*Kane,
1812, where bank-ilotes were lodged in a ..
sealed parcel.
The case of Nairn and Ogilvie could iiot
easily escape observation, as it was a remark-^ *
able trial. '
If 1 were to decide upon the letters, I would .
call for them, but I do not think that neces-
sary. I think the lord advocate judged well.
I do not know whether he has a command over '
the macers ; but he said he did not think it
rtght to interpose with regard to the psmefs
counsel getting access to the witness.
Mr..J«^irey.— I defly that.
Lord HermaatL-^lf I am mistaken in that, 1
do not wanUto atate it, .1 think, if there, had -
only been a junior counsel here conducting the
deienee, he would have had recourse to the
case of Naime and OgiWie, — ^and, upon prin-
ciple, I am clear that, the whole officers con-
cerned, the fort major, crown agent, and .lord
advocate, acted with great propriety, llie
panel did not take the course pomtea out . ^y
the decision. It is true, that the case of Nairn
and Ogilvie does,not in every particular apply
here ;— but in every case, even in dases in- the
civil courtB, the. designation of. a man as pre-
sent prisoner in a particular gaol,* is a common
designation. Nor could there be anymistake
here, unless there were a number of prisoners
of tlie same name* .
Lord GiiUes, — As (o the consequence^ of
disposing of this objection, I lay them out of
my consideration. Let them be what they
may, they ought not to affect our judgment on
the present point. I do not sit here to judge
of the propriety of the conduct of the officers.
The fort-major, I should believe to have acted
with propriety; but that is not the question
before us. And, I must own, that before
giving any judgment on that which is before
us, as t wish to avoid stating any thing that
miffht be considered inaccurate, I should Wish,
before giving an opinion upon the facts, to
have them ascertained by proof. For, it Is
very possible, that, in my notion. of^ the Cscts^r '
I may be inaccurate ; and in any opinion I
should deliver relative to them, the one or
other party nlight tell me I was wroDg. I am,
therefore, against proceeding on supposition^
or on ^ general notion of them. I wish them
ascertained.
As far as this is an objection to the designa-
tion of a witness, this is the proper and only
Eeriod for having it brought forward. Mr.
drummond will acquiesce in that.
The designation " prisoner there** is, primA
Jad€f a good designation, as the panel's counsel
might go there and enquire who the prisoner
is. But, the prisoner at the bar, says, he was
deprived of the means of doing so, and by the
lord adv'ocate. Whether that is true or not, I
know not ; and, till I know that, I's^aU not
give my opinion.
Lord Pi^i%.—- My opinion a formed^ but
2 P
5791 ^7 GEORGE Uh
Trhi of Andreto M^Kink^
C580
I ^hall defer giving it, tiU I find how tbe flitt
siaodi.
Loid Ratm and LordJytHec CkrkwM iWty
had DO objection to an examination of the fact.
lonf JthoctUe^-^A minute should be given
ia.
Mr. Jeffrey. — I am willing to give in a
minnte- My avetment is, first, that this per-
son, being under the custody of the governor
tk the castle, an application vras made to the
auAority there to get access to him.
Lord Advocate, — A proof of nothing can be
allowed unless diere oe a written statement
upon the reeord of the court. I wish to state
wnal I admit and what [ do not admit.
Mr. Jeffrey gave in the following statement :
^ Mr. J^frgf olgected, and offered to
•rove, iMo. Xhat the witness in qoestion
Mng only described as present prisoner
in the caMle of Edinburgn, the agent for
the panel applied in person to ma^or
Martm Alvea for access to him, which
was refused, until some warrant or autbo*
Bty should be obtained from the Crown
agent; and at the same time themaior
iUted to the agent, that he had pe-
lemptory orders from his superiois to re>
luse all access, eseept to persons having
such anthori^. 2do. That the agent lor
the panel anerwards applied by letter,
wbi<m will be produced both to the crown
agent and the lord advocate, requesting
aocess in that character to this and the
other witnesses in the castle. 3tw, That,
in return to these applications, he received
a letter from the crown agent, which will
be produced, stating, that he was directed
by the lord advoca^ to decline nanting
any such permission, and that uis was
apressed without any quafification what-
ever, and in express and peremptory
terms.''
Thft lord advocate wrote and gtvt
Mowing answer:
ift (he
** AiMcaha answered, thai when the
e loners were incarcerated in the castle,
gave directions, that, in order to save
trouble to die Court, under whose warrant
ttev were detained, and under whose
aawority access to them misfat at all
times, ifappBedfw and found bv their
lordships to oe proper, be obtained ; that
it should be intimated, to the officers in
the castle that he or the Crown agent,would
extrajudicially grant his consent where no
objections occurred, that persons applying
to see them mi|;ht be admitted, and by
whkh the neeesatY of a formal application
iu every oase would be prevented. That
tins was all Uie public prosecutor could
do, or could be supposed to have done
by such direction, having no power him-
self to exclnde any perto» ran the pr»-
toners. That when applied to by the
panel's agent to be admitted to the other
Misoners in (be eaiUe^ he direeted the
Crown aoent to intimate that he deemed
it incumbent upon him to withh^d hia
consent from such admission being gisni-
ed, leaving it as matter .of cooise to the
mnel to apply, if so advised, to the
Court, to obtain their lordships' authority
for obtaining such admission, but stating,
that if that was made it would be op-
posed.'' »
The following iaterlecutor was then pro-
^rrhe Lord Justice Clerk and Lords com-
missioners of Justiciary having considerod
the foregoing objections, with the answer*
thereto, and heard partie:i procurators
thereupon ; before answer allow the pro-
curators for the panel a proof of the tacts
they aver, and offer to prove in relation
to the said objections.
(Signed) *»D. Botle, J. P. D.**
Mr. J^^^.^I shaU read to tlie Coon the
comspendenoe which took piaee upon the
subject.
Ccoy— LaTTsa from Ma. Ramsat to the
Loan AovocATXy dated 2nd April, 1817.
^ My Lofd ^-I am direeted by the
counsel for Andrew M^nlsy, to apply
to your Idtdship for tttthorirr toget aeoess
to Huffh Dickson, Peter Gibson, John
M'Lachlane, Wiffiam Simpson, and John
Campbell, prisoners m the castf^ and
James Hood, in theToAoothof GtMgow;
havinff been informed by. Mr. Wanender,
that he oouid not give sudi authority.
The men sse included in the list of wit-
nesses, served ob M'Kinley; and Ue
counsd are desircms that some peneo, on
his part, should have an opp«rtnni^ of
seeing them. A» the day or triri is jnae
at hand, I beg your lordship will feveor
me with an immediate answer.
*^ I have tte hoBonr tobe," kc.
— LxTTEB firom Ma. Wabbxvdex to
a. Eahsat, dated 3rd April, 181 T.
^Sir^-I am diiected by the loi9 ad-
vocate to acknowledge die rooeipl, betwnit
ten and eleven o'clock last ni|^ of your
letter to him, of yesterday, appiyiiig» ^
agent for Andrew M'Kiidey, to get aetoaa
to Hugh Dickson, Peter Gibson^ Jolui
MOjKhlaBe, William 8smpeo% and John
Caas^ell, pvinsMia in the cMtle of Bdia.
burgn, aaid James Hood, piiaaoep hi the
tolbooih of Glasgow; and at the mmm
time^ to aeqnaint you^ that his lordship
does not iml himealf wipntaasA t# jno
his consent to yov gettinjf artiieaimi to
thesepetsons. - -
** They axe all in custody, under
of being engaged in offences againsl
Copj-
««1]
Jar Adminkienng HnUmfut Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
CSM
state, mA they have been alreidy «ited
as witDesseSy to ^re eTidence 4>ii ttie trial
of Andrew AfWtiley. Upon both theie
accdants, therefore, the lord advocate
deems it iiicii«kbent upon him to with-
hold his coDsenl, as public proseoutory
ftoftt their hating any oemmnnicalion
whatever with the agents of the panels
should auy other steps be taken to obtain
that object.
" I am. Sir," Ice.
Copy*-LnTEft from Ma. Ramsay t« Mft.
WAR&sHnBft, dated 28th May, 1817.
'/ Sir ;~1 had a letter frdm you some-
time ago, in answer to an application
I made to the lord advocate, tor access
lo those witnesses against Andrew M^Kin-
lev^ who are under close confinement.-
Their names are, Hugh Dickson, Peter
Gibson, John M<Lachlane, William Simp-
son, John Campbell, and James Hood,
all prisoners in the Castle of Edinburgh.
As it is of the utmost importance to
M'Kinley, that some person, on his part,
should have access lodiese men, I trouble
yoa with a reMwal of the vequett which
was then Fefiised. The reasons which
induced this refusd may now have ceased
to operate with the same force ? ' and if
so> I beg you will give directions that I
shall have access to them, alonjf with one
or more of the counsel for M'Kinley.
^' I remain, sir,'' &c.
Copy — Letteb ffom Ma. WAnnuiDEM to M^.
Ramsat, dated 29th May, 1817.
'<Sir; — ^I am jnit now fiivoimd with
your's of yesterday. In answer to which,
I can ool^ refer to my former letter, not
having, since that time, received any in-
structions contrary to what was than
signiiled to you.
^ I am, iir," &c.
Copy — ^Lbttxr from Mk. Ramsat to M».
WAaasvoEa, dated 15th July, 1817.
Sia; — Notwithstanding of my former
If tteri on the subject, not having tinof
received any further instructions*
** 1 am, sir," kc.
Mr. Sejfrey, — ^You will bear it in mind that
it is a part of my averment, that the actual
costodiar stated, and shewed written autho-
rity for it, that he had no power to grant
admiaeion, under any other aulhosity than
that of the lord advocate.
Lord Gi(£Kf.— Unless the lord advocate
contradict what Mr. Jeffr^ has stated as to
the fort-ms|jo]^ I think we are bound to hold
the matter to be as stated by Mr. Jeffrey.
I conceive this is the pn^r time for ob«
jectiog to the designation of the witness.— (t
IS not a direct obiection to the designation.
The situation of me witness was sufficiently
pointed out, to enable the prisoner to go to
where he was, and to apply to the commanders
in the castle to see Campbell. I am clearly
of opinion, that the prisoner was entitled t»
liave access to John Campbell. He was en*
titled to have access to him, both lo learn who
the individual was, and in oider to make in-
quiry as to the nature of the evidence he was
to give against hnn. Ibis is the law of Scot-
land. I do not say it is a matter of absolute
nght; but, prima Jade, it is a right which
every prisoner enjoys. If it should be stated
in the proper quarter, that there are reasone
against it m any paxticular case» the Court
would refuse it, if itjudged the reasons to be
si^dent for the refosal. But standing, as
this case does, we must presume that the
prisoner was entitled to have access to the
witness. This being ^ case, what does the
prisoner's agent do ; He naturally applies first
to the coomiander of the Castle, and he is
told he must have the authority of the Crown
agent, or of the lord advocate. He applies
to them, and he is by them told they would
give no such authority or consent. ^Hie
lord advocate deems it incumbent on him la
withhold his consent, at public prosecutor,
from the witnesses in the Caatte having mtf
commnnieation whatever with the agents <»
the pane), should any othef steps be taken to
1- ^^ ^ * s -^t^ u I obtain that obiect." TWs is the intimation
apF»hcations for aco^ to the witnesses i,y ^^ j^^ J^,^ ^ if appUeation be
against Andrew M'Kmley, who are m ^^^ ^^ ^^^ Court, he will nit consent to
that application. What, then, was the ste|»
to he taken by the prisoner ? He should haina
applied to this Court, and then your lordrfiips,
with or without consent of the lord advocate,
would have granted access to this witness. I
am not now entering into the, question whether
access would have been allowed for inquiry
as to the nature of the evidence to be given
by the witnesses at the trial ; but to this extent,
at least, the panel had clearly a right of
access — to learn who the witnesses were — to
identi^ the persons named in the list served
upon him. This application has not been
made by tiie prisoner, -ably assisted as he has
been. If any bad consequences follow, the
blame lies widk his counsel, as he was not
w — — — — ^» — — ~ ~~~
confinement, having been refused, I eon-
tider it of so mnc£ importance to him,
that an opportumtr of seeing then should
bealfofded, thatlcamMH help troubling
yon with another apfriication. It is only
throoj^ you that access can be obtained ;
atfd f think it is not unlikely that you
may have received other instructions,
since I formerly heard from yon on this
sunject*
<« I am >' Ibc.
CefQf— liVfnm from Mn* WAuminu «« Mb.
EamaT dated Uth Jnly, 1817.
*^ Sia: — In answer to your^s of this
datCf I can only refer you to my former
5831
57 GEORGE III.
TrM ofAndmm M'l&nhy
C«84
adviied ts make the compkint at the proper
time. It k now too late. And the deqisioo
l^erxed to woujd^ in point of principle, have
ftpplied to the present case. .
. lioid PitmUfy.—'MB queatipn as to the
admissihiUty oV the witness embraces two
fKiints. The first relates to his designation.
Xhe second i»\ate8 . to the application foe
access to him, made by the panel*8 agent
to his majesty's advocate.
The objection to the designation is, that
the witness is designated ** present prisoner
In the castle of Edinburgh." That is no good
objection to the designation, unless, as Mr.
Drummond stated, there were others of the
same name there.' There are many instances
of such designatioa% which have been always
considered sufficient, and therefore it is not a
good objection.
The second objection is, that access to this
witness was denied. As to that objection,
I concur with what has just b^en stated, that
this is not the proper time to bring forward
such an objection. I did not think the proof
pn the subject was relevant ; but when such
an assertion was made, it was desirable for
the Court and Jury to ascertain the facts. But
if the lord advocate, or any other, refused
consent for access, and if there was any claim
for the prisoner to have access, application
should have been made to this Court, and no
time wo|ild have been improper for it but the
present/ If the panel's counsel had applied
yesterday, with these letters, and had stated
their desire to have access to the witness; the
Court would have considered the application.
If they had done so this morning, before the
jury was formed, the Court- would have given
it consideration. But the only improper ^me
for making the application is now, when the
trial has commenced. . It would be productive
of evil consec[uehces, if this objeption were to
be supported.
. Lord ReUon, — I am entirely of the opinions
which I have heard from your lordships. The
objection as to the designation is not sufficient.
Suppose the application had been made to a
proper gaoler, and he had refused to grant
access, then this Court; on being applied to,
would have ordered aceeps to be allowed. But
the lord advocate is not the gaoler, and his
refusal is no reason for not applying to your
Iprdships.
Lord Justice Clerk. — I. am clear, now we
have the facts before us, the objection ought
not to be sustained by your lordships. No
such objection ever could l)e sustaiped, except
when the prisoner would otherwise suffer in*-
justice. But no injustice can be complained
of by the prisoner before us, because the three
etters by his own agent show, that application
was not made to the proper quarter; and
though put on his guard that the consent of
the prosecutor would not be given, althojagh
pt^er iteps should be taken in order to obtain
access, yet the appUcatioa nevtr was made
where it ought to have been. For though the
lord advocate thought it right to refuse ad-
mission, he had not the authority to control
Ihe prisoner, and prevent him from applying
to us. If the commanding officer in the castle,
under the circumstances which here occur,
had refused to comply with our order,
he must have answered the refusal at his
highest peril. We have equal charge and
command over prisoners committed by our
warrant to the castle, as we have with regard
te persons committed to any of the common
Srisoos; audit is impossible for anyone to
oubt, that obedience must have been given
to our order for access to the panel's agent
and counsel. I would have granted access
without hesitation uppn proper application,
and at any stage of the pix>ceeding8. Your
lordships would have listened to it this morn-
ing, if a statement had been made, that dis-
advantage had arisen from the want of access^
and! the trial would have been delayed. The
present is the only improper time when appli-
cation could have been made to your lord-
ships.
The Court pronounced the following inter-
locutor :
<* The Lord Justice Clerk, and Lords
Commissioners of Justiciary, having con-
sidered the said letters, they repel the ob-
jections, and allow the witnesses to be
received.
(Signed) " D. Boyle, J..P. D."
John Campbell was called, and the oath admin-
istered to him by lord Hermand.
Lord FcniMmrf.— Have you any malice or ill
will at the panel at the' bar ?— No my lord.
His any body given you a reward, orproraise
of reward, for being a witness ?— i es, my
lord.
[The answer not being distinctly heard,
lord Hermand continued. ]
' Has any body told, or instructed you what
to say as a witness ? —
Mr. Clerk, — We have some questions to put
on this matter.
Mr. Jeffrey.-^yfiW your lordship be so good
as questioii him again? L dont think the an*-
swer was distinctly heard.
Lord Hermand. — ^Do* you hear, sir, what I
say, and answer distinctly — lias anybody
given you a rewa^d^ or promise of reward, for
being a witness ?— Yes, they have.
Lord JmtkeCierk,—! think.it right to warn
the witness— You are now adduced as a witness
in this prosecution for the Crown. I am bound
to tell you, that in reference to the crime whkh
is charged by the presecutor against the panel,
you are not in a6y panltel sitnation with the
panel, and it is not competent to bring yoa
for any concern you had In thes^ transactions.
MS]
Jot. AimtitUrmg uxH^ll^ Oattt:
A. D. .18)7.
1966
totally proMOnliony «£ieT your beiog adduced
. as a 'witness. It U necessary for you to tell the
whole ti^th, ia as far as yoa know it^ jwlative to
all matters as to which you may be askted now,
or at any fiitnre stage ci the examination. I
have to admonish yon, that^ as to the questions
now put, or that may be put, you are to disclose
the truth, and nothing ^but the truth; and that
as to your situation, you stand in no risk, un-
less you state upqn your oath what is contrary
to the truth. If you do so in any part of your
examination, be assured your being a witness
jrill not prevent your receiving punishment.
It as my duty to give you this admonition, and
keep it in view.
Witnetf. — ^I am aware of the nature of an
oath. Where I stand, I have called God to
witness to the truth of what I assert, as I shall
answer at the day ofjudgment. I am likewise
sensible, that what I have now stated may be
construed as proceeding from my concern with
the prisoner, and that it may be thought I have
taken this method in order to save him. It
will probably be believed also, as to the per-
sons who have given this promise, that tneir
word should be taken before my oath. In my
situation, if I can produce even presumptive
proof, I hope to convince the world I do not
peijure myself. I shall state the names of the
persons, and the whole circumstances.
[The witness's statement was ordered, on
the motion of the lord advocate, to be
taken down in. writing.]
' Mr. Jeffrey. — I am enabled to ask pointed
questions of the witness. If I ask improper
questions, the lord advocate may stop me.
. Lord Juttiee Clerk, — ^The correct way of pro-
ceeding, is to desire the witness to explain his
statement, and the prisoner will afterwards be
allowed lo put questions to him.
yiT.' Jeffrey. — I am satisfied.
Lord JmUiee Clerk. — I ask you to state dis«
tinctly and accurately the grounds which have
made you make this answer.
Witnet$, — ^I will state the circumstances as
distinctly as possible, Aid you will make idlow-
anee for my want of education preventing my
going through the circumstances so well as a
person would who has had the advantage of
nore learning. I cannot easily explain them
without going baek to the beginning. It will
W neeeseaiy that I commence from my exami*
Mttien at Glasgow.
Hie following deposition was then taken
down by the Clerk of Court.
*' I>eponeB. That he was i^prehended
. alongstwith the prisoner at the bar, he
thinks, on the 23nd of February last,
without cause assigned, and without a
warrant: That upon the Tuesday or Wed-
nesday following^ he was examined before
the sheriff-depute of Lanarkshire, and was
7 interrogated, if he knew what he was
, brott^theie lor : That he sUte4, that he
. did ttotknow, and that the sheriflf insisted
th%t he did,' and it.would be wisdom of
■ him to make his breast clean . Alter some
similar conversation the sheriff went out,
leaving the witnees with Mr. Sahnond^
and he is not sure whether any other
person was present or not : That Mr.
Salmond came up to the witnes«^ Mying,
* John, you perhaps do not know that I
' know so much, about this afiair;*. sod
adding, ' I know more ahont^ it than you
think I do.' Depones, That Mr. Salmond
added, < I suppose you do not know that
I have the oath you toojc at Leggat's on
the first of January ?* He then shewed
him a scroll of ^n oath, saying, ' You see
John, I have get it ;' adding, that * you
and other persons (whom, he named) took
that oath ;in^ Leggat's ou the- first of
January.' The witness then told him,
that he had not taken that, oath.* De-
uooee, that after several f xamioations be-
tore the sheriff, and being often closeted
with Mr. Salmond, on one of which occa-
sions, after using many eatceatiel^ to the
witness, and these having lailed, after
railing at the prisoners as villains, who had
betrayed him, the witness, and stating,
that it was out of respect to him .that £i
wished him to be a witOiesB, Mr. Salmond
said, < John, I assure you that I have six
men who will swear that you took that
oath ; and you will be hanged as sine as
YOU are alive.' Depones, That upon this
he told Mr. Salmond, that if he got six
men to swear that he took that oaSi, they
would peijure themselves. He answered,
' John, John 1 it is impossible to get six
men to peijure themselves.'* Depones,
* The following part of the witness's state-
ment was not recorded : —
'' I suppose it is needless to go through any
further as to that part of the examination with
regard to the ill humour shown me by the
sheriff, — ^threats held out to get me just to say
that I would be a witness. I suppose I may
come to the engagement between us V*
** Lord Juatkt CferA.— -Do you mean to say
the sheriff threatened, you F"
" He run into arguments with me to confuse
me — at one time about religion and other
matters — at another time putting the same
3uestions in different words that were taken
own in my declaration before, and said such
questions, were not taken down before; and
said. Supposing that to be the case, I, am not
satisfied with your answer, and I have a light
to demand answers to the questions. I said^ I
was obliged to answer him, but that UWas
wrong in him to put question^ to me in dif-
ferent language ; and he told me I was impu-
dent."
* What follows was not recorded.
<< Loni Ju^Kc CMcr-What. did Mr.^ JSal-
M7]
57 GEORGE VL
Trial ofAndmo M'KmUy
l56S
will ffan yoQtMlf if 71N1 perrfft in tins wajy
b«C tffmi take Hm otkor waj, yon will do
joviwlf OMMh good.* Da^OMSy That
mfter ■acfa cowvertatioii, 4iewitM0SMdd
%e waa not afraid of tlia ont way, and
iia did not aee mnch good ha ooiild do
lumself by the other. DeponeSy Tint Bir.
SataMmd taid the lofd adfooate was in
Glasgow, and he wmdd oome under any
obligation he ohoae, if he wovld be e wit-
neae. Depones, That riiortlv af^ this he
was taken befere the shetiff, ^Hien Mr.
Dnunmondy adfoeate-depnte, came into
the room ; after which he was examined ;
—bet the subject of the obligation was
not then mentioned ; and that in a few
days afterwaids tlie witness was remored
to Idinbnigh Caslle. Depones, That
when in the Castle of Edinbar|^i Mr.
Drammond case to him and mentioned
tihat M'Kinley had been served with an
indictment) and that his name was in
tiM Ust ef witnesses : and that now was
the time for him to determine whether he
would be m witness or not. That the de-
ponent stated, that he did not wish to be
n witness ; and that he, Mr. Drummond,
knew, thatif he was, he need not go back
to Glasgow, as he conld not live ihere.
Depones, lliat Mr. Dmmmond then said
that he was quite sensible of that, but that
he might, go and reside somewhere ebe ;
mmI that he might change his name : But
the witness said he wovud not change his
name ; and that it would be mudi the
same if he lived in any other menufao-
taring place as in Glasgow. Depones,
That Mr. Drummond then said, he had
been thinking of a plan of writing to lord
Sidmooth, to get him into the excise ; and
that if he, the witness, chose, he would
write to lord Sidmouth, and shew him his
answer. Depones, That he answered he
did not choose the office of an exciseman ;
and remarked at the same time, it was
probably the only office under gjoremment
he was capable for: That it was an
office that exposed bim to risk and ill-wiU
which he did not choose to eocounter, as
he had suffiered enough from thepnblic
while a' peace<offlcer. Depones, Inat at
this conrersation no person was present
but the deponent ana Mr. Drummond ;
and that Mr. Drummond was with him in
the Castle done at other times. Depones,
Ibat at the first interview, after vAat is
above-mentioned, Mr. Dnnnmond askc^l
Inm what he wanted to have: The witness
remained sHent, and made no answer.
Depones, That Mr. Drummond then said,
^ that if he would give sndi Information as
me^d siy as te jour veedving n reward or
promise of
^'Itis
wbde, ae it
?"
that I should explain Ae
•kmg in a chaiB.'*
would plenee the lovd advocate, he should
neither be tried himself nor made a wis^
ness. Depones, That he said that that
vras an uncertain matter, as he did not
• know what ii^nnation they wanted, or
that he could ^ve more than th^ alresdy
had ; and that if his infoimation did not
please the lord adrocate, be woidd lie
open to every attadi that could be made
against him. Depones, That Mr. Dmm-
mond then said, * 1 do not know what to
do with you, Campbell. I wish to do every
thing I can to favour yooy I shallffi ve von
a dxf or two to think of it.' Tliat Mr.
Drummond added, ' do you wish I should
call back again^ Thataftersome hesitation
the witness said he might do as he pleased,
and Mr. Drummond went away. That in
a few days afterwards Mr, Drummond
came back again, and said, ' Campbell,
this is the last time ; you must be aeter-r
mined now.' The witness asked if he
had wrote to lord Sidmouth, and Mr.
Drummond answered he had not, as the
witness had rejected it. That Mr. Drum-
mond asked if he had made up his mind
vet. Depones, Tbat he answered that he
had upon conditions; and upon being
asked what these were, the witness told him
he wished ^to get a passport to ao to the
continent:' That Mr. Drummond lold him
he supposed there wasnobodjr could stop
him; andhe answered, that be»g a mechn-
nic, he believed the laws of the country did
not allow him to quit it. Depones, That
Mr. Drummond replied with a smile, 'la
that all ? There is no question you will
get that, and means to carry you there.'
Depones, That they were standing while
this convemtion took place; and me de»
ponent said, that upon these conditions
he would be a witness, provided his wifo
was also taken into consideration. Do-
poues. That upon tbis, Mr. Drummond
said, 'Campbell, let us sit down, that
vre may understand eadi other properly,
as I wonld not wish that we misunder-
stood one another at the latter end.' De-
Kines, That the vritness mentioned to
r. Drummond* that his wife was in %
verr delicate state of health, and had
notning but what she earned to suj^ovt
her; upon that question being asked by
Mr. Drummond, and that if it was known
that he was to be a witness, she would
suffer from ill-vrill by the public: That
Mr. Drummond then replied, poor
woman, she must be ill off ; and desired
the witness to write a letter| and maik m
one-pound note in it, and give it to Mr.
Sibbald, who would bring it t6 1dm,
and be would put a one-pound note
in it for his wifo : Ibat Bfr. Drummond
also desired the witness to state to
his wifo| that be was to be a witness,
and to desire her to leave Glasgow
and go to the witaessli fatfierV at
5991
fw ^4^iifi^^^gJ''^^^^'^i Oaihs.
Symingtpny m Aynhira* Depoiies» That
he said that would be the nrat tiling to
discover that he. was to be a witness,
bta wife oottld not read or write. De-
pooesy That after some convenation
about writing to the tow»«leric of Glas-
gow^ or some fiiend of the witness's, it
was agreed that the ¥ritne8s should write
a letter to his wife, stating that a friend
of hi^ had sent her a one-pound note, to
pay her expences into £dinbarp;h by the
coach, and that she would receire ttoncr
here to carry her back ajndn : That thre
letter was given to Mr. Sibbald, in oonse-
Jnence of the conversation with Mr.
>rumnond, but that some days after-
wards it was brouf^t back by Mr. Drom-
mond, who told him, that the lord advo-
cate disapproved of sending such a letter,
but thought it more prober that Mr. Sal-
mond should be written to, to send for
the witness's wife, and teU her that he
wanted her to come to Edinburgh. And
after this, Mr. Drummond read to him a
letter he had received from Mr. Salmond,
stating, that a ticket had been bought;
Imt a postscript of the letter mentioned
that his wife, from her state of health,
declined to come : That Mr. Drummond
retunied the witness's letter, which he
burnt. Depones, That he was informed
by Mr. Drummond that the sheriff was
coming to examine him, and that it was
agreed ttpon, that, in answer to the first
question, he, the witness, was to state,
and have it taken down, that he was to
receive a passport to the contment^ and
the means to convey him there, it being
nnderstood that Pitissia was to be his
destination ; That die sheriff, and, as he
betievesy the sheriff-substitute, the solicit
tor-general, the procurator fiscal of Editk-
bnigh, as he understood, and a eleift,
came into the rpom; and Mr. Dram-
mond having asked, 'CampbeQ, what
have you got to say in tfiis business?* the
deponent answered, that, supposing* He
was concemei in ^at affidr, and was lo
tell the whole truth, that he did not
conrider either himself or his wife saft ;
,and that, without his getting a passport
to go to the continent, and the means to
oany him there, he could not be a wit-
ness ;. upon which Mr. Drammondi tnra-i
ing to the solicitor-general, said, 'An-
swer you that :' That the soIicitor>ge&e-
lai then ordered the detk to write these
wonls, as he thinks. ^Wbereupon tiie
solicitor-general assures Um deehnm^
that every means neoeisaii^^ will be taken
to preserve him and his wife, and that he
wiu gel a passport to quit the country or
go to the continent (he is not sure
whidi), and the means to cany them
there : *' That during this time, die sheriff
wftt waBring np mi down th0 loem,
wbicb is a pretty large onei ^^4 wben
A. n. mi. [MO
the. above words weie taken down, he
was desived tooome and sign this. De-
pones^ Thai Uie sheriff came, and sat
down at the table; and, after penning
4k» pvjfv for sooM time, said» * 1 will
not sign this;' and addedf *that, as he
was an ofiioer of the crown, it was his
dn^ to see ^nstioe done : and he could
iasttre the wataess, if he was to sign that
naper^ be wevdd not be answerable for it
for a good deal ; fof tbatf if the depo-
nsntwasbsoaffhttoldsoath, and should
swear thai; he had received no promise of
lewaid, and this ptper signed, he would
peijure himself:' That the witness an-
swered, < Ne^ if it was considered as a
means of his preservation ^' upon which
he was supported in the same aigwnent
by Mi. Drammond; upon which the
sheriff said, he would sign no s«oh paper :
That Mr. Drummond then prepoeedf that
it should be put down that he waa to get
the means ot carrying him to anjy ef the
British colonies, in place of going to a
feeeign kinpdon; but tfie sherm also
lelused that, and added, < that he was
willing eveiy thing should be set down
for the pfeeervalion of him and his wife,
but nothing forthev:' That after the
sheriff had stated this, there was a pause
for soflM time; whmi Mr.- Drummond,
lipoking at the deponent, said^ * Caftip-
bell, you know whether 'you can be a
witness on these tesms or not,' Thewit-
•esaremainedaalent; and some time after,
Mr. DnimmeAdsaidv * Now, Campbell,
do TOtt believtiihal we eaft-dothai leir you
which. yo« .ei|>eei, wittioiit ito beaaf set
downin theyaper?* and that aithia lime,
as he thitthai die Shariff wm sinins «t the
tsMe, the Sollcitov'geaeral and Bir.
DnuMond standing at the fiic^ and the
other gentlemen waUong about die room:
That we witoeiS' anawmd, he hnesr^they
were able if thev were willing.; to which
Mr. DrMMMoa replied; ^ Gonld ha rely
upon them for thafiF' The witness an-
aweiedi ^MayI^ Mr. Dmmmend an-
swered, * You may ;' and thai the wit-
ness said pretty londly, * Well, theiT, I
AaU nky upon you as ffenttemen.' De-
pones, That shortly ^r thii he was
allowed to write^ hb dedaration himself, .
all eaeepring one part lelaling to a. Mr.
Kerr: Theft, a fow dmi after this, the
Sherifl^ the Precnrator Fisoaly'and aelerk,
tame ut> to have his narrative signed,
whioh wnadoMi; vapom which the.Sheriff
said' tc^hiai^ * CiMapbeUv. ^fias.jm^ have
fntekarel Aifli TenihadrhtMvfohome
to yenc lotm» aad let theaatinlnthn nation
an they please:' That upon. this the de-
poMBlMidt that rather tfaangobnek to
tdsloom he wonld be served. with an in-
dsetaeal himself, even after- all he.* had
written: Thit the Sheriff annmred^ ' he
had nothing, ta do wfth that— it nmeined
Slifi] 57 OEOtlGfe tit
IViiU ofAnikem, M*KiiJU^
!•
betwfeeVk the Trithess and'otbien.* De-
Sones, That he was mited by Mr. Dtuin-
lobd after this, who ordered Cait>tain
Sibbald to get him plennr of books^ and
that be has read near an hundred volnmes
sinte that time : That, about a Ibrtnight or
three weeks ago, he wrote iaietter to Mr.
Dnimmobd, that be was in need of 'a pair
of shoes and a pair of trowsers, and that
his wife was in need of niion%T. Depones,
That he did receire a pair or shoes from
Captain Sibbald, by uie orders of Mr.
Dnimmond, as Captain Sibbald saidi but
that he could not then get any money, but
that, as soon as the first trial was over, he
would get money : That he wrote another
letter to Mr. Drummond, stating part of
what was in bis declaration, as a gentle
dematid for money, and received the same
answer, that he could get no money at
present, but that he would get some pifter
the first trial was over ; and that he, Sib-
baldi told him he had got this answer
from Mr. Drummond. Depones, That
although their engagement is not in writ-
ing, in consequence of the interference of
the Sheriff, and which writing was imme-
diately burned in the Sheriff's presence,
he considers it still a subsisting private
engagement, upon the performance of
wlich he thinks himself entitled to rely ;
and that the declaration, whidi he signed
and gave to the Sheriff, was made upon a
reliance on that engagement. Depones,
That at the conversation with Mr. Drum-
mond', when he got an order to get the
books, he was then cited as a witness on
Ibe trial of Andrew M^Kinley, and the
first book that the' deponent received from
the library, in consequence of that order,
was lipon the 23nd day of' April last.
Depones, That he was not cited as a wit-
ness at the time he sisned and delivered
bis declaration to the Sheriff, and that the
conversation about the books took place
in the week that Mr. Drummond went to
the Circuit at Glasgow. Depones, Iliat
The first idea of apprehensioh of his being
in danger was suggested to the deponent
by the Sheriff and Fiscal at Glasgow, who
asked him, if the reason why he would
not be a witness was, that he con-
aidered bis life to be in danger? Thai
be cannot say that he considered his
life to be in danger, but that be did
not choose to go back to Glasgow after
being a witness. Depones, That he did
not t^ Mr.'Drunmond that his life was
in danger, as Mr. Drummond seamed to
be iuipieased with that idea, and the de-
ponent-oonlimM to cany it on.- De-
pones, That -in the conversations above>-
mentioDed widi Mr. Drummond, or' any
of iba other gentlemen, ' there wasno at«
tempt whatever made to instruct hhn in
any w«yas to what he should say in
fiviDg evidenoe as a witoesi. All whieb
is truth, as the deponent shall ainswer to
God.»
(Signed) ''Jobv CAinniELL.*
« D. BoYw, J. P. D."
* Copt — ^Letter addressed *^ Hume Drum-
mond, Esq. Advocate, Edinburgh.''
'EMburgk Cattle, ZUt March, 1817.
Sir; — rAfter consideration I can see no way
that wife can be informed how she is to act
but by your writing Mr. Salmon giving him
instructions and by me writing at sametime to
her to call upon him and attend to what he
tells her to do you must cause Mr. Salmon to
state to her that I was under the necessity c€
acting in the manner that I have done and to
shew her the danger that she is in to stop
about Glasgow and that I request her to go out
by the maU to Kilmarnock and then walk to
Symington to my fathers and after stoning
there a few days to go down to Irvin
and stop there in my Sisters a night and next
day walK ^o Saltcoats where she roust take a
room for herself and live there till that I send
for her as also in Saltcoats she will be more
Comfortable beside htr mother Brothers andr
Sister than in any other place and that she is
to write to me as soon as she reaches my
fiithers but Sir I must also state tliat it is
needles to send her away without the means
of support as my fiather is an old roan and has
no income but his Pention as well her moilier
is a widow and is sustained by a son who lives
in the house and he being a weaver they pan-
not but be poor and she has not the same op-
portunity or earning a shilling in Saltcoats a»
in Glasgow and weakly constitution, and in
the situation in which she is at present. wilt
not admit of labourious work as also she cannot
remove any of the furniture without paying; the
house rent that sum being only 1l. 3s. which I
owe to the Laird of house rent having paid
him the last half year's rent and is. more — ^I
owe him 1/. lOt. of loom rent at Witsunday
that is a thing that has no concern with the
House as it was taken seperatly and if the
house rent be managed tell Mr. Salmon to be
sure and order her to give it in nam of house
rent or do not give it at all and that she must
have all the things upon the Saltcoats carriers
cart upon friday at farthest and be off herself
upon Saturday Mr. Salmon at same time
writing' a letter by post the night before the
things goes away to William Archibald weaver
in Salt^ts stating that the furniture is coming
witb the carriers and. that Martha his Sister is-
gone to my fethers but that she will be there
in a few days (An expression is here omitted
as relating to third parties.)
I remain Dear Sir yours
most respectfully
(Signed) John Caicpbeil.
(P. S. to the foregoing leher.) *
I wrote the report of that meetiag on nb(r
Slsl and 32nd pag» of my declantwa nk9m
<
M»l
Jot Admnitleying taJa^ful ^tit.
A. D. 18ir.
mi
Mr. Jffiey. — f f ( uridenttand^ on the ptcri of
the prosecutor, that the facts now disclosed,
are disputed, I am prepared to corroborate
Sir if you positively do not see a way
for me to escape out of their hahd« I
would reqiMBt it of yoa as a particular
faMmr that you would serre toe with an
IpdictODent even although that I have crimi-
nated myself as I would rather die by the
lUnds of the executioner than by the hand of
as assassin as it would "not be a ball through
the head or body that would satisfy but wodd
•nploy eirery kind of torture that conveniency
wo^ allow or that malice eoald invent.
Youn <co.
(Signed) Joaif Cakpbel£.
The foregoing letter was inclosed and trans*
• tnitted in the following letter from Mr.
Drummond to the Procurator Fiscal at Glas-
gow:
Itftnr. idprtf 1, 1817/
Siai-^The fadoenres "will eiplain them-
ailv9.f We aro certainly bonnd to insure
tha woman's personal security, and ia order
to effect that, you may cause her to be sent off
to Ayrshire by such mode of conveyance as
tha sitaatioii' oif her health fenders necessary,
anplying her with the means of travelling and
aaoaiaieace of which she seems totally dasti*
tata. As to liie house reat and fumitaia it is
knpossibla to say any thing. Campbell has
bae»piomised stieh meesbtes as are necessary
to seeore bis peisonal safety, and that of his
wifis, without vHiich it is impossible to expect
shat ha should glva mi unbiassed evidenoa» or
iadead any etidaaco at all. — ^Farther he must
^ left ia the silaation of every other witness.
I remain,
Sir,
Your most obedient servant,
(Signed) U. Hoke Drchmoiii).
lif, George Sahnond,
Piaaarater Fiscal Glasgow.
P. S. I have beard nothing of Campbell^
wife Tia%ing arrived here. Is it not a little
awkward for you to be seen about her house t
i mean oa ' her account. But you know
best.
€a9y^fipte addressed ** To the Sheriff of
Edialwrgb,*' acebmpaoying some addi-
tions to J<^a CahipbeH's Declaration,
Silt
Having neglected what I have here wrote
at the time of writing my narrative I consi-
dered it prudent to write this as an addition to
my forager narrative on account that I would feel
nys^fvary embarassed if that these omissions
were aot made knowti to the Crown Counsel
till I made them known when upon oath be-
^Ke the Court — and for this reason I 'hope
y.oii> win have tha goodness to forward it to tne
* The other inclosure mia a letter (nm J.
Camobell to his wife.
VOL. XXXIII.
Ihein, by the examination of the persons
gointed out ia the deposition which has just
leen giveti. And, in particular, in that event.
Crown Counsel by so doing you will much
oblige y' m* oV ser*
(Signed) Jouir Campbell. .
Cepv — ^Letter addressed <* H. H. Drummond;
Esq. Advocate, Edinburgh.''
Snt
Edinburgh CastU 27th June 1817
Necessfily irapells me to make yon acquaint-
ed with my present wants ;ind at same time
to crave your assistance in getting ray dis-
tress in some measure lessened they are in
number three two of them are entirely per-
sonal and the third concerns both my wife and
me the last of which causes me a great deal of
uneasiness, and shall therefore take the free-
dom to ktate them seperatly which is as fol-
lows
My shoes are in sach a sitnatioa that they
do not serve to keep my feet of the ground so
that my stockings are in a gpreat measure de-
stroyed and in a few days the want of shoes
will leave me without stockings
my tronsers are also in that situation that
for these some weeks I could not put them on
as they were become unfit to serve there da^
sign in at^ sense which caused me to wear a
pair of Breeches the cloth of which cost me
32j. pr. yd. a very unfit article for every days
wear they are fast changing appearance which
will render me soon destitute of elothing.
I now come to the last of the three and the
one that concerns me most I informed you be-
fore of my wife being Pregnant and of having
been in a bad state of health these some years
by past I have now to add that I believe she
is arrived at that period when that a wife has a
right to look for the roost tender care — ^but what
must her situation be her husband a prisoner
her friends poor who has the heart to assist a
person in distress and thus render*d unable to
give her attendance when needed the credit of
every poor man destroyed by the badness of
the times add to this the recolection of having
been six days badly with her first child — and
to this a Doctor without the view of pay for
his labour is seldom known to give his assist-
ance with these pronpects I think her misery
nearly compleat and my reflections cannot ba
diottght to b^ very pleasant.
1 hope Sir you will excuse my freedom it is
very disagreeable to my feellings to be forced
to this alternative at tliis time.
Yofir consideration of the above will greatly
Oblige your most OV. St.
(Signed)
John Campbell.
It IS believed that the Jailor famished John
CunpheH with one or tiro articles of dress as is
usual with prisoners nnder Mmilar drcumstanees,
and which he informed Campbell, before deliver-
ing the letter, oould he done without writing to
2 Q
596] 57 &e;prge hi.
1 should wbli- DOW to call for the exatninalicq
of the Sherifi; sir William Rae/ thai the ac-
curacy and veracity of this witness should be
established.
lard Juttice Clerk, — In the view in which
this examination presents itself to my mind, it
does not appear to me necessary to proceed in
this inYCStigfation.
Lord Advocate, — I should think, aAerwhat
has been sworn to by this witne^, the state-
ment of Sir William Rae should be given to
the Court, and the Court will then determine
what line of proceeding should be followed.
It will then be for me to consider what line
I am to adopt ; but till this inquiry belfinished
r am not calbd upon to say what I am to do.
Lord Jmtice Clerk. — ^Your lordships will say
if this enquiry is to be gone into.
Lord Hermmd.^lBAther this man^s state-
ment is true or not. If not true, what sort of
witness have we here? If k be true, which I
disbelieve, for the promise of an office in the
excise, and the promise of writing to the
Secretary of state, I don*t believe; but, if
true, the objection to his evidence being re-
ceived, must be sustained. We are in an
equal dilemma against receiving him as a wit-
ness, whether his story be true or false.
Lord Gillkt. — I concur fn the opinion
which lord Herroand has given. I should
wish very much to have Sir W. Rae examined ;
but the Court is sitting to try the case' of M'
Kinley, and it is our duty to proceed in this
trial, and examine no witnesses whose evidence
cannot affect the result of the trial. If five
hundred were examined, say what they like,
this man is disqualified from giving evidence.
' He is disqualified in every way, whether what
he has said i^ true or not. Besides, he has
sworn that he considers himself under an en-
gagement, having influence on him, and con-
nected with this trial. Under these circum-'
stances, I cannot go farther into the inquiry.
It may be a subject for consideration after-
wards, whether any proceeding should be had
in regard to tlie witness ; but, at present, it
could not lead to any thing towards forwarding
the trial.
Lord PitmUly, — ^We must attend to the pre-
cise point which is before us. All this has
come out in the questions put by the Court,
tfi inUialibuSf to this witness, and we are'now
in an inquiry whether the evidence of Sir
William Rae is to be received. I, for one,
am of opinion, that it is not hujus loci to enter
any person. No answer whatever tras sent to the
letter, either in writing or otherwise.
[See some farther particulars respecting this
witness Campbell, in the Deoate in the
House of Commons, Feb.'10| 1818; 37
Hans. Pari. Deb. 268.]
* Afterwards Lord Advocate.
Trial ofAndrtn M'Kinley
[506
upon this enquiry, and that it is not - compe^
tent to examine Sir William Rae at present.
Lord Btiton, — I concur in thinking that
Sir William Rae cannot competently be ev
amined.
Lord Juttiet Clerk, — The opinions now de^
livered are to the same purport with what I
was going to state. However anxious ^roar
lordships may be with regard to them, this is
not the stage to proceed in an examination of
the statements made by the witness ; for I am
clear, that, even supposing^ you were to have
the most satisfactory evidence, that he has not
correctly stated any one of the coDTersatioDe
which he has detailed, he cannot be recetred
as a witness, for he has sworn he is acting
under an engagement which he holds to be
binding. Therefore^ there can be no farther
examination of him in this trial.
Lord AdvocaU.^Yom lordships will io-
duljge me with saying,, that this mode of pro-
ceeding abridges the discretSoaary power eom-
petent lo me with relation to pressioi^ the
examination of this witness. I have expressed
my anxiety that Sir William Rae should be
examined; and after his examination wa»
closed, it would hare been for me to have said
whether I wished or not that the witness
should be examined or withdrawn. It woold
have been within my competency then to have
stated, that I did not desire a judgmeat of
your lordships upon the admisstbiUty of the
witness Ounpbell. As it is, it only remaina
for me to say, that I am satisfied that whatever
might have been the evidence of Sir William
Rae, after what has been said by the witness^
besides what I have now heard mm the Cour^
I should not hare considered it as my duly,
as public prosecutor, to have pressed the evi*
dence of this witness apon your lordships ; and
my wish for examining Sir William Rae arose
from my feeling of what was due in justice
to persons whose names hare been mentioned.
One thing, as I am up, you will aUow me
to say, that I myself have not been in the dty
of Glasgow for two years.
Mr. Je/^rey.— I wish a statement on the sub-
ject to be made on the record.
The following minutes were then given in :
*' Jeffrey for the panel, represented,
that if tKe truth or accuracy of the stale-
ment now given in the initial depositioa
of this witness, was not admitted by the
prosecutor, he was ready and desirous of
corroborating the statement by other wit-
nesses, and accordingly begged leave in
the first place, to calf for the evidence of
Sir William Rae, upon the points alluded
to in the preceding deposition.''
'^ Advocatus answered, that he was no
less anxious than the Counsel for the
panel, that the evidence of Sir William
Rae should be taken. Without t^tam
eridence the true state of the &cts, and
«?]
Jw Admmkhring unUmfitl Oaiiu,
A. J>. 1817.
[509
of the cottverMtioDi alluded to in the
foregoing depoeitioD, could not be pre-
^ely ascertained. That the precise im-
jportof thpse alleged convenations must
oe ascertained before the nature and effect
of the legal objection could be distinctly
estimated : That he had . no intention to
.press the examination tn cau$d of this
witness upon the Court ; and even after
the testimony of Sir William Rae should
-be taken, it was his intention to withdraw
the witness."
The Coutit -declined going into anj investi-
gation in this matter.
The wituess was then withdrawn.
JioAn M'LoMme sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Drummond,
Do you know the prisoner at the bar ?— Yes.
^o you know a person of the name of Hugh
Dickson } — ^Yes.
Do yoo remember meeting the panel at the
bar at the house of Hugh Dickson, in the
Gallon of Glasgow, in the month of December
last T-^I could not say whether November or
December.
You remember a^meetiog at his housed — Yes,
but not the time.
Id Che month of December}^! rather sus-
pect "November.
Before the New Year ? — Yes, a considerable
time ; I think November.
Who were present there? — I could not say
altogether.
Could you mention some of them? — One
John Campbell and Hugh Dickson.
Who else ?<*One Gil^n, Peter Gibson.* I
eoold not say I can recollect their names; but
I thmk they were all present.
Was the meeting in the evening ? — ^Yes.
What was the purpose of it ? — To consider
whether it was pnident to commence Reform
SocieCies, as they are called.
Describe what was done at that meeting ? —
What I recollect. After some alt^'cation
taking place, some one was introduced by
Peter Gibson, who told us there were some
societies aSout town, who would wish others
were formed, and that if he would agree to
ferm societies, they would correspond with
them.
Others of the same kind? — He said he un-
derstood so. And the question being put— *
Go on?— It being allowed by tne same in*
dividml, that it was necessary they shonld
piomise secrecy, there was some altercation
vpon that subject. The ground stated then
Mr feerecy was ; that as it was hinted, for some
time previoOs, in the London newspaper, the
XiODdon Courier, that the Habeas Coipus might
be suspended soon after the meeting of parlia*
nent tor dispatch of business ; and as it vras
ftnarally understood that a very small crime
asgfat be the cause of throwing a roan into
poton; at tast if any unguaided ezpreasioos
were used, no one therefore should hurt his
neighbour for such unguarded expressions.
An V member might use unguarded expressions ^
and his neighbour should promise not to hurt
him for such unguarded expressions.
What vras done in consequence of this t^k
of secrecy T~- 1 was going to proceed, if you
please. Then it wasproposed an obligation
should take place. This was objected to by
some, as we did not know how other societies
did, or what they were about. All we could do
was to promise not to hurt them, till we should
know what they were about, and see what
weve the grounds or meanine of the other
•ocieties, or what rules they had.
Well, sir P — I recollect the preses (I do not
remember his name) put it to the vote, and
that those for secrecy should hold up their
right hand.
How was it decided ? — It was agreed, with
the exception <»f one man, for secrecy.'
Who was he P-^Mitchell, I think; but I
could not be positive.
What was done next? — Each individual
shook hands. There was a shake of hands in
confidence, that nothing was to be revealed
of any information given them by other socie-
ties ; and that no one was to hurt any indivi«
dual. Then there was an appointment of two
individuals.
Do you remember who they were? — I was
one. 1 do not remember the name of the
other.
What were they to do ?— To wait upon the
Glasgow Reform Committee, to see wnat in<*
formation they could give them.
Was that all that was done that night? —
That is all that I recollect was done that
evening.
When WM the next meeting? — Before I go
forward, I suspect, I should give what took
place afterwards before any other meeting.
Cour^-^It is what you know that you are to
tell us.-^What I know took place as to myself.
Before I got time to call upon the Glasgow
Committee, there was one of the memben
called upon me.
Mr. Druiftifioml.^What was his name?—
Alexander Richmond. He called upon me,
and asked, what was our Reform Committee
about now? I told him, I was not an active
member, or member of the committee. He
said, they would be as lax, he supposed, as
the Glasgow Committee. . I told him, I was
glad to see one of the committee, as I had been
appointed to wait on them ; and I asked what
were they to do ? Did they mean to petition T
or what were they to do ?
Go on to the next meeting?-— It took place
in M^Kinley's house. Those I was connected
wiUi
Mr. Je^rey.-^There is no meeting in M'Kin-
ley's libelled,
Mr. Drummond, — Do you remember a meet-
ing upon the first of January ?— Yes.
990] 57 GEOliGE lU.
Tri0i ofAwirm M'KUky
1400
Where was that beM ?— lo 9n« LeMai'f .
Where does Leggat live?— loTradettovD.
Was that meeting. in the evening too? — ^Yes,
Can you tell us who were present? —
CampbelU Dickson, M'Kinley.
This roan P [pointing to the panelj. — I re-
nember seeing him there.
Do you remember any more of tbem I — ^Yes,
one of the name of Somenrille*
Court, — How many of them altogether ?-^A
dozen, or perhaps more.
Mr. Drvamond. — Who was preaes of that
meeting?— I think a man of the name of Pate.
But as I was a little intoxicated that evening^
I could not be positive upon that point' or any
other. I was the worse of drink.
Do you remember any thing about an oadi
at that meeting? — ^To the best of my recollec-
tion, there was a paper wrote that night, called
a Bond of Union. I never heard it called an
oath till after I was made a prisoner.
What was the nature of it ?— I could nol
repeat it at present. It was about persevering
in demanding a reform in parliament, or at
least in petitioning for it.
Who read it ? — I could not be positive, i
believe it was read by one or two.
Do yon remember any of the woids. — ^If I
heard them read perhaps I could.
You said it contained something about pe-
titioning for a reform in parliament? — Yes.
Please to read it, and I will say what I re-
member.
Was any particular species of reiorm wanted ?
— ^To obtain the elective franehise at the age
of twenty-one.
Who were to get it P^-Thoae^ I suppose,
who were to be considered worthy of it.
Was it for any particular description of
persons, or was it a general thing ? — I recollect
nothing more than the elective franchise at the
age of twenty-one.
Court, — Was it to every bodyP — Insanity
was one thing, crime was one thing, that was
to disqualify a man, I understood. If he was
disqualified by crime he was to have no right.
Mr. Drvmmand, — Was insanity to disqualify
him ?•— I could not be positive ; but I l>elieve
it would do it. But I do not remember whe-
Ihere it was in the paper or not.
Do voo remember any thing else of the na-
tare of this bond of union ? — ^Yes, there was
one thiitg. There were none that were to
oome into this society that were to hurt any of
their brethren in the same society.
Lord Bermand. — ^What do you mean by
hurting ?— By giving information.
Mr, Drimmond. — Do yon remember tny
thing more of the nature of the promise ?— ?1
could not say at present.
Was it said what was to happen if they
broke their promise ?— They were to be con-
sidered at traitors^ or someUdDg to that pur-
pose.
Coir^.«*-if ftey should give iofiNWittipii f—
Mr. DnanmoHd. — ^Was it said what was to
be done to them? — ^Not that I remenrber in
that paper.
In any other ? — ^I saw one in court.
But at that meeting f'— I recollect none.
Tliev were to be accounted traitors, and to be
jusea as such.
Court.T-To be used ^s sacb ?^I understood
so.
You remember itP — ^Yes; that is, to the
best of my recollection. It is from a copy I
saw of it next day that I speak.
Mr. Groii^. — He was not sober at the meeir
ing, and does not speak from his recollertion
of what took place then, but from ^ recol-
lection of a paper which he saw afterwards.
Court, — ^Are you s^ng to us your reeoUec*
tion of what passed P-^Tiie last part, I ob-
served to vou, as to traitors, I do not remember
at Leggat^s, but firom a papjsr I saw MSt day.
There were other papers read, as a speech
prepared for some reform-aueeting. Tb^
were strangers to me, except a few UmI I jesi
now named.
lord Bermond, — ^Was any thing said at that
meeting as to the means to be employed f — I
never understood any of their means, bnt by
that of persevering in petitioning.
Lord Juttke C/!erfc.*-You irill vsMlerstaad
we should hava warned you, that, bgr Mng'
brought here as a witness, you tamwt be
brought to any trial for those transaetions, and
that you are now in no hazard if you speak thd
truth. Having been brought here as a witness,
you are bound to apeak out the whole tralb,
without regard to any obligation that may hatve
been taken from you at any fbmer iimtf or
for any thing Ulat was ever said to yos.
Mr. thvmmond, — You sdd you were a little
the worse of liquor f — I was, before going to
the meeting ; and I became a little sick after
I was there.
You were not so drunk you could not re-
collect what passed? — I was not insensible
altogether, but it hurt my recollection.
Do you remember any thing further than
what you told us passed at that meeting 1 — I
recollect of the words, moral and phyitt^al
fbrce or strength, or something; moral or
physical strength, I think.
Lord IfiTwoML— Was that in the beodP—
I understood so< It is from the P^P^ I«n
speaking.
Was it in the bond ?-*-To the beet el my r^-
coUeetion.
tord Justice Cftrft.—You heard it at Leg-
gat's ?— Yes.
Mr. Dnmunetuk — How wa» this eKpressima
used in that bond? .iiow was tiie metal
streDfth tc b* applied ?-^ADy* mt^m^tm. I
•on
for AimhikLenng unlawfid Oaihs,
A, D. 1BI7.
[«M
9tB give if, I nnSenMod it mertfly i» mmi,
they were to use great effortt, bj roasdoing
and all the means in their power, to effect a
refonti in parliament.
Court.— Repeat your words, sir?— Tocon-
Tinoe of the necessity of a reform in the
Commons house of parliament. .
Mr. Dnomnond.^'llow was .the physical
strength to be applied? — By the expression
pliysical strength, I understood from the rea«
soning that took place, that I was bound to
assist personally in preparing and forwarding
petitions for the like object; or subscribing
sums, as the case might require, subscribing
s(s much money as possible, to defray the
expenses of forwarding and preparing the pe-
iiitons.
Lord AdvocaU. — ^You said you are not quite
sure whether the Hqid* are pbysieal force, or
strength? — ^To the best of my recollection,
strength.
Do you employ them as meaning the same
thing ? — I do not ptesttme to be a judge in the
language.
If it had beca physical Ibreet would yo«
hare— -
[I^Qid Advocate interrupted in putting the
qae8tioi),by the- Opposite counsel objecting.]
Jjord Advocate. — I am entitled to ask——*
•
. 1fitett.f^Tbey mcy be synonymous ; Vut I
am not a judge of language.
Did you understand subscribing money to
be exerting physical strength ? — I understood,
that if my physical stiengSi was not t6 be efen-
ployed the other way, I was to subscribe;
that, if I weie not ealled upon to act person*
ally, I was to pay those who were to act ptr^
sttndlfty.
Did yott see any papei* takea that night out
of any person's pocket? by the prisoner out of
faispocket ? — I could not say so.
Did yon see him produce a paper ^ — Yes;
I saw him have a paper in his hand.
* Was that papeir read ? — ^I understood it was
fead.
Did yeu bear it kead f-^-To the best bf iliy
recollection.
What Was it- about h--Oft the same sid>jbet,
reform in parliaiaent.
What did it say ?— I could not be positive.
Do yon remember nothing about it? — It
was like the lest of them, abonl a refotn in
periiasenl.
Siniltr to the bond of nnien ? — No ; I do
npt tlimk it we» siasilaf to it. I think it was
longer than it, fi>r one thing.
what wee it abo«t?^About a lelbrte in
padiiunent ; but I am not able to recolleet.
Did it contain any of IhS' werdil yoia heve
speften oif-^l do not renMsber.
. Any thing like theni?-^! eoeld not ley*
Tkmim was a p^^et reed by tbem befvre it,
wtfiifih was laid-esidei aaii enew paper ordered '
.«tr Ii0 sped fee the conmtlWNilBiit. Mer
these twe were read and Wd aside, tktm fras
a long speech, five or six sh^ets^ whi^ had
been prepared to be read, or which 4ud
actually been read, at some refbfm meeting.
Was the bond of union, which vou tok) us
of, approved of 1 — l^o ; I do not think it was«
- Any written that night 7 — ^I understood it
was written.
Did you see it? — I do^not recollect that I
saw it ; but I understood afterwards.
Was there any body present ? — One
M'Dowall Pate, I tnink, to the best of my re-
colUction.
Did McDowell Pate read aloud in your bear-
ing any paper?— He did read the bond of
union, of Which I have spoken.
And, what did the oihecs do when it was
read ? — ^To the best of my recollection, there
was some amendment proposed, whi<^, I
understood, was added afterwards ) but, to the
best of my recolIection» I was out at the time.
Covf/.— Was it proposed in your hearing ?
— Yes.
In yonr presence read by Fate ? — Yes.
Lord Aduoeaie. — Did they sit stall or rise
after the reading ?— They sat st^^ I believe.
You did not hear, it read when they stood
up l^-Yesy but not at that time.
Yen came btxk again ? — Yes.
You heard the paper read over as agreed
to ? — Not by tbe same individual, but another
at tbe other end of the table; his name I do
not know.
What then ? — Tbe preses ordered every one
who approved of the paper to signify so, by
holdirfg up their right nand.
. Do yon know a person of the name of*
Edger r — I hate seen him onee since I was
made, a prisoner.
Did you hear him read ? — He retfd it once^
and so did the preset Both read rt^ and
amendmeafts were proposed. He who read it
the third time sat oes^e £dgar^ or where he
sat before I went out.
You Said tltey stood up; mMl each was to
signify his spptovai of the' bond of enion by
holding u^ his right hand?— I did so^ sad I
understood each did so.
. Wtiat did you do 1 — ^I geve my approval to
it, by holding up my right hand.
What do you nkeen, by giving your ap-
proval?— I became a member of that society^
bound as I have eitplained, I understood it«
How did the paper begin ? To the best ei
ny reoeUectien^ it began with <' In the pre«
sence of Almighty God.''
Did it end wttb the vrordtf *^ Almighty
Ged?** — ^I do not positively reflsember; but,
I beUeve it ended with " he^ tae God," et
sefnsthing te thaiL)purt»eae» .
Was there anything in it about brothesbeed ?
— *I dd not lemdmber.
Try to recollect whether there- wss lajr sddb
wdrd in it ?-<-^Yes; i daae segr theie wes.
Brotheriiood of affeetien l^^-Aondthii^K
%SB^S^w
eOBi St GBOSGB lit
fTbelptd »d?ooa!tew«s
Cleik.]
Lord Adnofaki, — ^I must not be intempted.
Mr. CMl — ^Yo« tnust be intemipted ivhen
joQ pat incompeteot questknui.
Lord Jtatice Ckrk, — ^The Couit will prevent
questions from being put that are iBoompetent,
but none such have been put. The question.
Was there anything in the oond of union about
brotherhood ? is not incompetent.
XoftJ^dvooite.— Did the wIGness add bro-
theilMMM of afieolioii t — ^I think there was some-
thing of thai kind.
Was there anything about con6dence in it ?
— ^I could not say I recollect of that word.
Was there anything like it, or of ^the same
meaning ? — I could not say tlwtl remember.
Was there anything about the punishment of
death in it ^— Not that I recollect of. There
was, in one I saw after I was a prisoner.
Speak to what you heard that night, and the
bond to which you became a member. Was
there anything about equal representation in
it 7 — ^Yes, I thmk there was ; that was in it.
Anything about annual parliaments in it? —
zes.
You have said, persons were to be con-
sidered as traitors, in certain circumstances.
Did this bond of union, or whatever il is,
bear that any punishment should be inflicted
on them ?— Not that I remember. It held up
as traitors, or detestable characters, those who
should give information, upon what I have
said.
You hare said, that there was in this bond,
or whatever it was, the words Almighty God,
that it began with the name of God ; What
were th^ words before ? — ^In presence of Al-
mighty God.
Was there anything about hopes or fears, or
rewards or punishments f — ^Yes ; I think these
were in it, hopes, fears, rewards, or punish-
ments.
How applied P — That no man should become
a traitor for the sake of reward ; that no man
should become a traitor to his brethren who
composed the society.
Was the word stedfast in it ?— Not that I re-
member*
You hare stated, the words equal represen-
tation and annual parliaments, were in it, and
aUo that the terms moral and ph^cal strength
were in it ; was there not sometmng also about
endejivours ? — ^Yes ; endeavours to obtain all in
our power.
liow were the words I have now mentioned
and annual parliaments, and unirersal suffrage,
connected ? — ^I 4o not remember at present Uie
way they were connected. They were all in
the same paper.
In the same paper, which began with Al-
mMty God P— Yes.
Do you remember the word awful P— I do
not remember of the word awful. '
When you held up your hand in order to
Triti rfAwirm M*KMqf
riMM
itenvpled by Mr. testify your beeoming boond to that tocietyy
' Mr ft mMnhgy
Mr. Clerk, — ^You canoot be albwed to as-
sume so from what the witness said.
Lord Adoocate. — The assuming is not upon
my part.
fWitness removed.]
Mr. Clerk, — ^As I understood the witness,
the substance of what he said was, that they
did stand up, and some held up their
hands, and some held them down. Examine
the witness again; for he has not yet said,
that by bedding up his hand he approved the
oath.
Lord JuUiee C/erfc.— The words I took down
«re,
[Here his lordship read from his notes.]
Mr. Jejfity, — There was only one putting up
of hands.
Lord GUlie$* — ^My recollection concurs with
your lordship*s notes. And I suggest the
propriety of learning from, this witness, as I am
not sure of it, whether he was speaking from
what he remembers passed at Leggat*s or
from his recollection of what he saw the day
following. *
Lord Jdvocaie, — I begleare to state, that
I wish to know nothing but what he does re-
member of that meeting.
[Witness returned .J
Lord Jmike Cferfc.— I wiah to state, that the
Court expects you to say distinctly, whether
you are speaking as to the terms of the bond
solely from your recollection of the meeting at
Leggat*s, and not from any recollection upon
seeing any other paper?
WUneu, — I think I have made the difference
always to your lordships, by stating when it
was nom something else. All the answers have
been as to Leggat's where I did not mention
any other place.
Lord Jdooeete, — At the time tou stood up
and repeated these words, and held up your
hand, and approved of the bond, and became
bound as a member of the society, was
M'Kioley present } — I believe he was, but I
could not declare it upon oath.
Have you any douot he was present, from
your recollection P — ^He might be out at the
time, but I have no doubt he was in. He was
out, but I believe he was in at that time. I
think so, but could not be positive.
Did you hear M'Kinley, or any body at
that meeting, say from what the copy of that -
paper was taken ?•— I heard some of the meeting
say, at one of the meetings, that it was similar
to what was used in Iruand ; and there was
soine alteration made on that aooount, as their
object was only to employ legal means, and
the Other had different means in iriew. That •«
f»T Adii^kuteniig tmltmfiiKhtht.
dosJ
was the cauM of the alteration^ as I under-
stood.
Do YOU remember whether the words, moral
and physical strength, were in the first time
the bond was read ? — I do not remember but
I understood they were in the last time.
Mr. Dnamumd. — Do you know Leggat him-
self ? — I could not say I am acquainted with
the man. |
Was there any liquor at the meeting that
night ? — ^Yes.
Who brought it in T-^The man of the house,
I undentood.
Could you know him, i£you saw him ? — ^I do
not know but I should.
Do you see him in the Court ? — Not at pre-
sent.
[Three men were produced, one of whom
was Leggat, trbom he recognised.]
Were you at a meeting on the 4th of January ?
—Yes.
, Where was it held ?— In Keill Munn*s.
Where is that ?— In the new town of Glas-
gow. I could not name the street.
Who were present at that meeting ?— There
were these inaividuals, Gibson, Dickson, and
M'Kinley.
What time did you go there? — ^Half-past
nine o'clock, as near as I recollect. It might
be twenty minutes from ten; but near that
time. I think the 4th of January.
Who was preses at that meeting ? — I think he
who was preses the nieht before.
Pate, you mean ? — ^Yes.
How long were you at that meeting? —
About half an hour, I think.
What was done?— Some delegation was
tpoken of. M'Dowal Fate Tolunteered, I
think, to go out to a place called Carmunnock,
to see if tome friends and acquaintances of his
there would agree to form a society, similar to
that then met, which commenced, I understood,
the 1st of January.
Were any others present, than those who
were present at the former meeting? — ^Yes,
many who* were strangers to me. I saw
none initiated. That was the term generally
used.
What do YOU mean by initiating ? — Becoming
members of the society, signifying their appro-
bation Qf the bond.
CoMTf . — What is your explanation of initiate ?
— ^Doing the same as I had kcted myself upon
the 1st of January, by holding up the right
hand to that bond. That is what I qnderstood
by initiating.
You said, many of those others you did not
know ? — ^Yes. The room was pretty full^ tfrhen
I went in, not having room to sit.
Lord Hernumd, — ^Not room to sit ?
Mr. Drammofiii^-Initiate was the common
word for the parpoie yoa explained ? — I heard
it naed.
A.D. t8l7.
tCk)6
GEwrf .-^Did yon bear that word used at that
meeting ? — No.
Mr. Drummond. — ^Did this man, Pate, sit al
the head of tiie table ? or where did he sit? —
He was standing, when I went in.
Had he any particular place as preses T — I
could not say whether the side or head of the
table was to him. '
How do you know he was preses?-- He was
addressed as such.
Was there any vice-president, or secretary ?
— None that I recollect of.
No other officer, with any duty to perform f
— None that evening:, except the panel, who as
collector received e^;hteen pence, which was
over the reckoning.
Collector of what ?— Collector to collect
the reckoning, or for any thiag that -might
occur.
What was to be done with the money ? — >^
I could not say. It was for the reckoning ;
and the meeting allowed him to keep what was
over.
Ctwri.— Was he called collector ?•— Yes.
The 1st of January he was' appointed. He,
or the person who had the office, was to keep
what was over, as some individual might he
out of a sixpence, when he was called to pay
the reckoning.
Lord flmnanJ.— How much had you to pay
yourself? — I think sixteenpence.
Upon the 4th ? — ^Yes.
Do you know whether any were present at
that meeting who were not initiated ?-— I do not
know. I heard no remarks made.
Lord Juitke Clerk, — He said none were
initiated at this meeting; but persons were
present who were not at the meeting of the Isl
of Januaiy.
Mr. Dntmmtmd. — Were you at any other
meeting after that ?— I believe I was at some
other meeting. I do not remember particu-
larly.
Were you at a meeting at Robertson's ?— At
Robertson*s, I think, in tibe Gallowgate.
How long was Robertson's meeting after the
other ? — I could not positively say.
A week ?— -A week or two; out I do not
positively recollect.
Was M'Kinley there f — I do not remember ;
but I think he was.
"What was done ? — ^I do not remember any
thins particular that was done.
Did M'Kinley keep a copy of the bond of
union ? — I could not be so particular. I never
saw him have it.
Did you ever hear him say he had it ?— I
never heard him say so.
Who were in Robertson's ? — A number of
persons; John Campbell was there; and
Didcson and James Hood were there ; and a
number of others, whose ^ names I do not re*
member.
Was Simpson there ?— Never that I saw.
Was Fiidayson there ?-*-No.
007] ^ GEOBGE III.
Tnkt of A^idr^w M^£mls^
C«<M
Wore jTOii At tbe nweCiag U Hiiniet^s ?^ Ye»,
upon the 23nd of February, when I was taJctn
up ;. never before.
Before I have done with you, J wiah to ask
yo«L to try to repeat, as iar as your memory
aenres you, the way the bond was expressed.
Begin.— In connection, I could not repeat it.
There were annual parliaments, eauai repre-
sentation. There were these woras — ^hopes,
fears, rewards, and punishments, were in it ;
and there was something about brotherhood of
affection. I could not take it in connection.
These words were itf it.
Loid ficrMMMJ. — ^Wcfe aay false names as-
nmed by ajiy on$ t — ^Yas ; one by Gibson, and
one by M'Kinley.
What did bacall fainself r^Brotheistone, or
tome sucbname. Qibsaa did so too ; he called
himself M%nley.
John MlfOehiane cross-examined )>y
Mr. Jeffrey.
How many were at Munu's ?— I could not
aagr. «
A handred ?^No.
Tyventy or thirty ? — ^I could aoi say.
Was il a laige room tba ascetiiig oacapiad f
—No.
Mr. J^Jrof. — I hare no more questions.
Lord Advocate, — Were the wordsy declare
and swear, in the bond? — ^The word deckare
was in it. It vf as at the beginaing>
There were the words Almighty God, and
then the word declare after tUem ; hoiw did the
words run ? — I know declare, was immediately
after Almighty God ; but how the words were
used,! do not know.
Did TOO ooderaCand you ased the word
dare r — Yes ; that it was ii
declare
in the bond".
Ceurt. — ]>o yoa fecoltect any thing of the
' swear in it ? — ^Not that I recollect of;
but, the word declare, I recollect.
Explain m what way the preses directed the
holding up the hands ?— The word were : All
who approve of the bond, ae it now stands,
will signify the same by holding up their right
hand.
This was after it wa» read ? — Yes, after it
was read the third time.
Attend to this question. Am I to under-
stand, that by your complying with this ques-
tion, that was put bf the preses, by holding
up your hand, you mean to conrey to as, that
that was being* initiated ? — ^Yes.
Do you reooUect any thing more being said
by the preses, either before or after he put that
questioB about approval by the holding up of
hands ?— No, except his part in general con-
verMrtion.
Am I to understand from you» tJhat this pro.*
aetding, which iwAi place at Lemf s was the
only oceasion when you saw this bond ap>-
proTed of, in the way you mention ; or did you
see it^kma at any other meetirfe f — At none of
those meetings I was talking or.
Lavd He^mtmd, — Did you ete¥ see it done at
any priyate meeting ?
Comaelfor tie Fanel. — ^That is not in the
libel.
Mr. Draiawioarf.*— The gentlemen opposite
have not attended to the indictment, in object-
ing to this question.
Lord Advocate, — ^Did you ever at any time
see the question of approval put in the same
way as at Leggat's?
[Objected to by Mr. Gerk,]
I never recollect it being put when the panel
was present.
Lord Advocate. — I wish to ask the witaess,
whether he, at this moment, considers himself
under the obligation of this bond of union?—
By no meaas.
TeterOAun called.
Mr. Je^ey. — This man proposed to be
adduced la evidence, is liable to ooavulsions
and epileptic fits, which have so iur weakened
bis memoiy, as to render htm aa tmiK witness
in such a case as the pnssent. We can prove,
by those who have known him from hie infancy,
that his evidence is not be relied upon.
Lord Advocate. — The otjeotion relatas le
epilepsy. It is quite common to men of the
greatest f;alents. Julius Cesar was liable to it.
Buonaparte has been said to be liable to it, aa
well as another great military commander the
Arohduke -Charles. Do our learned friends
mean to say, that none of tliese personages eoald
have given testimony in a court of justice } I
appri^end this to be impossible. If so, yoar
lordships caaaot admit a proof of this aUeg»>
tion ia the terass in which it is made.
Mr. Jeffrey. — It is in the knowledge of alV
mankind, that this disease impairs the faculties
of the mind.
Lsxrd Advocate. — Is it meant lo aver thai
Gibson is turn aompu mentis
Mr. C/^^.— We do not say he is an idiot ;
but we make an averment that bets subject to
a weH known disease, which weakens thf in-
tellects to an extraordinary degree. And sup-
pose we should not be able to establish this fkct
to such an extent as to induce you not to receive
his evidence at all, we may do it to such an
extent as to satisfy your lordships and the jury,
that the witness, if examinable, is yet entitled
to very Kttle credit or belief with a jury. Having
said these few words, I need not trouble you
with a long harangue, as I never heard suc)k an
o!]gection opposed ta iifnine.
Lord Advocate. — I merely wish to kuow what
is asked io be proved, aixl I desire to see the
allegation in wn ting upon t^a record.
Jokn derk was called as a witness Ibr the
panel.
66dl
9 \ '
far AditAniUenng unlaXB/id Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
feio
Lord Advocate. — Till this moment I vras not
aware of this eridencp. The witness is not in
the list of witnesses furnished by the prisoner.
I do not object on this account to his e^dence,
though I might do so ; but he is uot in the list
sent me eTen last night.
[Witness sworn.]
Mr. CoMum» — What are you 7— A cotton-
spinner, in the summons I received.
What are you ? — Sometimes I am designated
by that name, and sometimes by the name of
merchant.
Do you know Peter Gibson ?«— Yes, I do.
Was he ever in your employment f^-Yes.
Mr. Jeffrey, — You know Peter Gibson ?—
rdo.
Do yon know whether he is in a sound or an
inBrm state of health? — He was for several
years in my employment previous to the month
of March. I was told he is subject to a falling
sickness. I never saw him in it.
Have you occasion to know whether he is a
person oS entire understanding, or weak in his
intellects ? — ^I had occasion to give him orders
in various things ^ and in any intercourse I
had witb him, we understood one another.
He knew what was to be done or not.
Did you observe any defect in his under-
standing ? What kind of matters had y<m to
speak of to him F^—In cotton mills there are
many things of a mechanical nature to speak
about.
Did he appear to you to have the ordinanr
memory and understanding of other men ?-<-i
always received the same kind of answers from
him as from any of the pther servants. .
Peter GftftioMr sworn .-^Eztfmined by
Mr. Drununondm
Court, — ^Being adduced here as a witness,
you can now suffer in no respect on account of
any share you may have had in the proceedings
in question, and yon will tell all that you re-
meoiber of diem.
Wifytsuj^-l shall not tell what I do not re*
Mr. DruffmtonJ.— Do you know this man ?
—I do.
MThat is his name ?— Andrew M'Kinlev.
Do you remember seeing him in Hugh
J)kikaon% in December, last ?r~Yes.
Do you remember what other persons were
at that meeting? — ^There were so many of
them, and some I did not know.
Mention any of the names f — Hugh Dick-
son, John Campbell, John M'Lachlane, and I.
About how many might there be altogether
at the meeting ? — I thi^. there might be about
ten.
Was there any thing of the nature of an
dathy obligation, or promise, at that meeting ?
— ^A proniise of secrecy by shake of the hand.
Do not be too fast wiUi me. I should wish so.
Can jOQ describe to us how that promise of
ifecreey by shake of hand was done F— I can*
VOL. ?cxxni.
not describe the very way. I remember we
all shaked hands.
Did you stand up? — ^Upon our feet. We
had been sitting ; and we shook hands, that
what we should get we should keep to our-
selves.
All information ? — ^All information whatso«
ever.
Do you remember a meeting some time
after this at William Leggat's?— In Trades*
town ?
Yes ? — I remember a meeting there.
At what time? — I think on the 1st qf
January.
Was M<KinIey at that meeting ?~I think
he was.
Cotart. — Are you positive he was?— -I am
pretty sure he was there.
Mr.. Drummond. — Can you mention any
other names? — I cannot recollect any more than
I mentioned before.
CsMf^.— Were there others ?— Yes^ strangers
to me.
Mr. Drvmmmd, — ^Was there any thing in
the shape of oath, promise, or obligation, at
that meeting? — As I had got spirits befbre
going there, and while Uiere, I do not recol-
lect what was said or done, at the meeting of
the first of January. I dare not say any tUng
concerning it. I am not very sure.
Do you mean to say you were so drunk that
you could not remember ? — I do not mean to
say that I was drunk. Tliere are different
degrees in which persons may be the worse
of liquor. I have seen some persons -Mio
cannot go, others who cannot speak, and some
who can do^ both but do not afterwards re-
collect what happened in their presence. '
Do you know what M'Kinley and the others
did ? — I remember coming home with them.
We went into a public house at the Catton,'
wheK I fell asleep and continued so, I was
told, for two hours.
Do you remembev the approval of a bond
or oath of union ? — I do not remember.
Do you swear you do not remember? — ^I
swear.
Do you say or swear you do not recollect any
thing of an oath at that meeting ? — ^I do not
recollect any thing about it.
Do you recollect any thing about a bond of
union at that meeting ?— I saw one about the
2nd or 3rd of January.
Where ?-^In a man's hand in the Calton.
Was there any thing of that kind at the
meeting ?-^I don't recollect of it.
Was there a person of the name of Mn[)oi!^
all Pate at that meeting ? — I was told he was.
Lord Advocate, — After you did know him,
did you recollect having seen him there ?— I do
not remember.
Wete you at a meeting at Keill Munn's
upon the-4th of January ?— Yes.
Were those persons present who had been
at the former meetings ?— Was M'Kinley there ?
2 R
611]
£7 GEORGE IIL
Trial qfAmken M'Kmiqf
[612
— I do not remember of s^ng M'Rinley there.
I was out some time. I do not recollect
him.
Was he there?-— I say he was not there.
Was Soroerrille there ? — I do not recollect.
Was Hood there ? — ^Yes.
lard JuUiee CMt.~He has said M'Kinley
was not there, at least as &r as he recollects.
Lard Advocate. — ^We must ascertain how far
his memory serves him, and whether he be
consistent in his statements. — ^Was Somenrille
there? — I wish to say nothing but what I
recollect. I am not certain whether he was.
I have a judge to answer at another day.
' Was Hood there T—Yes, I say he was. I
have not at all a good memory.
Hugh Dicksen's house is off and on with
your's f — ^A but and a ben ; I am on the north
end, and he is. to the south of that in the
middle.
' You have sud you were at a meeting in
Hugh Dickson's part of the house, in which
John Campbell and M'Kinley were present f—
I juiid 8o» and I say it yet.
I believe your statement is perfectly true,
and you said there was a promise of secrecy.
Was any paper produced and laid before the
meeting?— It might be the case, but I do not
recollect.
Do vou recollect of any paper being read
in the n>rm of an obligation of any sort? — No.
Any thing of the nature of a bond f — I never
heard tell of a bond or any such thing.
An oath ? — ^No.
A declaration ? — ^No.
Did you hear any words repeated, in which
the name of the Almighty was employed ? — ^No.
Do you know Robertson's? — ^I know the
place.
Were you there on the 15th of February P
—You are leaving a long way now. I was
there.
Was a person of the name of Finlayson
there? — ^Tes, I think so.
Was M'Kinley therel-Yes.
I ask you upon your oath, whether an oath
or obligation was administered to him there
in presence of the panel at the barf — I could
say, and hold up my hand again» that there
was no such thing, or I am very far mistaken,
upon the 15th of February, in Roberston's.
Was there so any other day f — I never saw
that man administer an oath to Finlayson.
Ijfrd Advocate. — ^I wish the witness*^ de»
position to be taken down in writing.
The following was taken down in writing
by the Clerk of Uourt.
^ And uDon the motion of the lord
advocate^ tne said Peter Gibson being
interrogated^ if at the meeting at Rob^ert-
son's, on the 15th day of February las^
at which he admits he was present^ and
where he depones the panel and one
Finlayson also were^ any oath was admiii^
stered by the panel to the said Finlayson
in his presence, depones, That there mm
none. Interrogated, if, upon the above
occasion, any oath was administered to
Finlayson by an other person in the pre-
sence of M'kinley, the panel? Deponea^"^
That there was no oath administered to .
Finlayson, or any person else at Robert-
son's on ^e I5ui of February last. In-
terrogated, if any oath was administered
by M'Kinley, or any body else in M*&ui-
ley's presence, either to Finlayson or any
body elA, or ariy other day in the month
of February last, at Robertson's? Da*
pones, Tliat he was present at a meeting
at Robertson's on the 18th of Februaiy
last, along witli the panel M'Kinley and
Finlayson, when he thinks there was an
obligation taken; but whether it was
more than a promise, or amounting to an
oath, he does not recollect. Depones,
That at the meeting at Leggat's on the 1st
of January last, which was the only one
he ever was present at in that house, he
was in liquor, and if he took any obUga-
tion or oath there, he does not Know of
it, nor does he know of any other body
having taking any there. Depones, Hutt
he never read any oath from a paper,,
because he cannot read writing ; and all
which he depones to be truth, as he shall
answer to God.'*
(Signed) Pbtee Qibsox.
Who took the promise on the 18th of Fe-
bruary ? — ^All present.
Was there any writing? — ^No.
Was it read ?— No.
Was it repeated ?<~I am not very certain.
What do you think ? — ^I did not see those
present take this obligation, and do not know
whether it was any more than a promise.
How ' was it taken ?~I thinK it vras re-
peated. I do not recollect who repeated it<.
Was it M'Rinley?— I do not recoiled
whether he or not.
You have said there was something of the
nature of a premise. What did they promise
to do ?-«-There was a secret committee choseit
to do nothing unknown to the central meeting.
They bound themselves to do nothing bat
what was to be made known to the central
meedngK
Lord JBermdnd.— Is that all you recollect?—-
That is aU I reeoftect
Lord Advocate. — ^Did you at any time, at
any meeting at Robertson's, at Hugh Dick-
son's, at Leggat's, in the months of January
or February, see any other oath taken than
that you have now mentioned, in presence qC
the panel ?— In Hugh Dickson's, tnere was a
Jromise by shake of hand. 0>n the first of
anuary I do not remember what was said«
And in Robertson's, on the 15tb, there was no
obligation at all.
I ask whether at any time of these two
months, you heard any obligation taken f — ^I
6131
■ •
Jot AdminisieringunUnt^l Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
C614
do not remember seeing more thtn what I
have told you of.
I>id you take any yourself when M'Kinley
was present? — ^No. Mind, I said I do not
remember what passed on the Ist of January.
When sol^r, at any time, did you take an
oathy or any obligation, when the prisoner was
present ? — No. '
In the month of December, was there any
other promise? — No.
In the house of Leggat, in December, was
any other taken? — I never was there any other
time. I can say no more.
• Mr. Drwmnond. — ^Had you anv other ^ymp-
torn of intoxication, than want of recollection ?
Lord Adooeate, — I want to know, whether
you administered an oath, or read any thing in
tb€ . nature of an obligation, at any of the
bouses or times mentioned, or tried to read
any ? — I never read one in my life, nor tried,
fat I cannoti which is a very gfood reason.
Yon limit your answer by saying, you did
not see an oath administered, or did not read
an oath ? Did any person read it to you ? — ^No
person*
Was any oath repeated then?— There was
never an oath repeated than what I have told
yon, Qp in Dickson^ on the 18th of February.
[The Counsel for the panel put no questions
to. this witness.]
Jtay, — In consequence of what took place
on the 18th, or at any other time, do^'you con-
ceive yourself under an obligation to conceal
Che truUa? In consequence of that promise, or
oath, whether more solemn or not than you
describe it, do you hold yourself at all in-
fluenced?— Not in the least. I gave up idl
that this present month.
Joawt Fmltnfton swotu-— Examined by
Mr. Dnanmond,
Do you remember being at a meeting, in
February, at Robertson's, in the Gallowgate ?
—Yes.
Were you at more than one?— I do not
remember the dates. I was at two, at that
man Robertson's.
At what date was the first ? — ^IJpon a Satur-
day.
What time of the year? The month of Fe-
bruary ?^-I think it was February; a week
before I was taken up.
How many were present at that meeting ?*'
At the first P
Yet. — ^About twenty.
Can yon name any of them? — ^Yes, the pri-
scmer was there.
Do you remember tiie names of any of the
reet } — ^Yes, Peter Gibson waa there.
DojoQ know him? — ^Yes. That vras the
first time I ever saw Gibson.
Do yon remember any others ?— John Camp-
bell was diere.
Was Hood there ?~Yes.
Was James Robertson Uiere ?— Yes, James,
is his name.
Was Somerville there ?*-i— Yes.
What is his first name ?— Andrew.
Was Buchanan there ? — ^Yes.
What is his first name ?— Fthink, John.
Was there any preses of the meeting? —
Robertson.
What was done at thb meeting? — ^They
chose a select committee;
What was that for ? — I do not know what
it was for. Positively I do not know what it
was for.
Were you one of the committee chosen ?-^
Yes.
Lord Adoodate. — ^Do you remember whether
there were any oaths administered ?«— Yes, I
do.
Recite them, and let us hear them if you can ?
— ^I have heard two. There was none at the
first meeting.
Mr. Drmmond. — ^Was anything more done,
that you remember? — ^I never heard what the
select committee was to do.
Was any thing more done at that meeting,
by way of oaths ? — ^Members brought money.
What vras done with the money ? — ^It was
given to the treasurer.
Who twas treasurer f — Hugh Cochrane. He
vras there.
Those present brought money?— Some of
them. I did not see afi of them.
Do you remember anything more ? — Tliere
was a good deal said, but I do not remember it
all. The most of the time was taken up in
electing that committee.
Was the prisoner at the next meeting, on a
Tuesday ? — Yes.
Was an^ oath administered or taken at the
next meetmg? — ^Yes.
What took place at that meeting? — ^An oath
was dictated to me> and I wrote it.
What was the nature of this oath ? — ^I cannot
repeat it ; the whole matter of it : we were not
to tell anybody what, was to be done ; either
the names of the select committee, or anything
they should do, for that select committee was
not elected openly, but bv ballot.
Was Gibson present when that oath was ad-
ministered or taken ? — ^Yes.
What was done with the oath ? — I read it
out.
All of the rest repeated it after you ?— They
all stood round the table, and I beard their
voices repeating it after me.
You aoministered it to the rest? — I could not
tell whether all did repeat after me.
Did Gibson ? — I do not know ; one or two
may not have followed me, and I may not have
noticed it.
Was Gibson present at the time ?— Yes.
Was he one of those standing round the
table ?— Yes.
Lord Adtfocaie, — Do you know if any other
oath vras taken there then, or in any other
houses, in the month of January P — Not in that
house.
No Qther in (hat boase ^*No.
6151 SI GEORGE IIL
Triai qfAndrm M'Kinley
[616
• £Th6 Counsel for the panel objected to
the questions now put, {ind the witness
was withdrawn.]
lord JrfiMicatt.— The indictment charges the
oath to have been administered at a secret
meeting held at the house of W. Robertson,
innkeeper and sUbler in Gallowgate of Glasgow,
or elsewhere at Glasgow, or in the immediate
▼toinity thereof. The question I wish to put,
is, whether or no, at any other place in Glas-
gow, within the three months, the witness heard
any oath administeied, at which the panel was
present?
Mr. Je^^^. — ^Wemust object to that ques-
tion. Itthere be any use at all in the specifi*
cation, without which the relevancy of the libel
could not be sustained, it must be incompetent
for the prosecutor, after the opportunity he has
had for deliberation upon this indictment, to
put such general questions to the witness. In
this case, particularly, where there is a specifi-
cation of only one meeting, at which this wit-
ness is stated to have been present (for he is
not mentioned to have b^en present at Hunter's
or Leg«^at*s, or at any odier meeting), such a
general question cannot be allowed. You
have that meeting specified in the indictment :
and I submit, that, especially after the prose-
cutor has brought qut that an oath was adminis-
tered (but which is not very available to him),
lie cannot take an opportunity of putting a
general question to the witness, whether an
oath was administered in Glasgow, or the
vicinity, at anv time within the limiution of
these months (for, as to Robertson's, the pro-
secutor has not confined himself there).
This indictment is divided into five heads,
charging, as so many acts, the administration
of the oath, at fixed dates and places, to a
number of persons mentioned ; and the advan-
tage of specification would be lost, if a prac-
tice were to be introduced, that after naming
a day an<]t place in his charge, the prosecutor
might, in his examination, go through many
months and different places. The general ex-
pressions added in an indictment are intended
for any casual slip or inaccuracy in what roust
be articulately stated, and not to give the pro-
secutor such a range of inquiry as he now
wishes. To what is particularly charged and
specified alone he must confine himselh Were
it to be otherwise, we might be mocked with
the appearance of a form of specification in an
indictment, but we should be deprived of any
benefit from it ; and we might be condemned,
in other hands, to suffer the perversion of all
the forms considered indispensable to the
safety of the subject. If this were to be per-
mitted, any suspected places might be men-
tioned; and different places might be inten-
tionally put in to oppress prisoners, by the
most intolerable latitude of investigation. I
submit, therefore, that the question pn^MMed
by. the lord advocate cannot be put to the
witness.
Mr. GranU-^ln a case in which T attended
before you last year, where a carrier was tried
for theft, the description of some of the stolen
goods was in general words, '' cotton twist, and
other goods;*' and you were all clearly oC
opinion, that the description was not sufficiently
particular and specific.
Lord Advocate, — My learned friends are mis-
taken in supposing that the general description
given in the indictment applies merely to the
persons to whom the oath was administered*
It applies also to the placed; and your lord-
ships nave found it, by your interlocutor of re-
levancy, to be sufficientlv specific. The ques*
tion is, therefore, whether or not, your lord-
ships having found this part of the indictment
relevant, the prosecutor is to be narrowed, in
the course of bis investigation of the Cuts so
found to be relevantly set forth, by the objec-
tion in question.
The dates when the oath is alleged to have
been administered are given specifically in the
indictment, as well as generally, within two
months. Your lordships have already allowed
questions to be put as to meetings any day in
the months of January or Februaxy, without
adhering merely to the precise days in the
minute and specific statement of the previous
clause of the indictment. Yet it is obviova,
that the same objection now stated to putting
a question as to meetings in other places than
those specially mentioned, but referring to
meetings at Glasgow or the vicinity thereof,
as stated in the indictment might bave
been urged vrith the same propriety to
a question general as to the time, and not
referring generally to tlie dates condescended
on. Now, what I now wish to prove, relates
to a meetinff at some place in Glasgow or its
vicinity. Your lordships have found, that the
charge in the indictment laid in those terms,
and thus generally, is relevant ; and you have
actnallv allowed me to put questions equally
general as the present, with respect to time.
The same prinaple, I submit, ought to prevent
my being narrowed in my inquiries as to place.
This, as I understand it, is the simple state-
ment of the case, and, I submit, your lordships
would not have remitted the indictment to an
assize without erasing that general statement
from the indictment, if Mr. Jeffrey's present
objection appeared to you to have been well«
founded.
Lord Justice Clerk, — ^We certainly could not
repel this objection without the most deliberate
consideration. I took it for granted, thert
were four several occasions upon which, it ia
alleged, the oath was administered; and,
although the general words in the indictment^
fonndmi upon by the lo)rd advocate, did not,
among the multiplicity of points for considen^
tioB, strike me before, now that the objeetion
to thegi is pointed, out, I htve to itaite, thai I
think it is my duty to confine this eaaminaCion
to the specific charges in the indictment.
Lord Hermand, — t was a little misled at
first, jiarticularly as to the first charge. It says.
I
617]
far AdmMitering unlav^ Oaths-
^. D. 1S17.
i^U
*' At a lecret meeting, beld at the bouse of
Hugh Dick^on^ then weaver in Abercromby-
street, in Calton of Glasgow, or elsewhere at
Glasgow, or in the immediate yicioity therep^
yon, the said Andrew M'Kinley, did,^ &c.
But, upon looking at it again, and comparing
it with the statement of the next charge, it
appears only a broad description of the habi-
tation of the man. The words apply to a de-
scription of the residence of Dickson, as the
next to a description of that of Leggat. The
lord advocate questioned as to what happened
at Kobertson's. Under this indictment, he is
entitled thus generally to establish the facts
which have been found relevant.
Lords QUUuy Pitmlfy, and i2es/(m,'4ntimated
their agreement in opiraon with the lord jastice
c^erk.
[The witness was recalled.]
Lord Adcoeate, — Do you know Hugh Dick-
son ? — Yes, I thiiik so.
Do you know he has a house in Glasgow ?
— ^No ; I do not know that.
You never were hi his house ?— No.
In the house of William Leggat ? — ^Not to
my knowledge.
Do yoQ know Neill Munn ? — I have seea his
sign, hut was never in his house.
And, in none of Uie three months mention-
ed, you ever heard, in Rofoertsoh's bouse, any
other oath ? — ^There was never any other oath
ra that house, either on the Saturday or Tues-
day.
CourC.— In that house, upon any other day
in that month, were you present when an oath
was administered? — Yes; but I do not re-
member the day.
In that month of February ? — I think it was.
Mr. Jeffmf, — ^This does not seem applicable
to the partioidar charge against the panel.
Ijord Advocate. — ^There is no necessity for
proving that M'Kinley was present, in order
to bring the diarge home to him. He might
l>e an accessary, though he was absent; sind
this is charged against him in the indictment.
Tlie witness says, there was an oath adminis-
tered in Robertson's at a particular period;
and I presume we are entitled to have this
fact investigated, as we may be able to prove
the panel's connection with the administration
of this oath, and to establish against him the
charge in the indictment. Perhaps I may not
have fully comprehended the force or extent
of my friend Mr. Jeffrey's objection ; and be-
fore my friend the solicitor-general or myself
submit any observations upon it, I hope he
will state it more fully. I have given what ap-
pears to me a sufficient answer to the objec-
tion, as already brought forward.
[The witness was withdrawn.]
Mn Jeffrey, — ^My objection is two-fold. In
the. case of accession to crimes committed, the
first thing to be proved is the crime. This ii
a different case. The charge is, that t^e panel
at the bar was guilty of administering the oath
specified in the indictment. It is true, by the
other clause of the act of parliament, it is s^d,
'' That persons aiding and assisting at ^e adr
ministerin|f of any such' oath or engagements
as aforesaid, and persons causing any 9ucii
oath or engagement to be administered, though
not present at the administering thereof, shaU
be deemed principal ofliendeis, and tried ^
such ; and, on conviction thereof by due course
of law, shall be adjudged guilty of felony, and
shall suffer death as felons, without benefit of
clergy, although the person or persons who ac-
tually administered such oath or engagement
shall not have been tfied or convict^/' Bui
it Is necessary, that the fact to which this
clause may apply iftiould be speciftcany stated
in the indictment, to give to the lord advocate
the benefit of that special clause. Now, ther^
is no specific allegation in any one of Chese
charges, that the pranel had caitted the oath
alleged to be administered.
Mr. Drwtmand. — ^Ihat is clearly ch^iged.
Mr. Ckrk, — It is charged : you did so and
so, or did so and so. If there is an allegatioi^
that he did cause the oath' to be administered,
what is it alleged that he particulaily did at
that house, and upon that occasiob }
lord Hermand. — ^That he administered, th^
oath, or caused it to be administered, 19
libelled. But the whole act of parliament is
libelled on ; and* the fourth clause is, [Here
his lordship read the clause ^bove quoted by
Mr. Jeffrey.]
Lord Juttke Clerk. — ^Tbere is no doubt of it
•^ook to the vrords of the act of parliament*.
The very words are repeated in this charge as
to Robertson's.
Mr. Clerk, — But then it is not said in that
charge, that when he caused the oath to be ad-
ministered he was at any other place. Now,
please attend. It may be true, that it is very
well to allege the panel caused the oath to be ad-
ministered ; but then it is necessary to allege
where. And the allegation in the libel is,
that at that place he caused the oath charged
to be administered, else no place whatever is
assigned.
Lord Kermawf.— The allegation is, that the
oath was administered in thathouse. *' Further,
you the said Andrew M'Kinley did, upon the
5th day of February, 1817, or on one or other
of the days of that month, or of January im«
mediately preceding, at a secret meeUng held
at the house of John Eobertson, then inn-
keeper and stabler in Gallowgate of Glasgow,
or elsewhere at Glasgow, or in the immediate
vicinity thereof, wickedly, maliciously^ and
feloniously administer^ or cause to be admi«
niste;^ ed^ or did aid and assist at the adminis-
tering an oath or enga^ment.*' He ma^ have
caused the administering of the oath in that
house, though he never entered i| in his life.
oiO]
57 GEORGE IIL
trud ofAndrem B9*Kinley
[630
• Mr. Ckrk, — I have one remaik to make* oq
the clause in the act of pariiament. '' And
persons causing any such oath or engagement
to be administered, though not present at ^e
administering thereof, sluill be deemed prin-
cipal offenders, and shall be tried as such.''
It is not libelled that the panel caused the oath
to be administered, though he was not present.
On the contrary, it is alleged he was present,
and so caused the administerinff of the oath in
that placjB. Neither time nor place is assigned
for the commission of the crime, unless this
time and this place are assigned.
Mr. *SoikUor General,'^! am little disposed
to trouble you, by prolonging this debate;
but, with your lordships' permission, I beg to
address a few words to you. It is necessary
that the precise nature of the olnection now
made, should be recalled to mina, before the
answer to it can be understood. The proper
form of the objection seems to be this : is the
public prosecutor entitled to prove the import
of the oathy before proving the presence or the
panel at the administration of it P The lord
advocate asks of the witness what is the import
of the oath which was taken or administered
by the witness, or in the presence of the
witness, and the objection is, ne is not entitled
to put this question, till the presence of the
panel on that occasion be proved. I submit,
that this is no objection at all, because it is
competent for the public prosecutor to prove,
by one set of witnesses, tnat the oath wa^ ad-
ministered at the time kpoken to ; and it is
competent for him to prove, by other witnesses,
that the panel was present. I know of no
tule, in the law of evidence, which requires
that the nature of the odth, and the presence
of the panel, should be established at the same
moment, or by the same witnesses. Much
light has already been lost by the real or pre-
tended failure of memorv in witnesses. If the
rule which the other side of the bar contend
for were adopted, it would produce much in-
convenience, and a total impossibility of prov-
ing a crime in any instance. In every criminal
charge, the public prosocutbr may prove the
corpus delicti, before proving the connection of
the panel with it ; and he neither can be, nor
ougnt to be controlled in the course and order
of adducing the proof and conducting the case.
In this part of his duty, he acts upon informa-
^on, ot which the Court and the prisoner
neither can nor ought to be in possession.
The objection by the panel rests on a principle
leading directly to absurdity, and creating im-
practicability in business.
Mr. Jeffrey.'^l submit that this position is
untenable. Tlie solicitor-ffeneral says, it is
competent to prove the administration of the
oath and its tenor, by one set of witnesses, and
then by another set, to prove that the panel
was present at or connected with the adminis-
tration of the oath. I^ he has witnesses to
prove that the panel was present, should not
he first prove that? Upon what principle can
he be allowed to prove any thing about an
oath, without proving the panePs connection
with that oath ? If the fact, as to an oath
having been administered, be proved, without
the prisoner's connection with it, would any
thing be established against tHfe prisoner? To
prove the administration of an oath, or the
terms of any oath, can here be of no avail,
unless my client's connection with it be esta-
blished. Without this, there is no evidence
against the prisoner. A case might happen,
that ffoods were carried off by one man, and
found in the custodv of another, and to such a
case the principle of the solicitor-general might
apply, ^t such a case is of a different kind
from the present;— and if it is hinted that,
perhaps, you will get nothing from Mr. Fin-
layson but the statement of an oath, and no-
thing about the pri5oner,-rhow could you
afterwards get any thing to connect the pri-
soner and tne oath ? At any rate, what dis-
advantage does the public prosecutor suffer,
by being called upon first to prove the pre-
sence of the panel ? while I have a material
interest that the minds of the jury should not
be prejudiced by any proof as to an oath ex-
traneous to the case of the prisoner. Are they
entitled to proceed so as to induce an impres-
sion against the prisoner of the most unfavour-
able nature, when, if they had begun at the
end, to which they must go, and inquired as
to the relation of the furisoner with the hcU,
they could have found no proof of any guilt
attachable to him ?
Lord. GUUcM* — This is a,que8tion of import*
ance and difficuUjr. One objection has neen
stated, and two different answers have been
made, and have nven rise to two questions.
The answer made by the lord advocate is, that
the act of parliament entitles him, although
M'Kinley may not have been present when the
oath was administered, to prove that he caused
its being administered. The solicitor-general
again sa3rs, I may prove by another witness
that the oath was administered by the agency
of the panel. We are bound to consider both
questions.
The lord advocate says, he is entitled to
prove that the panel caused the oath to be ad-
ministered, altnough he was not present when
it was administered. That is the first and
most important question. I think the lord
advocate is not entitled to prove under this
indictment that the panel was not present at
the administering, but caused the administer-
ing of the oath here charged. You must have
the time when — the place where— (though
there may be some latitude as to both)— You
must have the tpeda factiy the quo modo set
forth. The fact of causing, when absent* is
different from causing when present. Tbe
fact that the panel caused the oath to be ad-
ministered in nis absence, is not set forth in
the indictment ; and I must appeal to my own
recollection, and to that of every one who
hears me, whether it entered into ypur con-
templation that the lord advocate meant to
esil
/or
wdamfidOtahs.
A. D. 1817.
[0S3.
charge the causing without the paneVs being i I have iomei difBcultyy from what the so-
present at the administering. I licitor general stated ; for, it is possible this
I am not talking of the major proposition —
but, what I find defective is, that this apepes
Jacti, now stated by the prosecutor, is set
forth in no part of the minor proposition, and
I was led to conclude, that ail that the lord
advocate meant to prove was, the administering
of the oath, the panel being present at the
time. ^ he meant to prove a specki facti of a
different kind, that the panel, though not pre-
sent, caused the administering, that ^pectei
Jadi should have been stated. And surely,
according to Mr. Hume*s doctrine of specin-
cation, the fact whether the panel was present
<nr not at the administering of the oath should
bare been stated. Then, is the lord advocate
entitled to bring an indictment without saving
whether the panel was present at the aami-
nistering, or a hundred miles off? His lord-
sbip^s plea is competent, under the mmor, but
not under the minor proposition* If you
adopted this view of the lord advocate*s, you
would proceed on a tpedes faeti^ taking for
granted it is not necesssury to state the quomodo
of the tpeda facti alleged to be committed.
As to the question raised by the solicitor-
general's answer, it is of a dinerent nature ;
and I do not know by what principle of law
Ihe public prosecutor can be hindered from
proving the fact, and then the presence of the
panel. But, I submit to the public prosecutor,
Ihat it is an inconvenient moae of proof. I do
not mean to sustain the objection upon this
ground; but, it can answer no purpose to
prore, diat any obli^tion was then adminis-
tered or taken ; for it cannot, and ought not
to affect the prisoner if he was not present.
And the oidy effect would be, to create a pre-
judice in the minds of the jury.
Lord PUmUly. — Mv difiBculty arises from
vhat has been stated by the solicitor-general.
The crime charged is, that the panel admi-
nistered the oath, or caused it to oe adminis-
tered. It will be sufficient to prove that he
administered the oath, or caused it to be ad-
ministered-^ut then we must attend to the
manner in which, the time when, the place
wb»e, he had done m, and I agree as to what
has oeen said by lord Gillies and Mr. Clerk,
that such particulars x^uire to be specified.
It is a^d in the indictment, that the panel did,
** upoi^the 5th day of rebruary, 1817, or on
one or other of the days of that month, or of
January immediately preceding, at a secret
meeting held at the bouse of John Robertson,''
&c. whether he administered the oath, or
caused it to be administered, it must be upon
the 5th of February, or some day of that
month, and at that secret meeting.. It will
not do, that he did it out of that meeting. I
think we are bound strictly to festen the pro-
secutor down, both to the time and place
charged in the indictment. The proof must
be as to February or January, and the panel
must have been present.
man may have caused that oath to be adminis-
tered, and perhaps in a room among a crowds
and a particular witness may not have known
the panel had been the cause of the administer-
ing. I think it is not incompetent to the public
prosecutor to prove as he was doing. If he*
fail, it will not go against the prisoner.
Lord Betton concurred.
Lord JuMtke Cferfc.— I agree, that though it
is com]>etent to charge the causing the oath to
be administered, as well as the aSministerine
of the oath, yet the same precision is required
as to the nedet facti charged, and that time,
place, ana manner, should be particulariy
specified. But I own I am equally clear, that
there is nothing that can prevent the public
prosecutor from proving the nature of the oatli,
and the place and time when it was adminis-
tered, and afterwards the panel's presence.
I am, therefore, for allowing the question to be
put.
(The witness was brought back.]
Lord Advocate, — ^What were the terms of the
oath put that other night at Robertson's, not the
oath of secrecy f — ^It was the prisoner who ad-
ministered that oath.
What were the words P^It was the usual
one. I cannot repeat it. It was about
reform.
Do you remember how it began ?— *' In tlie
awfiil presence of God.*'
Was there any thing about swearing r<«»
res.
What were the words ?— I saw an oath, after
I was put in prison^ in a speech in parliament, *
which was the same as that then administered.'
You said the oath began, <'In the awfol
presence of Ood.'' Was there any thing about
the word '' swear T—Ifl had not seen &e oath
in a newspaper, I could not have remembered
a word of it.
Mr. Clerk made some inaudible observa»
tion.
Lord Jdooeate.^1 cannot lose the benefit
of this witness's testimony, and I have no wish
to *put any questions but with a view to get
the truth from him of what he may know
actually to have taken place. I shoidd be
happy to prevent those interruptions from
the other side of the bar if your lordships would
take the examination of tba witness into your
own hands.
Mr. Grant, — We can have no further ques-
tions to put after his last answer.
LordJmtice Cferfc.— Till you saw the oath
in a newspaper, you could not have repeated
any part of it?— Nothing but the beginning.
Before I went out, you nSked me whether there,
was an administration of any other oath iu:
• Fife 35 Hans. Pari. Deb. 729.
dg^] 57 GEORGE til.
these fioasesi I recollect, after I read out
the oath in Robertson's, John Buchanan came
in and I read it to him — the secret committee
oath.
Lord Harmand, — Could you^, ivithout the
newspap€9'y ha?e recollected tlie latter part of
the o^th ?— -No.
[Witness withdrawn.*]
Lord Advocate. — Although the witness read
the oath in a newspaper, he did not Bwear the
reading in the newspaper gave him any new
hnpres((iops .of it, The circumstance merely
brought it to his recollection. He has expressly .
Kiid the oath he. then read was the same he
lieard administered in the meeting. Now, I
beg leave to ask, what .is there to prerent my
laying a copy of the oath even now before him,
and asking jtbe witness whether that was the
oath whiqh was administered or no ? I am not
aware of any rule of law whidi should prevent
my doing so, and it would in .many cas^ be
attended wiUi the total loss of evidence if such
a form pf , proceeding was held to be illegal.
Few person^ have the power of repeating from
memory verhaimvrhat they have read, al&ough
t)iey can recollect it when laid before thern^ or
n^Ml over to. them ; and it would be to render
the statute under which this indictment is laid
utteriy inopeiativie, if it were held, that it is in-
qpmp9tent lo do more than, ask the, witnesses
to repeat the ^muima verba of the illesal oath
ch^md to haye b^en aduinistered* Nothing,
in effect, more happened in this case* Indeed,
Iqiprehend not.ao much has beendone^ when
the fact is merely that the witness saw acci-.
dentally in a n«W9pii|>er the oath which 4ei had
heard before, and which brought, ho depones,
its terms to his recollection. In feet, the qnes«
tion is not how he came to rem^ttber ttie oath,
W does he now recollect it; tthd, I tfubmit^ it is
of no consequence how that leoolleciton was
dhtained (excepting always any undue pio«
ceedin^on the part of the pub&c .proseentor,.
which IS not here alleged to nave taken place),
ifit is clear and distinct^
This is a question of great importance in-'
Med ; and'if yottr lordships sustain this objec-
tion, founded upon , the witness having read
the oath in a newspaper, it will go du to im-
pede the course of justice. The same must in
every case be sustained* where the witness has
read the narrative of the previous pioceediogs,
before a magistrate, in the public prints, and
an epd would therefore be put to convictions
in the most atrocious cases, which are genesrally
those on which the most public investigations
take place.
Mr. Jeffrof. — Nothing can be moie fair or
candid than the statement of the lord advocate,
and 1 agree with him in an observation which
he ^made, but it leads to^ a decision in my
favour. If the lord advocate had been correct
in stating, that, in consequence of an innocent
accident, the Crown was to be deprived of any
thing they would otherwise bave had the benefit
Trud ofAnitem M^Kinhy
[624
of, that certainly would be an evil. But ob*
serve how the fact stands. The witness ad-*
mits, that, in point of fact, if the trial had pro-
ceeded before he read the newspaper, or if he
had never seen it, his memory would have been
an entire blank as to the terms of the oath ; and
the question is. Can evidence from such a
source be received in a court of justice ?
What is it that a witness must speak to ?
Tbe facts to which he was present; and if he
states, that, as to these facts, he has no recoU
lection of himself, and that the source firom
which he has derived any recollection of the
circumstances, is a newspaper, this is no evi-
dence at all.
I distinguish this case from one where a
person may say, I had forgotten every thing
but for a paper that I wrote myself, and, im-
mediately upon reading it, my memoiy was
refreshed, and I could now positively swear to
the circumstances. But only see the difference
here, and see the infinite incalculable danger
to which a person might be exposed, par-
ticularly in a question with the Crown, as in
the case of this panel, on a trial upon charges
of a crime against the government if a witness
were to be examined whose memory is gone,
and who is totally unable to give testimony on
the subject but from the accident of seeing an
unauthentic account in a newspaper. Such
witnesses will be subject to the delusions to
which the human mind is liable, from anything
bearing' a resemblance to former objects of its
knowledge, and will think that they have seen
before what only bears a resemblance to what
they had formerly known. Every one familiar
with dreams must know, that in them the vivid-
ness of conception sometimes leaves an im-
pression' almost of reality on the mind; A
witness, who has altogether forgotten the terms
of an oath which he nad once read, and after-
wards reads in a newspaper an oath which ap-
l)ears of the same general description, will be-
lieve it to be the same oath ; but if he be exa-
mined^on the subject, all he can swear to will
be the tenor and recollection of what he read
in the. newspaper. Even at this moment the
witness swears he could not have recollected
anything of the nature or terms of the oath but
for the newspaper. A witness whose memory
is revived by accident, may say, I now re->
member. But this vritness says he could not
have recollected but for the newspaper. Hq
recals the oath to his imagination rather than
his memory. If he says he has no recollection
butyrom the newspaper, he has no recollection
but of the newspaper, a source of information
which must exclude his evidence from being
received. I submit, that, in a court of civil
jurisdiction, evidence of this kind could not be
received ; and to allow evidence of this ques-
tionable sort to be taken in this couYt, and in
such a case as the present, would be an example
of the most dangerous nature.
lard Adbocate, — If the recollection of the
witness depends altogether upon what he read
635]
Jivr Administering unlawful Oaths.
A. D. 1817.
1620
in -the newspaper, I am not entitled to ask as
to that recollection; but my question if,
"Whether he can recollect the substance, not the
terms of it, without the newspaper ? I wish
that to be further cleared up.
Lord Justice Clerk.— I think it right to state
what I have taken down from the witness.—
** That if he had not seen it in the newspapers
be would not have remembered another word
<d it ; and that, with the exception of the words
in the beginning he has stated, he could not
-have repeated on his oath any part of it, had
he not so seen it in the newspapers." Under
these circumstances, we are clear it would not
be consistent with any 'rules of justice to have
the witness examined further as to the tenns of
that oath, for he could only give his recollection
from the newspaper. *
Lord Hermand. — In answer to my question,
he said ' be could not without the newspaper
have recollected the last part of the oath ; so
he cannot be examined further on the terms of
the oath.
[Witness- brought back.]
By whom was this oath administered at
Robertson's ? — By the prisoner.
Mr. Jeffrey ' — '^o whom was it administered?
--—To a man whom we met upon the road.
What other persons were present? — We
went in with John Buchanan and this man,
and John Buchanan went out to see another
«Ban, and then eame in ; and I am not sure
whether the administering was done when he
jretumed*
Vo other person ?— 'No.
You do not know his natne ? — No.
Hugh Dickson sworn. — Examined by the
Lord Advocate.
' Do you know the house of William Leggat?
••—•Yes, I have been in the house.
. Who were all there ? — A number of men.
Was the prisoner there ? — Yes.
Was Peter Gibson there ? — Yes.
Was M'Lachlane there ?~ Yes
Was John Campbell there ? — Yes.
Was any oath taken or administered at that
meeting ? — ^There was what we cabled a bond
of union agreed among us at that meeting.
• Can you repeat it ? — No.
.Can you tell the import of it? — Hearing it
read, I could give an idea if it was like it. I
never read the original.
Did you hear it read that night ?— Yes.
Who read it ? — I could not be certain of his
name who read it.
Was it the prisoner? — No.
Was he present when it was read?— I think
be was.
Did you take it? Was it given to you.^
Was it administered to you?*- After it was
agreed upon, it was taken by a vote. From
• Fkfe 1 Phill. Ev. 288, 5th, ed.
VOL. XXXIII.
circumstances that occurred through that day,
I could not say it was taken as an oath. It
might be the case.
In what form was it taken ? — They stood up
and held up their hands. I do not remember
any words used at the time.
' Part of the time it was read, they held up
their hands ? — ^Yes.
What were the circumstances that happened
through the day ? — Being the first of January,
I had got some liquor through the day.
Did it affect your memory ? — I could not
take upon me to speak with, certainty as to
that night.
Were you at Munn's? — On the 4th of Ja-
nuary.
Was the prisoner there ? — Yes.
Was the bond or oath read or administered
there? — One man read it and held up his hand.
Who was he ?'--I never saw him before or
since.
Was the prisoner present ? — I do not know.
Who reaa it?— The man himself.
And held his hand up ?— 'Yes. *
Was the prisoner present ? — I conld not' say.
The room was too small, and some withdrew.
He had been at the meeting, but I cannot tell
whether he was present at the administering.
•
Lord Advocate. -^Vfiihdnyf t^e witness.
Having now concluded the most material part
of the evidence upon which I had expected to
establish the charges laid in the indictment,
and finding that the witnesses have not given
testimony corresponding to their previous ex-
aminations, and on which I was most thoroughly
•persuaded I should have convicted the panel,
1 deem it incumbent on me, in justice to your
lordships, whose time is too precious to be
needlessly wasted, not to take up a moment
longer than necessary, by going into further
evidence, which I believe (o be stili less con-
clusive, and without proceeding further in
which, I am now satisfied the panel is entitled
to a verdict of acquittal. However much,
therefore, I must regret a result so different
from what the truth of the case and public
justice demanded, my consolation will be, that
I have discharged my own duty in submitting
the investigation to the judgment of a jury,
Mr.Jeffery, — After what has been stated,
with so much candour and propriety, by bis
majesty's advocate,! should be to blame, if I
were to dwell on the course of evidence which
has been led. I should be infinitely to blame,
if even any feeling of joy or triumph, excusa-
ble on such an occasion, should lead me to
make any further observations. I shall be
satisfied with that verdict which the good
sense and right feeling of the jury shall deter-
mine upon; and, in whatever terras that ver-
dict shall be contained, I am sure it will do
ample justice to the whole case.
Lord Justice Clerk, — Gentlemen of the jury,
I am happy to liiink, that, after what ha^ taken
place, the panel can expect nothing but an ac-
2 S
0271
57 GEORGE ill.
Trial qfAndrn M'Kinkif.
CMfi
qaittaii. Yottf duly is now mi exUwmly light
«iid pleasant qac^ and Tecydiff«reQt fromtbat
^hich must have been eipect«d when we oojsr
aeneed this trial. It ki your duty to return
•ttch a vefdict as you may think due lo the
case, taking all the drouraataBces into oon-
sideration» and to find the panel either Not
Guilty, or the libel Not Proven.
I leave the case in your hands, you being
poMfMed of all the facta as hitherto disclosed,
and quite able to discriminate the circuni'
stances of the evidence. And as to the ver-
dict yeu return, it m^ be vM voce^ if you are
unanimous ; but, if not, we will sit with great
pleasare to receive your v«rdi<:t in writing,
if. you think it necessary to retire for thi^t
purpose.
The Jvrv, without retiring, unanimously
* found the libel Not Paoven.
lard JuUke C/«r/c.~Gentlemen of the Jury,
you are now discharged from your fatiguing
duty; and I have to express my entire con-
currence in the terms in which you have ex-
preised your verdict.
Andrew M'Kioley«— in consequence of what
has passed this day, relative to the charge
exhibited against you, the jury have returned a
Terdict, all in one voice, finding the libel Not
Proven. It is, therefore, the duty of the Court
to assoilzie you timplieiirr, and to dismiss yeu
from that bar. But, Sir, I cannot help notic-
ing, upon this occasion, that the verdict of
your countrjrmen has not pronounced yoa to
be Not Guilty of the charge that was exhibited
against you; and I have already stated in
your presence, that, in reference to the evi»
dence, unsatisfectory and iDeondusire as it
was with respect to the full measure of yeor
guilt, and looking* above all, to those declarah
tions of yours, which were proved and made
part of the evidence by a regular minnte of
admissien by your counsel, I am decidedly of
•pinion the jury were bound to return the ver-
4M!t now npen record — a terdict which leaves
n mark upen yent character, that noshing but
a tife of future rectitude in evevy respect can
^ wipe off. Yon ape now to be delivered from
nH risk of puniehaoent for ai^ degree of guilt
yon may have ificotred relative to the traoa-
netions mentioned in the indictment ; and I
do hope and trust, that, after the full, fair, and
impaitial trial you have undergone, in which,
while an attempt vras made to estabhsh the
charge against you, you had the protection of
the laws of your country, and the nlessed safe-
guard of a jury of your eottntiymen.to watch
over your interests, you have now an entire
and i>erfect conviction of the happiness and
security under which the people of this couuii
try at present live, that yon are now fully con-
vinced the constitution of your country affords
a oempleto safegnard to its subjects ; and that
there can be no risk of their lives or liberties
being invaded, while the sanction of the law
at aH timet extends its proteetion to them. I
hope, therefore, when you retnm to the society
in which you formeriy lived, that, in whatever
proceedings you may have formerly been en-
gaged— whatever secret meetings yon may
have attended — whatever description of pei^
sons you may have been linked with by boiMU
of union, oaths, or engagements, you will from
this time resolve to attain from all such pro- ^
ceedings, and never render it even possibit
that any such charge should again be exhibited
against you; that, on the contrary, you will
use your utmost endeavours, by holding onl
the example of the protection of Uie law, which
you have experienced, to convince theni that
they ought to unite with you in preserving un-
impaired thai happy constitution and govern-
ment, under which the subjects of this country
live ; — that, in short, yon will act the part of a
good subject, justify the verdict in your &voar,
and prove, that, though you mav have been
misled by the designs perhaps of other men,
yen are not wicked in heart, and will live
peaceably in time to oome. I trust what I
have now said will have a due effect, and I
congratulate yon upon the verdict yon have
received.
'< The Lord Justice Clerk and Lw^
Commissioners ^Justtciarjr, in respect of
the foregoing verdict, assoibie the pen^
mgUkUer^ and dismiss him from thn bar.
(Signed) « D. Botle, J. P. Dr
jUubKw M^SmiQf. — I am not able to stand,
from a weak state of body, to return mj thanka
in a long speech. Bet I wish to retnm my
sincere thanks to your lordships for sbowing
me such kindness;— to the gentlemen oC the
jury for their attention, and the verdict they
have returned : — and to. the Loi4 Advocam for
his kind attention during my impiiaonmen!^; —
and I wish publicly to deciare, that I had -nil
the liberty and indulgence that man coiUd
possibly have in snch circumstanfes. My
feelings of gratitude to my co«dhI ^W stw^gni
thanlcanexpieas«
^roeMittgi
t«3»
Proceedings agaimst Jku^s M'Ewan^ and others^ at Gla^ow.
^T&ACT from the Record, containing Pro-
oeedings in the Circnit Court of Justiciary
at Glasgow, against James M'EwaN,
M'DowAi. pATEy or Peat, and John
Conn ELTON, 23rid April, 1817, before
Lords Hermand and Gillies.
The -diet was iheii called of the criminal
pMwcntion at tbe instance of bis m^esty's ad-
iKooate, ibriiis im^siy'i interest against James
M^fiwan, now or Utefycardiog-masterat Hum-
phne*s Mill, Gortels of Glasgow ; M<Dowal
rate, or Peat, tiow orlatefy weaver in Pieoadilly-
at]%et, Anderston, in the vicinity of Glasgow ;
and Jditi Connelton, now or lately cotton*
apivmer, in Calton of Giaegow,* far the erime
<n admiiR0te|U]g unlawfiil oaths, as patticuiariy
nentioBed in die indictment raised and piir-
•«ed agamst them thereanent bearing :<^
James M^Ewwiyiiow or lately cardnig-maiter
m Htmiphrie's Mill, GorlN& of cSasgow;
M^owal Pata, or Peat, now or lately weaver
aft Picoadilly-street, Anderstoa, 4n the viciaity
of Glasgow; and John Connelton, •now os
lately ootlon-«pinaer in Calton of Gtasgow :
Yon are indicted and accused at the instance
oT Alexander Maoonochie of Meadowbank, bis
maiestv's advocate, for bis majesty's interest :
That albeit by an act passed in the (ifty^econd
year of his present majesty's reign,intituled, *' An
act to render more effectual an act passed in the
thif^"sevonth year of his present miyesty, for
Mcventing tiie adoainisteFing or taking unlaw-
ral oaths, ft is itUer aiia enacted, *' Tfattt every
person who sbaU, in any maofner or form what*
aoevcf , administer, or cause to %e admimstev-
«d, or be aiding or assisting at tike adaainister-
ftng <rf any oaih or engageownt, porpevting m
intending to bind tbe penon taking tbe same
to commit -any treason, or murder, or any
Mf«iy,'paiiiiliable by hm with dealh, skaU, on
<MnivicMi IhereoC by 4tfe oourw of low, be
l<§jttdgedgaitfy of felony, and sdihr death as
* felewy wttho«t bancdit of alesgy.^' And ;
fbrtfaer by section fourth of «Mil«et, it is eti- 1
aoied^ ^ not pernons aiding and anistiag at
the administerin|^ of any such oath or engage-
ment as aforesaid, and persons causing any
such oath or engagement to be administered,
tbough not present at the administering thereof,
shall be deemed principal offenders, and shall
be tried as such, and on conviction thereof by
due course of law shall be adjudged guilty of
felony, and shall suffer death as felons without
benefit of clergy, although the person or per-
sons who actually administered such oath or
eogasement, if any snch there shall be, shall
not have been tried or convicted." And
forther, by section sixth of the said act, it is
enacted, ''That any engagement or obliga-
tion whatsoever, in the nature of an oath,
puiporting or intending to bind the person
taking tbe tame to oommit any treason, or
murder, or any felony punishable by law with
death, shall be deemed an oath within the in-
tent and meaning of this act ; and in whatever
form or manner the same shall be administered
or taken, and whether the same shall be ac-
tually administered by any person or persons
to any other person or persons, or taken by
any other person or persons without any admi«
nistration thereof by any other pemon or pai^
sons." Yet true it is and of verity, that you,
the said James M'Ewan, M'Dowal Pate, ar
Peat, and John Connelton, are aU and eidk^
or one or other of you,^£nilty of* tbe said
crimes, or of one or more of them, aolors or
actor, or art and part ; in so far as you the
said James M'Ewan, H'Dowal Pate, or Peat,
and J<^n Connelton, having atOlasgow, and
in the vicinity, thereof, in tbe course of the
months of November and December, one
thonsand eisfat hundred and aixteea, and of
January and February one ihoosaiid eight
hundred and sei^enteen, wickedly, nalicionsly,
and traitoitmsly ooofpired and agreed, with
other evtl-diaposed .pemens, to break and dis-
turb Ihe |>ubhc peace, <to change, subvert, and
overthrow tbe govemmeot, and to exoiie,^
move, and raise insurrection and rebelliott; and*
especially to hold and attend secret mfsetings
for the >pnipose of obtaining annual parlia-
ments and universal snifrage by unlawful and
violent means, did then and there, aU and
each, wr one <or other of yon, wiokedly,
maliciously, and trahoiouely administeK, or
caase to be administered, or did aid or assist
at the nflflnnisteving, to a great nnmbtr of
peieoos «n osah or tmgage^ent, or an
obligation "in <the nature of an oath, in the
fbUowing terns, or to the following perpovt :
— '^ la asifttl fPesenoe of God, I, A. B. dio vo»
lanlarily vwear that I will pcnsevere in my en*-
deavoaiing to form a brolhevheod of nflfection
amongst Britons «f every descfrtptioa, who are
oonsidBred worthy of confidence, and that I
will pamenen ia my endeavours to obtain for
all the people in Great Britain end Ireland,
net idisquahfied by crimeB or insam^^ the
elective franchise at the age of 21, with free
and equal representation, and annual pariia-
ments ; and that I will support the same to
the utmost of my power, either by moral or
physical strength, as the case may require.
And I do further swear, that neither hopes,
fears, rewards, or punishments shall induce
roe to inform on, or give evidence against
any member or members, collectively or in-
dividually, for any act or expression done
or made, in or out, in this or similar societies,
under the punishment of death, to be inflicted
on me by any member or members of such
societies. So help me God, and keep me sted*
fitft." Which oam or obligation did thus pur-
port or intend to bind the persons taking the same
to oommit treason, by effecting by physical force
^1] 57 GEORGE ill. Proceedings agauut JaAu M^Eman and others. \QSSt
the subversion of the established government,
laws, and constitution of this kingdom. And
more particularly you, the said James M'Ewan,
M'Dowal Pate, or Feat, and John Connelton,
did, upon the first day of January one thousand
eight hundred and seventeen, or on one or
Dther of the days of that month, or of Decem-
ber immediately preceding, or of February
immediately following, at a secret meeting,
held for that and other unlawful purposes, in
the house of William Leggat, change-keeper in
king-street, Tradestown, in the vicinity of
Glasgow, or elsewhere at Glasgow, or in the
immediate ricinity thereof, all and each, or
one or other of you, wickedly, maliciously,
and traitorously administer, or cause to be
a4ininistered, or did aid or assist at the
administering of an oath or obligation in the
terms above set forth, or to the same purport,
to Peter Gibson, John M'Lachlane, John
Campbell, and Hugh Dickson, all present
prisoners in the Castle of Edinburgh, ot to
one or other of them, and toother persons,
ivhose names are to the prosecutor unknovrai ;
the said oath or obligation thus binding or
purporting to bind tlie persons taking the same
to commit treason as said is. And further,
(2.) you, the said James M'Ewan, M*Dowal
Pate, or Peat, and John Connelton, did, upon
the fourth day of January one thousand eight
hundred and seventeen, or on one or other of
the days of that month, or of De<tember imme-
diately preceding, or of February imme-
diately following, at the house of Niel Munu,
innkeeper and stabler in Ingram-«treet of
Glasgow, or. elsewhere at Glasgow, or in the
immediate vicinity thereof, air and each, or
one or other of you, wickedly, maliciously, and
traitorously administer, or cause to be admi-
nistered, or did aid or assist at the administer-
ing an oath or obligation in the terms above
set forth, or to the same purport, to the said
Peter Gibson, John M'Lachlane, John Camp-
bell, and Hugh Dickson ; also to James Hood,
Andrew Somerville, John Buchanan, and
James Robertson, all present prisoners in the
Tolbooth of Glasgow, or to one or other of
them, and to other persons, whose names are
to the prosecutor unknown ; the said oath or
obligation, thus bindingy or purporting to bind,
the persons taking the same to commit treason,
as said is : And you, the said James M'Ewan,
M'Dowal Pate, or Peat, and John Connelton,
conscious of your guilt in the premises, have
absconded and fled from justice. At leaa|(
times and places foresaid, • the said oath or en^
gagement, or an oath or engagement to the
same purj^rt, was wickedly, and maliciously,
and traitorously administeiifd, or caused to oe
administered ; and some persons did aid or
assist at the administering thereof; And you,
the said James M*Ewan, M'Dowal Pate or
Peat, and John Connelton, are all and eaob»
oir one or other of you, guilty |hereo(^ actora^
or actor, or art and part. All which, or part
thereof, being found proven by the verdict of
an assize before the Lord Justice General, the
Lord Justice Clerk, and Lords Commissioners
of Justiciary, in a Circuit Court of Justiciary,
to be holden by them, or any one or more of
their number, within the burgh of Glasgow, ia
the month of April, in this present year one
thousand eight hundred and seventeen, you the
said James M'Ewan, M'Dowal Pate, or Peat,
and John Connelton, ought to be punished
with the pains of law^ to deter others from
committing the like ciimes in all time
coming.
(Signed) H. Home Drummoko, A. D.
And the said James M'Ewan, M'Dowal
Pate or Peat, and John Connelton, having
been all and each of them oftentimes called ia
open Court, and three times at the (foor of the
Court-house, yet failed to appear,
The Lords Hbrmand and Gillies decern
and adjudge the said James M'Ewan, M*Dowal
Pate, or Peat, and John Connelton, all and
each of them, to be outlaws and fugitives fron&
his majesty's laws ; and ordain them to be put
to the horn, and their whole moveable goods
and gear to be escheat and inbrought to his
majesty's use, for not appearing this day and
place, to underlie the law for the said crime
of administering of unlawful oatlis, as they
who were lawfully summoned for that effect,
several times called in open court, and thrice
at the door of the Court-nouse, yet failed t<^
appear, as said is.
(Signed) Ao. Gillies. P«
«3»3
Trial of NeU Dwglasfir SedUion.
A. P. 1817.
imM
701. Proceedings in the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh,
against Neil Dougdas,* Universalist Preacher, for Sedi-
tion, May 26 : 57 Geo. III. a. d. 1817.
HIGH COURT OF JUSTICIARY.
May 26, 181T.
Fre$ent.
Rt. Hon. Bamd Boykf Lord Justice Clerk.
Lord Ucmoad,
Lord GilHeg.
Lord PUtmlly.
Lord Raton,
Cowmlfcr the Ovwn.
James Wedderhuniy Esq. Solicitor-Genend.-
H. Hcmt DrttfiMROfM?, Esq.
Jcmei Maconochie, Esq.
If. Warrender, W. S. Agent.
Coumelfor Niel Dtntglag,
Fra$ids Jeffrey, Esq.
J. P. Grant, Esq.
Henry Coddrum, Esq.
J, A, Murrey, Esq.
David Bamay W. S. Agent.
lard JuUke Clerk. — Neil Douglas, —
„ iAttend to the indictment ftgaiost you,
which is now to be read.
^' Neil Douglas, Unirersalist preacher,
leskting in Stockwell street of the city of
Glasgow, you are indicted and accused, at
the instance of Alexander Maconochie of
Meadowbaok, his Majesty's advocate for
his Muesty's interest : That albeit, by the
law^of this and of every other well go-
verned realm, sedition, more especidly
when committed by a minister, or by a
person exercising the functions of a mini-
ster, in the perfohnance of divine worship,
is a 'crime of a heinous nature, and se-
verely punishable : Yet true it is and of
verity, that you the said Niel Douglas are
guilty of the said crime, aggravated as
* aforesaid, actor, or art and port ; In so
£ir as, on the 9th day of March 1817, or on
one or other of the days of that month,
or of the months of February or January
inmiediately preceding, in a house, hall
or room, called the Andersonian Institu-
tion Class-room, situated in John street
of the said city of Glasgow, jrou the said,
Niel Douglas, being a minister, or exer-
cising the functions of a minister, did, in
* This panel was a member of the celebrated
British convention in 1793, in the proceedings
of which assembly he appears to have taken a
very active part: See the minutes on^^Vol.
^. p. 392, e4 fcy.
the course of divine worship, wickedly,
slanderously, falsely and seditiously otter,
before crowded congregations, chiefly of
the lower orders of the people, prayers, ser-
mons, or declamations, containing wicked,
slanderous, false and seditious assertions
and remarks, to the disdain, reproach, and
contempt of his Majesty, and of his Royal
Highness the Prince Regent, in their
persons as well as in their offices; and
also to the disdain, reproach and con-
tempt of the House of Commons, and of
the administration of justice within the
kingdom ; all which wicked, slanderous,
false and seditious assertions and remarks
were calculated and intended to the hurt,
prejudice and dishonour of his Majesty,
and of his Royal Highness the Prince Re-
gent, both in their persons and offices ; to
withdraw from theUovemmentand legisli^
ture the confidence and affections of the
people; and by engendering discord be-
tween the king and the people, to inflame
the people with jealousy and hatred against
the Government, and to fill the realm with
trouble and dissension. More particu-
larly, time and place aforesaid, you the
said Niel Douglas did wickedly, slander*
ouslv, fiadse^ and seditiously, in the course
of the prayers, sermons or declamations
uttered b^ you, assert and draw a parallel
between his Majesty and Nebuchadnessar
king of Babylon, remarking and insinuat-
ing that, like the said king of Babylon, his
Majesty was driven from me society of men
for infidelity and corruption : And you, thei^
and there, did further wickedly, slander*
ously, falsely and seditiously assert, that hif
Royal Highness the Prince Reg^ent was «
poor infatuated wretch, or a poor infatuated
devotee of Bacchus, or use expressions of
similar import : And you, then and there,*
did wickealy, slanderously, falsely and se*
ditiouslv assert and draw a parallel be*
tween his Royal Highness the Prince
Regent and Belshazzar king of BaMon ;
remarking and insinuating that his Rofral
Highness the Prince R^^t, like the
said king of Babylon, had not taken warn-
ing froqft the example of his father ; and
that a (ate similar to that of thd said
king of Babylon awaited his Royal High^
ness the Prince Regent, if he did not
amend his ways, and listen to the voice of
his people: And further, time and- plaea
forc»aia, you did wickedly, slanderously,
falsely and seditiously assert that the
House of <JommonB.waB corntpt, aaf
iiil 57 C80RGE ttl.
that tlM memben tharaof w^e tbievesmd
robben; that seats in the sud House of
FarUanient were sold Uke hulk>cks in a
fnaikety or use expresshms of similar im-
p<»rt4 .And fvfetbery lime and place foie- *
saTdy you did wickedly, slanderously,
h}a%\y and seditiously asaett, that .the !
laws were not justly administered within
this kingdom ; and that the subjects of
his Majesty were condemned without
trial, amd trididnt endenoe, dt use ex-
pressions of similat impoit. And you
the said Neil Douglas having been ap-
jnthended and isken before Robert Ha-
«ki)tcm,£squire,'Shetiff-depatfe of the county
of LttUaHc, did, in his presence, at Glas-
tdw, emit three sereral declarations,
ated the 15th^7th and 18A days of
Msrch 18t7: Which dedarsctions being
to be used in evidence ^;ainst ybu, will
1)e lodged in due time in the hands of
Ae derk of the Hi^ Court df Justidaiy,
l>efore whidi you ai« to be toed, that you
may have an opportunity of aeein^ the
tame. At least, time mad place 'foresaid, in
the <xmne of divine worship, prayers,
sermons tur dedamalions were wickedly,
ftanderCTQ^y, -ftOsdly and aeditieiusly ut-
lered containing %e foresaid wicked,
ttandefrcms, fiUse and seditious assertions,
vemaiks and insintitftions, by a person
^wfao was aministei^ or wbo jexercned the
fnctlous of a minifter ; and you the said
Hiel Dooghtt are gitiHy "ftiereof, actor, or
«n «md pmt. AQ Whidi. or part thereof,
JNtogTOund proven bfihe Terdhftdf an
lUHhey MGsre the loM Sfntftce-^Gviieral,
fte tod Justice €le<t, «!& teids torn-
nrtsiiuueif of Jmtticiavy, yoou the 'said
WW I>ou|(tas ott^to Ik punlMmd with
tbe paitts of hm, to deter others from
tommittiDf tbe uke crimes in lA time
tnmh^, JamesWefldeibun^ A.!D."
XtST or WXTKBS3S8.
Itakfff SamhoH, Esq. Sheaff-diprte ngf the
Xam Zhamsn, eMi to Jolm DtindaOa, Aeriff-
d«vk «f lAaaAshite.
600|M Jkmtmf iheiiff «Aeer In Ciewgiw.
MaZttlJ^,4aerk4otbesaid /iteDsyaWe.
tigbett JUemmdm't tiebaaaDnis^ GlaMoir*
MMkeuf Xawitm, tailer ifceie.
JoAa M^tcaibm^ town^flker thiMt.
M99m4» Ziorfsr^ towm lotfoer there*
Jamet i^rrii^ ^ewn-ofioer fhert.
ififgilWfmoi^ libsuMf ^MttPt.
jMifffii^w 00^, noir<«r l^raierlgrMsidilig in
TcAiagD H^ratt, OImi^ww
imm WaiM^ samaM thaM.
ArtMbaU Cockrm of Ashkirk.
James Gordon^ meochant in Dalkeith.
4Jemrf^^Batj, weaver diere.
Siiwiii IRtfteffftyn, saddler there.
Thomm Doddi, famer, EdgeUw.
Jamei Boaft, iaimer, Broachrigg.
Camty (f BaAimgUm,
Wmiam AUehuon of Drummore.
John 'Fowler t)f WtndygowH.
Robert fiotocfea, temer, Chiq^l.
John BurUy farmer, Kingston.
Joftn Howden, do. Congalton Mains. '
CmayvfljmMgem.
Jama Joteph Hope Vert of CraigiehalL
Jamei Dumku of Dundas.
Robert Jngia, residing at CowdenhiU.
Jamet Trotterj farmer at Newton, parish of
Aberoom.
John Simmo, fanner there.
CUy 0fEiMurgk.
Peter Bor^, smith hi EdmbM%h.
Pairiek Can^pheU^ hotel-ke»>er there.
WUUam BMhrnudy boola^lWrllhere.
Jomet Macgregw^ hotel-keeper thee^'
Jamet White, bookseller AierSb
Ebenexer GUchritt, banker rtbaie.
John lAfcUy wine-meidmnt4hAi<i.
Thomat &amr, baker there.
J^hn Mackay, post-master there.
'^Maegjmmny
\h.
. ffiaker aiere»
Andrew Broion, fo«mder there.
Robert White, pewterer there.
WiUiam Ped/Sk^ leatber^nHmBhamt these.
JbrdkiibddJMmdainep merchant these.
WUUam ^Boggf doth-merobaatAhem.
Jksander (S«w, acceantaattheaa.
William WjaddeO^ fmater Iheve.
John SmL Siai^pton, sil«er*^ter ihtse*
Jafta Faabaim^ bodoellar theie.
Sobo-/ Agic^ dothier there.
ToumcfLeith.
JammGaUm^ Hope Stneet, biih. *
Mem^ i^«r Jsa, builder thaaa.
Rabmt Jftyng, grocer ia 'L&Uk.
ianmt Bei( aaerolnBt tfanrab
Mokert BrmXf maaager fat the Lottde^ aod
SdiuEbfUD^ Shipping GomMy «t Leith .
John Poaf^aeed aerchatit in Leilh.
Reberi Uikan, merchant there.
D. BOTLB.
An.GitUEa.
David DouoLas.
bri JalKiie CAsrJk.-i*^19i^l l>oag1tfs, What do
you tcy to this imdicmwntf'^afe ytro. '^uiiir|^
or not jguilty ?
iWarfi Hal Oaillf , my leid:
XatA SMice Cterk.^ftx9^ the coomft^ fttr
the* pKti^l «ny d^jactiom to the lelevanqf «C
ihia indictment I
fi^^] Vnkertalot PrtudUrpJor High TreawH. . A. 9(^ \^%
)Ar« Ji^9w,^No» my lord* W« bavt sjittn
In defenoM tor Um piuoiMr.
l>EVEircE9 ibr ttie R«t. Nid Don^^ to tiie
indictment against Um at the - instance of
his Majesty^ advocate for his Majesty's in-
terest*
The panel deoiea that he ia gniltyof the
crioM chaiged in the indictment^ or that he
ever made use of the expressions there im-
piUed to him, or of any similar eiipresaions.
On the contrary, he avers and offers to prove,
that he has always spoken with the ntmost
icspect of the Sovereign^ and the Hoosea of
PamaBQent; has on all oocasioas eoUoUed tl^
laws of the* country, and exhorted all his hear-
«Ea to avoid and disoouBtenanoe every .a9rt of
JlumnU or disorder.
Under protestation to add and eik.
F. JaFFftBT. .
LIST or EXCULPJlTOaT WITVESSES.
WiUiMi Warrdl, weaver in Mailboronsb-
tffoet, Calto« of Glaicom
AUm C<ampbeiif teacher, Dempsler-etftct,
Gla^poir.
Unid Ymag, weaver, Barraek^etrealt CalloB.
Jolm Benioidf candle^mftker^ Aig]^e<«treel,
Gksgepw.
WUUam NMet, weaver^ High^stine^ Qtesgoiv.
JoAn CAa&nert, weaver, Carrick-streetji Brown-
field, Glasgow.
Bev. James Smiti^ St. Patrick-s^nare, Edin-
burgh.
Rev. James Donaldson, head of BladLfiriars*-
wynd, Edinburgh.
Lard JmHce Clerk, — Your lordships have
«een this indictment, and have heard the de-
fences for the prisoner read ; and thovtgh no
ohjeetions to tlie relevancy of the indictment
liavebeen stated by his counsel, yet if, in re-
feenee lo tiie sufficiency of the fhcts charged
in the minor proposition to establish the crime
charged in the major, or in reference to any
other cineumstance in the indictment, any ob-
leetions to the relevancry have occurred to your
wrdehips, yen wiH now state them to the
Cksnst,
Xoni Bbrmonci — ^I should be happy to find
ifui. ikm charge of emploviug sucn language
j!i(gp»ding the soveteign of this country as tlttt
iMsdin die indicti](ient should not be brought
home to any sabjed. Never waa a sovereij^
toa deserving qf such imputations. The in-
dictment is unquestionably relevant.
Lord GaUet, — I see uo objections to the re-
levancy of Chis indictment.
LordJuttice Clerk, — ^The usual interlocutor
ftuding the relevancy of the indictment falls
DOW to be pronounced* Niel Douglas : attend
to the interlocutor of relevancy.
'' The Lord Justice OerkandLords Cosmus-
W^era of Jaaticiary havins considered the in-
mtment lused 9xA pursuld attfi^ iuatano* <^
hit m^estj^a adnwate^ fpr \um a^i^sty^a i»»
tam^ agauMyt Kiel Dobfflasb ^el« find tl»e
same relevant to infer the paina of law ; h«t
allow the panel to prove all foots and ^
oumstaiKes that may tend. to. ssculpa^e him„^
attaviate hia goil^ apd reaut the panel, with
theindictmeat aa found relevant, to the koaw-
Mg^of anassiae.
<* p. BOTM^ J, P. TK""
Lord Jvitice Clerk. — ^The question fbr yvmr
lordshipa' determination now is, wbettker you
should proceed, at this late hour, to the trial
of the prisoner*
Lord Advocate. — If agreeable to your kayi-
ships, I should wish that the trial should now
proceed, in order to saw^ trouble to tW Juiy
and the witnesses who are in attendatfcew
Mr. Jeffrey, ^-^ it oar vrlsk on the part of
the prisoner that the trial should go on now, aa
he has brought witnesses from Ulasgovr; and
to delay &e trial wmM occasion addHjjioiMl
expense and trouble. So fir from lotjecting
that the trial should go on at present; it ia o«r
interest and desire that it shwnd promd now;
and, for niy own psrt, I bscf o no wisif for
delay on any personal coasidenttons.
Lord Hemumd. — I wish to get quit oC tk^
monflif«i8.1oad; el bntineeswhieh wt»h49« at
present. TWa oibeK impertaMl^ eaidi at pre-
seM MBMin l» ho^diapMad ol.
Lord FUmilly, — ^If we proceed now* it would
Srove a serious interference with our odier
ttties.
Lord JktMue Ckrk,^^li weald b* mosi piiin-
ful to me to aUesr any thing t» inlerfore wji^
the interest of the piiaoner; m$A theaalbre,
atohoogh iMoftfttiient w na in aaia* fMpMtit
we shall proceed with th* tsial.
The foll6wing persons were then named as
jurymen.
_ »
Tkomat DoddSj farmer at Edgelaw.
Jmm$ Baakf fwrner, Broacfarigg,
WaiimH' AiMtofb of Dnimmore^
John Fowknof Win^gowlK
Moheri Bo»dm, fiuaiMr, CbapeU
Jteer Danrfar of Dund^s.
J«aMX Troitefs foimer a* Newtoa^
Wmam JUaafaMwd^bookseHer, Edinbui^.
men. <}iUmmi, bankisr th«re.
Jfaftni^aU^ win»-merehaat, Edinihwgh*
JaAaJicwfai^ post^aaaster there.
WUUam Waddk, printer there.
Jamee Betty merchant in lieith.
Mahert Enxe^ manager of Uie JU>udon mi
Edinbutrii Shipping Compaiky at Imfk,
Moiert Wutonf merchant there.
SVlDBffCE FOa TH£ C&OWV.
i/niwsrihr OaUan sworn.— Enfldinad hf
Iftr. MaeQn0eiia^
Hit, Qrant.^-^l object to this witness, m "W*
haTi h0 nQ opportuxdty of kiiowiAg any.thiiii
!^fyg] 57 ^£6BfCE' ill.
*«b<mt bim. It is not sud when, or in wliat |
'oapacityhe resided in Tobago-streety Calton
of Glasgow. Another objection which we
-state, is, that we understand' his name is
Gillian, while the name in the list of witnesses
annexed to the indictment is Gollan. I need
not take up the time of the Court in showing
that these objections are sufficient to entitle us
to demand that the evidence of this witness be
.{ejected.
Court. — ^What is your name ?— Gollan.
Mr. Maconochie, — ^I do not think it necessary
to state any thing in answer to the other ob-
-jection.
, Cbiir*.— Where do you life ? — Tobago-
atreet, Calton.
- Jif r. Jliaco8odUe.-*WbBt is your profession ?
-—I am a weaver.
Were you one of the patrole of the county
of Lanark P-^X was one of the patrole.
Have you been in the habit^ upon any oc-
. casion, of attending Mr. Douglas's sermons ?
**-Yes, I hare beam him once or twice.
. When? — I do not remember the time; in
the month of January or February last.
Where was his meeting? — In John-street, I
think.
In the Andersonian Institution f — ^Yes.
- Was the meeting crowded ? — Yes.
What sort of persons attended it chiefly ? —
They were mostly of the lower orders.
. At what time of the evening was the meet-
ing P-^From six to eight.
On what'day of the week ? — Sunday.
' Can you speak more particularly to the
time ? — 1 cannot say more particularly.
• -Did any thing strike you particularly as to
<Mr. - Douglas's sermons? Did be introduce
politics into them ?-^Yes.
^_ That is he sittine there ?— Yes.
Do you rememoer any of the texts he
f reached from? — ^From the fifth chapter of
>aDiel.
Do you remember his entering into any dis-
cussion about the king?*— Some little, but I
remember but very little of it now.
Tell what you recollect of it P — He made a
simile of George the third to Nebuchadnezzar,
and of the prince regent to Belshazzar, and
•insiitied that the prince represented the latter
in not paying much attention to what had
happened to kings ; and that the king of
France had not acted agreeably to the voice
of the people, and brought himself to the block
on that account. And, enlarging in his dis-
course, he told the people it was necessary to
•have a reform, and he set forth, that the only
means for getting it was by petitioning, and
that he had no doubt that by petitioning it
would be obtained.
*Do you remember any thing further?^--! do
not remember much more of his sermons. In
jiis prayer, he prayed that the lord might turn
the Hbeart of the prince, calling him in&tuated,
Ihat be might disperse the corrupt counsellors
Trial of Nifil Douglas t
[645
that were about him, and place wise and
faithful counsellors around his throne.
■ Dp you remember any thing further he said
in his prayer, or in his sermon ? — ^This was in
his lecture; that agreeably to the situation
every person is placed in, he is 'more or less
accountable for the sins he commits ; and if
the prince, in particular, be guilty of not
listening to the voice of his people, he would
endure punishment for a series of years.
Do you remember any thing more f — I can-
not say that I do at the present time.
Do you remember if there was any thing
said about the House of Commons ? — ^There
might| but I do not remember at the present
time.
Did he say any thing about the Habeas
Corpus act P — He gave a statement of the
suspension of it, how far it ran ; something
wim regard to that.
What did he say P — I do not remember.
Do you remember the substance of what he
said ?-^No» I do not remember.
Did he approve of the suspension of the
Habeas Corpus act.? — He fo9nd fault with it.
Did he say any thing about those that passed
the act suspending the Habeas Corpus act ? —
No, I do not remember.
Do you remember if he talked at all about
the victory of Waterloo ?
Mr. Jeffrey, '^l object to that question*
Solicitor General. — ^There can be no dbubf,
that, by the practice of the Court, the question
may be put to the witness. The general charge
against the panel is, that he uttered certain
discourses or a seditious nature and tendency ;
and/ in the minor proposition, there is a speci»>
fication of the particulars from which the sedi^
tion charged is to be made out. We are not
restricted in our proof to the particular words
charged in the indictment, but may prove ge-
nerally whether in his discourses his expres-
sions were wicked or seditious. There may be
many circumstances of an apparently trifUag
nature, from which the character of these dis-
courses may be proved' to be either innocent
or seditious. I aver that the answer to the
question which has been put will throw most
important light on this matter. In the case
of Muir, a question of this sort occurred ; and
some of your lordships will recollect, that an
objection was made to questions being put re-
garding any expressions but those contained
in the libel ; and the Court did allow the pro-
secutor to enter into a proof of circumstances
not mentioned in the libel.*
[He read the debate from the printed trial.]
There was thus a long debate on the subject;
and the prosecutor was found entitled to pro-
ceed in his proof. Here the same rule shoutd
be adopted.
• Muii's Case, 7, How. Mod. St. T^, .I3S^
140; 148e/jey. "
441]
UnhSerMitUH PreadMr^Jir Seditivh*
A. D. 1817.
[64»
Mr. Mfirtjf,*^! etneas^ «n not disjyoMd to
Uke up the time.ol th« C^nrC by a speecb io
•Qpport of ay o^e^ioB to this qnestion. I
UEk fer from aiguing^ thAt the pablie prate-
•utor if to be tied down to the very words
nentioned in the ainor propoeition >, bat if
there u any meaning at all in recpiiriag % spe-
eiflc aatement in l^e minor propoeition, he
most be United to matten of the same tiani
or description with these whioh are charged.
He is not entitled^ nnder the general charge of
sedition, to inquire wheUier the prisoner
ottered any thing isdecoronst nnpatnotic, or
improper, at the time libeUed. What are the
terois of the chfirge here ? That the prisoner
^ didy in the course of divine worships
wiekedlyy- slanderously^ falsely, and seditiously
otter, before crowded congregations, chiefly
of the lower orders of the people, prayers,
sermons, or declamations, containing widced,
slanderoos, false, and seditious assertions and
toraarks, to the disdain, repraacbi and co»*
tempt of kii m^afy^ and of Ats rcyg/ kighnat
tkcfrmct regmtf in thbir persons as well as in
their offices ; and also to the disdain, reproach,
and contempt of <A0 Bffute of Commmi, and of
ihe admim&tfaiwn ofjiatioe within the kingdom ;
all which wicked^ slandef<on% felse, and sedi-
tious awciliona and remaiks, were calculated
and inteaded to the hutt, prajodiee, and dis*
honour of his majesty, and of his royal hig^
DOSS the prtooo regent, both ia their persons
and offices ; to withdraw from the governotent
and legislature the confideace and affections
of the people; and^ by engendering discord
between the king aad die people, to inflame
the people with jealousy and hatred aaainst the
fPTorament, and tofillthe realm with trouble
and dissension." Row, «ha(t poesible con*
i|ectioo can there be between the proof of any
of these charges, and tho pri^nora opinion of
fihe battle of Waterloo ? Supposing a perMin
ahoold haive the singnlariiy, the want of fteling,
or the wfaiasicaUty of thiokiag the victory at
Waterioo disreputable to our reputation or
||oiy, is a prejudioa to be excited against him
in a trial for sedition or othev crime, becanse
(e feels so little for bis country as to have such
sentiments ? What is it t^ the support of (his
indictment, supposing the prisoner had sioch
peculiarity of thinking? I am not now to
aripie whether the oKpression of such senti-
ments would amount to the charge of sedition;
fof even if that were the case, and if soch
expressions had been specified in the indict-
nsentp yon could not have allowed a proof of
them, as they could not infer the particular
sorts of sedition specified . in the minor pro-
pontioa. Particular chsfeges are^ stated itt the
indictment, and are you to aOow si paily to
M prejudiced by having, soch qaestions, as
that to which I now o^ect, — 1 de not say
answend,*— but put to a witness at all ? 1 do
not care ibr the anawers; but Io allow the
prosecutor to take such a course, would be
attended widi bad consequences in worse
times, and in other tiials for crimes. - At all
VOL. XXXIII.
vnm% (he qaestioa is obviously <}nife irre-
levant, and not admissible io this trul.
Loid GtOet.— What is the paztioohv qnea-
tion objected to ?
Mr. Jeffrey, — "Do you remember if he
talked at all about the victory of Waterloo ?^
Lord Hemumd, — ^I cannot concave what the
victory of Waterloo^ or the Uabeaa Corpus act,
has to do with this indictment. It is divided
into three heads. There are charged, 1st, Se-
<ditious assertions and remarks against his
majesty ; 2nd^ Against his royal highness the
prince regent; and 8rd, Agidnst the House
of Commons and the courts of justice. Yon
have charged Sedition under three heads; and
yon most keep to these heads«
Lord Gillies, — I concur in the opinion which
has been given. As to the battle of Waterloo,
I should think it strange to find any difference
among people in this country about it ; but
whatever the prisoner's opinion may be as to
that victory^ mere is nothing relative to it in
the indictment. The sedition first charged re-
gards his roijesly. Then a charge is made re«*
garding his royal highness the prince regent,
3iat the prisoner used the expressions libelled^
or some of similar imports Has the battle of
Waterloo any connexion with these charges 7
Then it is stated in the indictment, that the
panel seditiously asserted that the House of
Commons was eorrupt: that the members
thereof were thieves and robbers ; that seats
in the said House of Parliament were sold like
bollocks in a maikot^— or that he used express
sions of similar nnport What has the battle
of Waterloo to do with this charge? The
same obeervatiDn apfriies in oonaidering the
remaining charge, which represents ^ panel
as having anarted that the svbjects of his ma-
jesty were oondemned without trials and wiUi*
out evidence. None of his laajestv's subjects
were broofi^t to any other trial at the battle of
Waterloo than that of skiU and vakHff/— a tpat
which Ihey passed triumphantly.
Lord PitmUfy,-^! am of the some opmioA
with the judges who have spoken.
LordJmtke Clerk^^l also am of tbo saat
opinion. I am not giving an opinion on
the point, whether, if the indictment had
charged, that theaeimon contained passagesi
manifesting geneml^ the disaffscted and sedi*
tions sentiments of the panels suck a qoestiott
as that pat ibr the orewn would or would
not have been relevant. Here the - general
charge is sedition;, but particvdncs sse con-
descended on, of such a liod aa do not aUo^f
the going into suohqnes^one ae that objected
to^ regarding the battle of. Wateiiooi
1 have heafdv diat thaie is an individaalv
whom I need not mention, whothinks that tibe
duk^ of Wellinig^on hs» no merit whatever iff
any of his campaigns jot the battles- whiah ho
has fought, — but eoiild this indivitkial, for
such singularity of thinking, be charged with
seditiooi sutii aft is imputed to this piSt^7
2 T
04^
£7 GEORGE- III.
Ttiat qfJWi Dougisi,
[644
Mr. Macanochk.^'Yon said, that in ipeak-
ing of the king atid the prince, be made a
•imtle between them and Nebuchadnezzar and
BeUhazzar ; did he say any thing else as to
the king personally? — He said, that, in his
opinion, a common executioner has a more
honourable situation than a king, as an execu-
tioner is guilty of taking only a few lives in
the course of a year, whereas a king takes
thousands.
Did he say any thing about Bacchus ?— He
said the prince was a worshipper of Bacchus.
Cotir/:— What did he call him ? how did
lie designate himP — I think the terms used
were, him and his Bacchanalian Court. I do
not remember particularly in what way the
term was used.
Mr. Maoonochk. — Did he say any thing
about the prince and Belshazzar?-^! do not
remember.
Did he sav any thing about thietes and
n>bbers F—l do not remember.
Was he very riolent, or did he speak with
great composure? — He spoke uncommonly
quick, so fiast, indeed, that 1 could not take up
fvhat he said.
Are you' one of Mr. I>)uglas's hearers? —
Nb.
What took you to hear him ? — ^I had heard
that he preached uniyersal redemption for
mankind, add P wanted to hear him on that
subject.
Mr. I>iifiiffioiitf.-^You said'hedrew a simile
between those personages in the Old Testat>-
nent and the king and tbeprfaice regenr.- Is
that to say that he compared the king and the
prince regent to them ?^Yes.
in what respect did he say they resembled
one another?— He said the king's infirmity
rendered him incapable of discharging his
dnCjr, as N«biiehadneiiar was thrown nom the
•ociety of men.
Did he give any reason for stating this ? — I
do not remember ; but it was in that manner
he enlarged in the discourse.
What conclusion did he draw? for what
irarpose did he state what yoit have mention-
ad r— I cannot recollect.
H6w did he make out that llie tw^were
like one another?— I have mentioned that
already. Nebuchadneszar had been driven
from the society of men ; and they l>otfa had
been driven from the society of men.
Did he say why they had been driven*?— 1
said he- spoke so hsty I coold not hear the
ftfth part of what he said.
Give me the fifth part, and I shall be satisfi^
ed ? — ^I cannot proceed &rther as to what he
•aid ; for I do not now lemember, or did not
lollow him at the time.
Did he or not give the reasob^ why Neba<*
thadaeKar was driven from the society of
meaP—*! do not remember whether he did or
not.
Did he give any mf%n why the king was
driven from the society of men ? I desire you
torecollecti and to state what yon know abouf
that?'— It was in makmg a simile between the
common executioner^ and the king being the
instrument of tldringso many lives. He saidf
God had punished him for his unjtist doingy
towards the nation.
You said something about an executioner;
what was that ? — I told that deliberately. He
said, the situation of an executioner was
honourable compared with that of a king.
Whom did you understand by kimy when
the panel spoke of unjust doings, Nebuchad-
nezzar or the king? — With regard to God
punishing him^ I understood he meant George
the Third.
He compared the 'prince regent to BeU
shazzar ? — ^Yes.
In what particulars* did he say they re-*
sembied one another ?-~In comparing the two,
he said, that, although Belshazzar had seen his
liather thrown from the society of men, and
made* to eat witli the 'beasts of the fteld; He
drank out of vessels forbidden, and the prince
regent was in the same manner, not lendmg an
ear to the prayers and supplications of his
people.
And did he say what was to happen to hint
from not lending an ear to them f— Yes, that
God would undoubtedly punish him for iC
afterwards.
You said that herecommendM petitioning?
—Yes.
For what? — ^For a reform in parliament.
And what did he recommena to be done in
order to promote the petitions? — He said, that
by petitioning, and petitioning, and petitioning
agam, and again, and again, their petitions
would perhaps be heard and granted;
Do you remember any thing else' he safd
about it ?-^No, I do'not mmember any thing
else just now.
Did he take any illustration ftt>m tibe
Scriptures to explain how they should proceed
iD^pon that oocasionP— I do not remember.
Did he say what they should do in case of
their petitions not being listened to?^~-I da
not remember.
I wish you would try ? — I cannot recollect
Did he say any thing about the House of
Commons ?•— He spoke of corruption having'
crept in among them, in his prayers, sermon,
ana lecture.
Then he repeated at diffi^nt times tiiat
corruption had crept in among them ? Did he
give anv example of the corruption ? Did he
particularize any measure as an illustration of
corruption ? — I do not remember:
Did he say any thing about the suspenaimi
of the Habeas Cotpus actP — He meolioasd
his not approving of it| but I do not remember
what he said;
I wish to ask you, if the general nature of
the prayer and sermon was rdigious or politic-
cal ?— Politicals
And what was the general poiideal fendency
of the discooise } [This question was objected
6451
VniotrMlut'Preaeier,ybr Sedition.
A. D. 1817.
E64«
to, ftDd Mr. Drammond said he had no wish
to press it.]
Alexander GoQan cross-examined by
Mr. Jeffrey,
You mentioned, Mr. Gollan, that yon went
there chiefly to hear his opinion npon a parti-
ciriar point? — Yes.
Had ^ou heard any thing particular about
his pohtical opinions f — Yes. There was «
general talk about him.
Had you been desired by any one to go to
hear his political opinions F^'No. I went of
my own free will.
Are you sure of that? — ^Yes.
He spoke quickly P — ^Yes.
Was there any thing else partioular in his
•mode of speaking ?-^e spoke somewhat with
a Highland accent It was not easy to under-
stand him.
You were there once or twice ? — I was there
three times, but only heard him twice.
Which time did you hear him deliver a
lecture fspm Daniel ? — Both times.
Aad what you said of his remarks apply to
eome i«marks by him at the one, and to some
made at the other meeting,? -To his remaiks
OD both occasions.
Some of them were then made twice over ?
^Yes.
Jcmei WaddeU sworn. ^Examined by
Mr. Maconochk,
Where do you live ?— In the Gallowgal&
What is your profession ? — I am a surgeon.
Did you ever eo to hear the prisoner at the
har preach ? — I did.
Do^ you remember when that was? — I am
not perfectly certain; but I think last Feb-
ruary.
What was your reason for going there f — I
«rent from motives of curiosity.
Did an^ thing particular strike you in the
course, of Mr. Douglas's discourse?— It was
altoffether novel .
What was new in it ? — ^To discuss politics
when preaching the gospel.
Was he very violent ^— Occasionally.
Tell what he said.— I cannot do that.^
Such parts as you remember struck you f —
The impression left on my mind is, that he
drew a parallel between Nebuchadnez^car and
our king, and Belshaz^ar and the prince re-
.gent.
Do you remember any thing more? — Nothing
strikes me at present except a few of the wprds
he used.
Tell them if you please.
Comri, — ^We want to know what he said in
drawing the parallel? — One thing he said, that
jitrikes me just now is, that Nebuchadnezzar
for his sins was driven from his throne ; and
the impression made on my mind is, that he
,3aid our king was deprivcid of his reason for
^s sins and crimes.
Court, — It is not so much your impression,
as his words,^ if possible, that we wish you te
tell us.
Mr. Maconodue. — Did he say in express
words that our monarch had been dnven from
his throne?— I can only say that was my im-
pression. I cannot remember the exact words.
Was that the meaning of (he words he used ?
— I did not say so. It is the meaning that I
attached to them.
Had you any doubt that that was his mean-
ing at the time?— I had ne doubt at the
time.
SolicUof^General. — Will you proceed to state,
whether bespoke of any tiding else in the
course of your hearing him ; and state it to the
jury ? — ^I cannot recollect just now ; my me*
morv does not serve me. There was such a
confusion and bustle, and he spoke so fast;
that it was only from a few words I could
gather what he said.
Mr. Maconochie* — Do you remember whether
he said any thing about the king of France ?— >
Yjbs.
State what your recollection is ? — He said
that the British bad forced a king upon France
against the wishes of the people. That is the
only thing I can recollect at present, but J
xlid not pay much attention to it*
Did he say any thing about Louis XVI ?—
Not that I remember at present.
Do you recollect any expressions that he
used in drawing the comparison between the
prince regent and Belshazzar? — I do not
remember the expressions.
State them as near as jo\x can recollect them.
— ^He said« that the night before the taking
and destruction of Babylon, Belshazzar and
his counsellors were rioting and drinking, and
that the prince resent held his meetings of
the same kind; and he added, that like causes
always produced like effects.
Do you remember his saying any thing i>f
the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act?— He
mentioned it.
What did he say ? — ^That it is a deprivation
of the liberties of the people.
Did be say any thing of the people who got
it passed ?— He did ; but I do not remember
what he said, I do not remember .the ex-
pressions.
Do you remember the substance ? — ^I could
not say> He said it was an oppressive and
unjust measure.
Did he aay any thing about their meeting
with punishment for getting it passed ? — I do
not remember.
Do you remember his applying any other
epithet to the prince regent? — I do not at
present.
Do you remember his saying any thing of
Parliament, or the House of Commons?— I
could not give a precise answer.
Do you remember the substance ?-^I do
not.
SolkiiDr {Teiiero/.-oWhen you say y-ou do
•471
57 GEORGE III.
Trial oflMl Dm^m^
fAlS
not remenber^ do y^u oMtii thtt |!Oii do
Dot remember the expressions^ or that yoQ do
not remember the substance P — I could not
say with certainty that I do remember the
substance.
Do you remember his saying any thing
about a gibbet ? — No.
Did he say any thing about the prince re-
gent being infatuated ?
Mr. Jejfra/.^l object to that question.
Hr. Drummoni. — Under your lordship's
correction^ I submit that tbe question put by
Mr. Solicitor-General is perfectly proper, and
that ve are entitled to put it, otherwise the
exampation is reduced at once to tbe single
question, what did the panel say ?
Mr. Je^rvy^-**! object to tke question being
pill; «nd I really most 4jdce this oppottomty
bf stating, that thii examination has been
conducted in a way, from first to last, that I
never heard of before in this Court. They
bave all along been asking the witness, not
what words he heard used, but what was his
impression* and his imagination of what Mr.
Douglas said.
How would such a proceeding be taken on
A trial for murder, or any other felony? In
answer to a question, the witness says he has
a faint remembrance ; and he is then asked
what his impression is ; to which be replies,
that so long an interval has elapsed, he re-
members little about it, but has a vague
impression on the subject. I object to the
whole strain of such an examination ; and I
hope ^our lordships will express your disap-
piobation of the attempt to bnog circumstances
to the mind of the witness in this manner.
When the question at issue is, whether an
individual used a particular expression, is it
tolerable that that very expression should be
put in a quastion to the witness, with all its
concomitants ? They should have asked, in a
^neral way, whether the witness heard the
panel use any expressions derogatory to the
prince regent. To attempt, in the way now
done* to state in a question to the witness the
veiy words charged against the panel, cannot
be allowed. They might as well read over to
the witness the whole discourse at once, and
then ask him if he remembers this sentence,
or this paragraph, or this discourse. They are
not entitled to proceed in this way. The
general question which may be put to the
witness is. What did yon hear tbe panel say ?
or. Do you remember hearing him say any
thing relating to such and such a matter.^ But
in an examination in chief thev are not en-
titled to take up their precognition, and pro-
ceed in the manner now attempted.
The witnesses oome with a knowledge that
there is a precognition ; and they feel them-
selves in some degree h^ down to a statement
which they know to be in the possession of
the Crown counsel. I say that von are not
entitled to put your own words into the
inoftth of a witness; bat that you most first
pat qaestions generally, and cannot ptt in «
question, in thM way, the very woras whick
are libelled. '
Lofi Juitice CZerft.—- In reference to* the
examination of witnesses, I wish that each
examination should be followed out by only
one counsel. The examination of the same
witness by several counsel tends to introduce
an obscurity into the evidence that may easily
be avoided. And I apprehend, that the nde
of law is clear, that in examining a witness,
a geneni question should first be put as to
his recollection of any psit of the speech or
discourse : and when he answers that he doea
not remember particulafly» it is then eonpe-
tent to ask him whether he heani sach an
observation or expression employed.
Lord OiUia.— I concur with what yoat
lordship has said, and would particnlariy press
the propriety of only one counsel fi>r each
party examining a witness. Geneial qnestiona
should first be put to a witness; and it is
wrong to start at once horn the ndddle of aa
examination as to one point to any other
KnnX ; to go, for instance, all at onee mm the
abeas Corpus act to the question, whether
the panel said the prince regent was in-
iatuated.
Mr. Maemioehie, — Do you remember Mr*
Douglas using any expression relative to the
prinoe regent being inAituated f-— I cannot
say with certainty.
You said you remember Mr. Douglas having
mentioned the suspension of the Habeas
Corpus act. Do you remember whether he
said any punishment awaited the persons who
had carried that act through f — I cannot say
with certainty, either. The impression is not
strong enough upon my mind to enable me to
remember so long.
I ask you generally, do you remember whether
he said any thing at all about the House of
Commons ?— He did.
Do you remember what he said P — ^I do not
with certainty.
SoUeUoT'Gentral, — ^When you say you do
not remember with certainty, do you mean
that you do not remember the paiticular
words, or the substance of what tne panel
said ? — I only remember tbe impression made
on my mind. It is^ that the members of tbe
House of Commons are unjust and corrupt.
Have you the least doubt of that impression
having been made on your mind at the timet
— Not the least.
Lord Judkt Clerk. — ^It is not as to yov
impression that we ask you; bnt» did you
hear, him use words which plainly, distinctly
and unequivocally meant that he was charging
the House of Commons, or any part of the
legislature, with being unjust or corrupt? It
is not the general scope of the disoourse, or
your impression, we ask; but whether you
heard words to that efiect? — ^What he said
had that effect or impiassioB upon me. I d^
net cemenber the weeds.
6i9]
VttivemUd Pimehtftjbr tkdbion.
A* D. i6IT«
(95«^
Afe we to mdmstaaA tktt 91M 60 *ot
femember hiii umg the worde m^ost or cor«
xttptf'^l do not remember these words; bat
fiom what he sMd, I heve taeatioiied 'ttjr
opnuoii*
SdkUor'G^nerol. — ^HtTe you then aoy doubt
from what he said that snch was bis meaning?
— None. •
Jwy,r^YiSa have mcbtioMd yow iiapteesioi^.
Ton do not remember wbtt were the words?
•«--l do ttot Remember.
Was ft on a Suaday evening you beard tfa^
eBr«on?**^Yes, oosm tisse betwiit m and
nine o^dock.
Yen ^ofMil reeoUeet tbe «mct day *f the
■Kftklh ?<--^o»
Lord JttMke CferA.-4)id te lecture ilr
preach ?— Be lectvred.
Do yott remekftbet* upon what put of Seri{>*
fore}— On a passage in Daniel.
What diaplerf--I do not remen^ber.
Yon are not ente npon what thapter he
leeinred. — Was this when yon beani aboat
Kebofihadneatar and Belshaaart-«It was my
lord*
Let me ask^on ibis question for the satis-
Diction of the jury and the Court Yon heard
liitt likewise pray f — Yes.
Was there any resumption in the prayer of
Any pakt of the lectore ?«-Oocasionally he did
00 resume.
Ha? e you any recollection of any partieolar
pmyer he made upon that occasion r— I hate
no teooUection of the precise words.
Did you go often to hear him ?— •! went four
Mines at least.
VfkB this the itet or last, or any of the
intermediate times of ^Adth you have spoken ?
—He was always upon the same subject.
Are we lo understand there was the same
l>arallel drawn npon these sevetal occasions!
—There was.
Arc we to understand this was on font
Hifereat Sundays ?-^Yes» I am not certain
jof the precise period) but it wu all about the
jnoettme.
Aksmdar Twhr sworn.*— Examined by
Mr. JJtifmmond.
Are yen a feown-officer at Glasgow ?— -I am.
Do you know that man f — I do.
Did you ro fee bear him pseach last winter?
•—Repeatedly.
Wbei month P— I tUnk Febmaiy .
How often did you go}<— I waa sent ex*
pvaasiy twice*
Both times in Febiuaiy f-^I tUak they were j
it la a oonsiderabletittC ainoe, snd I oauld noi
be teiy positive^
What did he prenrii i^out?-*He gareont
niaatlike other cietiti men frem a imlnit* from
What about? Do you remember anything
■enenHy of the nature of the teitf*— Ireaaem-
tiernotlMngof tbe text itseli It was
wiwattd ))y him- again after be gave it.out.
Do pm wxMaitbeT any perts of the setmon or
tootnref Did anything particular strike your
asemoiy ^^I leeollect he said thate«ata in the
House of Commons were sold like bullocks in
amaitoet.
. Did he say anything more abeut tbe House
of Commons^ or the members of it ? — He said
they were greatly subject to corruption^ ind
words to that efibct
iDo you remember any more of the words 7-^
I remember he represented Great Britain al
present as the modem Babylon.
How did he make that out?— He endea«
voured to prove it the best way he could. He
hoped the oapny period was come o( tbe down-
fall of the modem Babylon.
Do yon remember anything more ?— He re^
commended to his hearers to pray very
eamtttly, that God would put it into the hearts
of his majesty the king, and of die prince regent,
lo turn their attention to the cries of the people.
And he said, that a good prayer woula have
more effect than ten tfiousand armed men.
Welly sir, do you remember anything more ?
— I remember bim speaking much of the an-
cient John Knox. He quoted him repeatedly
from the pulpit.
For what did he quote him ? — Aa an exem-
plary character of his time, and he recommended
nim to the notice of his hearers.
Did he say anything of the king and the
prince regent ?— Yes, I thought he spoke
rather disrespectfully of them.
What did he say of them ?— Of the prince
regent^ in particular, he said that he was a
man he did not think bdiaved well somehow.
Did he say what was done that was wrong ?
Did he find any particular fiiult? — He seemed
to do so; but I hsTC fornot the particular
words Mr. Douglas used, nom tbelapie of
time.
Do you remember the substance of whnt he
said ? — ^He drew a simile between the Regent
and Nebuchadnezzar.
How did he compare them? In what did
he say they resembled one another ? — He drew
a Tcry strong simile. Nebuchadnezzar was
dri?en from ttie presence and society of men
to feed wi th the bullocks of the field . He drew
a disrespectiul snnile between them.
Did he say the prince regent was driten
fiom the society of men ^— No, hodid not.
What did he' eay?--4 forget the premec
words. There was a dedaratton in which I
noticed parts of his discourse, but it was given
away.
I>id he say anything more about the king ?— i
Yes. he did.
what was it ?— He spoke in a manned iii
if he justly dese^ed the vengeance of God and
his wrath.
Who deserved that? — Rings in general,
pointing to the kings of Europe.
Did he say anything about the late king
of Fmnee ?^ dtnnot ay I remember be did
Did he sayanythiqg aboiii tbf mjiwier M
^0 57 <jfE<>RdB'UI.
%hich th« law of tbe coantty ii adiinistttM }
— He did not seem to reliih tbe present
aiode of the administration of tbe law, firom
what be said.
Wbat did lie say? — He said that there is
such a corruption of the Houses of Parliament,
that thto law is not administered with equity
and justice.
Did be use any epithets of contempt or di9^
respect more than what you have said ? — I re-
collect he certainly did so.
Wbat were the words ? — ^I know the words
were talcen down in my declaration; but I
have rather forgotten them/
Do you remember none of them at all f
Wbat was the nature of them ?— They were
rfiarespactfal, but I cannot name them now.
Trial of Neil Douglau
resa
John MaecaUum sworn. —
Mr. Macono^ie,
ned by
Do you know tbe prisoner at the bar ?— I
do.
Did YOU ever go and bear him preach f — I
was ordered by &e magistrates of Uiasgow to
hear him two Sundays successively.
Did you go? --Yes, to John-street.
What time was this? — ^In the month of
March ; it might be before or after, I am not
tm certain.
Do you remember the text from which be
preached?— 1 remember the subject, but the
chapter has escaped me.
What was the subject ?~0n the impious
least of Belshazzar.
Do you remember any comparisons be
made?— I have mentioned in my declara-
tion—
Cioart.— You are only to tell us what you
'teoottect of these two preachings? — Well, I
will do justice to my own conscience, and the
•Ul^t also.
Mr. Maconockie. — ^Tell what you remember?
r-There is very little that I do remember.
. Tell what it is ? — He hinted or spoke to the
import, that Britain is the mystical Babylon
mentioned in Scripture.
Did be draw a comparison between tbe two ?
—I do not remember.
Cour$% — ^Do yoQ remember his saying any
thing of them together? — He just made a con»-
parison, saying Britain is tlie mystical Babylon
mebtioned in the S^ripturei
Mr. Maamochie. ^-Did he say any thing
about the king or the prince ? — As &r as I re-
collect, he made observations as to the king,
and said, of all rulers who follow the conduct
of Belshaxzar, that their &te would be the
same. I do not remember that he made any i
more particular allusions- to our rulers, than
to those of any other nation of the present
liffl^. ,
Comi» — ^Yon say he made no particular
allusion, but spoke only of kings and rulers in
feniral P-^Yes, my Wd.
Mr. MMncdUe.— Did he mtntion tbe king
or Uie prince regent upon any of these occ^
sions .^-^With regard to the king and the
prince regent, he did not name them but in
this way. In speaking of Nebuchadnezzar and
Belshazzar, he mentioned tbe conduct of
Belshazzar, in forgetting the judgment of God
upon Nebuchadnezzar. He mentioned that
Daniel addressed Belshazzar to the effect, that
notwithstanding the judgment of God upon
Nebuchadnesiar, yet Belshazzar did not mend
his ways. And be said, that notwithstanding
the phnct regent saw the state of bis fiitber for
diese seven years, he did not mend his ways j
or words to that import.
Did Mr. Douglas, upon either of these
occasions, mention the House of Commons T— •
He made some remarks upon the House of
Commons ; but to what extent, or wbat he said^
I, could not positively enter into, I cannot say
I can recollect now. At the time, I may bav*
bad more remembrance.
Do you remember the substance of what be
said about the House of Commons P— Upoor
that bead, I do not wish to say any thing, as I
am not safe to do it.
Do you remember )us mentioning tlie
Habeas Corpus act f — ^I remember it sounded
in my ears as if he mentioned it, but I could
not take up what he said about it.
Do you remember whether Mr. Douglas
said any thing about tbe administration of jus*
tice in the country ? — I i-emember something
of his remarks on our courts of judicature.
What did he say ?— There was so^ietbing he
was not satisfied with ; their procedure was
not what he would recommend. He said that-
the Courts condemned some of the reformers
without judges or jury ; that is to say, without
sufficient evidence, which tlie Scriptures de«
mand, that in the mouths of two or three wit-
nesses every thing should be established.
Did he say any thing about the judges in the
time of our Saviour ? — I wish to make a re-
mark, in order to do justice to both sides of the
question. He said, Aat, in the time of Com-
wallis in Ireland, a seijeant was condemned,
upon the testimony of one witness, for keep-
ing company with United Irishmen; that it
actually nappe.ned that the man had retired to
a private plao^ for devotion, at the tine when
he was accused of being with the United
Irishmen; and he said that Comwallis got the
man off, after being condemned.
I ask youy whether be inade any observa*
tions on tbe Judges in the time of our Saviodrf
Did he make any comparison between them
and the present judges of this country ? — It
followed, if not immediately, in some portion
of the lecture or discourse. He said the ji^dg^s
6f this Couiitiy are worse than tbe judges in
the time of our Saviour ; for they did not cdn^
demn persons without a competent number of
witnesses, grantifigtbey were fiilse witnesses.
Repeat this P— be said that the judges in'
onr day are worse than the judges in thi
time of our Saviour, in this respect, tMt
0591
VnherwUii Preaehetfjbr SedUioH.
A« D. 1817.
1654
ih%f do not find sufBdent witnetoes to condemn
those that are considered guilty. He said
that they are worse than- the Jews who Qon<-
demned our Saviour ; that the Jewish judges
found a competent number of witnesses^
allowing them to have been false witnesses.
Did this remade allude to the witnesses in
the court-martial you spoke of, or in the trials
of feformers ?— I could not say.
Do you remember his saying any thing
about the vessel of the state 1 — He considered
that, if it be not conducted in a better way,
and unless compiitted to a skilful pilot, it
would not reach tlie shore in safety.
Do you' remember his making use of the
word millennium ?—Yes, I think so.
What did he say? — ^This age is the millen*
nium of corruption.
Do you remember what he said immediately
after that? — I am not able to say.
MaitMew Lowtbn swom.'^^Ezamined by .
Mr. DnantoHtU
Do you know that man at the bar ? — ^Yes,
I do.
Mr. Douglas P — ^Yes.
Do you remember going to hear him preach ?
— Sometimes in April or March.
Was there a week or a month between the
times ? — ^A week or two, more or less.
How often? — I think three times altogether.
Did he preach from the Same text ? — I re-
member notie of his texts but one, about the
handwriting on the well.
Was there a (^eat crowd? — ^There was a
▼ery fun house.
Was the congregation of the lower ranks of
■fhe people? — I do not know. They were all
▼ery well dressed. I cannot tell nigh from
low at these times, at least on Sundays.
Do you reniember what he was preachinff
abont ? — ^I remiember he said that Nebucha£
fiezzar was driven from the society of men
among the beasts of the field, but repented,
and glorified Ood ; ind that Belshazzar took
no tramrng from his fkie; that the king is
driYen from the society of men, but not to that
of beasts, and that the prince regent takes no
warning from the circumstance.
Hare yon a distinct recollection of these
words ?-^aite distinct.
You said something more of that kind ? — I
could not always distinguish what he said.
He spoke as if he was short of the tongue. He
got mto a rapture sometimes, and his voice
afterwards fell low; and until he recovered
his breath I could not hear him.
He was very animated ? — ^Yes.
Did he say any thing about the Hoose of
Commons f — I remember hit wp^aittng about
a corrupt House ; I remember his speaking
il>outthat«
Cmtrt. — Do you mean to m he cafled the
House of Comitf ons a corrupt tiouse ?— Yes.
Do you remember any thing he said about
M — ^Kot that I remember of. He prayed
heartily for the king and the prince ; that the I
Lofd might duAge the hearts of his evil-
counsellors, and place righteous men in theip
stead.
Did he sayany thing about the House of
Commons?— That it is a corrupt House, and
shonld be reformed.
Any thing more } — I do not remember.
Do you remember the psalm upon that
occasion ? — I remember - it was the second
pealm. He commented on the lines as he.
read them.
Did be say any thing about the prince
during the psalm or any other time ?-*I believe
he prayed tot the poor infatuated prince, that
the Lord might turn his heart.
Hugh PtUenan sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Dmmmond.
Do you remember going to hear Mfit
Douglas preach ? — Yes.
On Sunday evening ?— ^Yes.
At what date? — I do not remember the
date.
In the month of March ? — Either the month
of March or latter end of February.
More than onee? — ^Yes.
How often P— Twice.
What did he preach from N— Ftott DanieK
Do you remember any part of what he said f
—Some words.
What were they? — ^Do you remember his
saying any thing about the prince regept ?-*
Yes, I recollect of that
Was it in his prater or sermon he spoke of
the regent f--4 tiimk I remember that he
mentioned the regent in his prayer. He was
prayinff to his Maker to turn his hean, that
ne migtit dismiss his corrupt Court, and plac^
in their ttead better men, i^ho would take
better charge of the prinoe.
Did he apply any disrespectful expressions
to the prince regent! — To. the best of my
recollection, be called hiift a bewitohed, or
poor wretched prinee> or some aoeh expres-
sion.
What else did hesay alxmt hfmf-^Hiere
was little more in the prayer that I recollects *
Was there any thing about htm in the
sermon ? — ^^Yes, I think Uier^ was.
And what was in> the sermon? — He waa
speaking about not taking a warning from his
father's tete.
What did he say wonld hotppen to him if
he did not take a warning from his father's
fiite ?— rl do not recollect it at present, -s
Did he say any thing about NebuchadnesMr }
—Yes.
What about him?<-^That. Neihudiadoeiaar
wae dri.ven from the aodely of iMiiy add
suffered mudi-fiom the different sins thnt he
had committed.
Did he malce any comparison to Nebncbad?
nezzar? — ^Yes, that our king had been^rirea
also from his state and the society of men.
What more di|i he say about our kin^ ? Did
he sav "why he had been' driven from his state
and mm the society of men?— Not that I re-
6ftft] 57 GEORGB lit.
member. I did nol Mif muienftand til* wwda
wbich he Qsed at the Uxae.
Was there anything about BeUhaziat?'-?*
The prinoe wm coiii|wnd with Betohesar.
fiy the panel is hia pieachingf— Yafc
What point of resemblance did be i&d
betweea tbeni?— BeUhazsv had poOnted the
^pmU of the saoctManr or lenpte o£ Jeraia-
larn^ in dciokiiif but of the veaaelt, he and hia
}mtd$p aad Wiwesi wd aoiicabinei^ to the ho*
BOUT of idols.
Hew did he cdmpeie the vegtal ta hkml—
Beeanae he also had rioted.
Did he say any thing about aay other king?
^-About the king of Fianoe.
The late, or the present king of France ? —
Louis the Sixteenth.
What of him F-^As &r as I can recollect, or
cofedd mderstandy he said that he was advised
by bis own Court, and the other Courts of £«•
rope, aninst his own people.
' CWf .— What do you say ?— That by follow-
ing the advice of his counsellors, he lost his
file, and is either in hell or pui^atoty,
Mr. Drummtmd, — Did he connect such re*
flections witb our kine ot prince regent? —
Oar prace» he sliid, lue the king of Fnace,
ivjould apt liaten to the wishea of lus people.
What wishes had the prince not Ualened to ?
'-The 'Veiea of his people, or cries of poor
pelitionan who had petitioned him.
Court, — Do you mean to say upon oath, that
though a comparison was autde between the
prince and Relshawar, you cannot state the
pobtaoC comparison t-— I cannot come upon
flieni at present.
JUbt WkHeil swom«— Examined by
Mr* Maemochie*
Doyouknoirthe priaoner Donglaa?-^Ihave
seen tha gentteman sefval times.
Did yen go i» heat Imn preach ?— Yes.
When ?— -Ten or twelve weeks ago.
Snd <rf Bftuochf^Ead of lftudl» or begin-
ning ef April.
Did yon goofien ?— -Three enrenings.
Upon what sn^ect or tsst did. he pnm^^
The fifth chapter of Daniel.
All the thne eveninp upon the same ohapi-
ter ? — ^The two first upon the sane dwptec,
snd upon the same tent I d6 not recollect
particolarly as io the thirdr
Did he say anylhcmg abmit the king, or the
pfinoe regent; v^on these oocMlona?— I heard
nim speak of the prince regent. There ia an
imfreaiian on ngr mind> that h^ aaid. the
prince- Bigent k- aa* fit for * gibber aa> a
thrtmti
Jiirif.p~Di4 he. say these words, or. do you
think, ne meant tliem ?— I thought he said so at
the time *.. but there was a good deal of confioi-
aion, and he spoke, very hurriedly.
Tour impression is, that he said them .'—I
think he da
qfNeU Baugba. [
Cpirl.— -WW do yon mean by a good deal
of confnsion ?-rFrom the pressure of the
people that wese in the fobby^ er entiance to
the seats.
John WaddeU cross-examined by Mr. J^frty.
Ave yon any relatian to Jamea WaddeU F —
Biotheff.
Was he with yen npeft these occasions? — ^No«
Do yon reler in ther answer which yen have
given above Io the first or second night yon
heaid Denglsn >^The first.
Ccurik — Were you constantly present from
the time the service began ?— It was begun be-
fore I went in.
How long might you be there ? — ^About an
hour and a half, or twenty minutes.
WiU you be so good as tell us if you recollect
any other passage either of his prayers or
sermon but this that you mentioned ? — Nothing
that struck ase with any kind of fovea.
How did he taeat of thia fifth chapter of
Daniel ? — That is what I cannot exactly re*
capitulate.
Do you remember anything that preceded <Ar
that followed these remarkable expressionathat
have been given ua? — Relative to the prince
regent?
Yes 7 — I did not hear the expressions pre*
vioos to that.
Canyon tell us what made him use snch
strong expressions?— I thought I heard him
utter them, but I did not hear what he said*
previooalv.-
What followed P*-I do not recollect indeed.
Are we to nodeistand that you cannot, tell
any one thing he said but what yon have men^
tioned ?-»Nothing else khat he said that first
^ght.
You say you went again ?— That night fort*
ni^t.
Da you recollect.anything he said that night
fi>rtnigbt?--Yes,. I recollect he used the ex-
pressions, speaking of the battle of Waterloo,
that some of those connected with it mi^^t
consider it an honour^ but for his part he would
rather consider it as a disgxaoe.
Nothing else, sir? — ^Nouiing..
How did he treat the chapter of Daniel that
night }—-l do not recollect anything more than
vrhat I have mentioned. I beard him very in«
dbtinctfy.
Was diat from the noise, or from his mode
of speaking ? — ^From the noise, and bis mode of
speaking, and from the pxessnre of the con-
gregation.
When you heard these remarkaUe ex-
prfmioos yon have spoken to, did yon men-
Qon th(^ to any one at the time ? — ^Nbt at
the* time.
Not ^at night to anybody T— Io none thai; I
recollect of.
When did you mention it f«-I could nek
exactly say. i heard such things mentioned
by others. There was just a goMral kind of
speaUng about him.
Unioenklut PrtMiir,Jor IkditioH.
9971
'Wkeinr did yoo^ orivlmii did TDti^^ention
tlM«KpnNio»to aiifbody eise ?— I bdiev« I^
IwTe mentioDed Ihem : hat I do not reoMmber
I, or wberei or to whoo.
The feUowng Dedarattons of the panel
were thea read :
At Ola^^ March, 15thj 1817.
^In presence of Robert HaiDilU>n» £sq^
advocate Sheriff-depute of LanarkBhire,
eonpeared Niel DouglaSy Universalist
preacher, inGlasgow ; whobeiiigexamiDedy
dedares. That for the hist eleven yearj he
hatbeoD apreaeberio Glasgow, and during
tfaatperiod hashad Sabbath eveninglectures
and sermons, whicby for aboot the last five
yean, he has delivered in the Andersonian
lostitutton Cias9-room, and his audience
has been, particularix for the last seven or
eight monttis, Tery nomerous and respec-
table: That his precentor's name is
Nicholson, who is employed in the ware-
house of Mr. Robertson, a quaker^ a
maaufecturer, in Commercial-bnildings,
Candlerig|(8 : That M'Dowal Pate used
oocaaiooalty to preceat, and he did so
lately., and he is not certain but be did so
last SabbaOi : That he keeps no oopy of
his sermons or lectures, but he premedi-
tates, and, by the assistance of notes, en-
deaevoars to adhere as close as possible ;
aad lie is noc conscious of having made
aay improper deviation from die object of
bis text: That iorthe last two years the
dedarant in his evening sernmas has
oommeoted or preached from the book of
Daaid ; and last Sabbath evening his text
was ia the latter part of the 5th chapter ,
of the book of Daniel: That befbre be
commenced the service, David Young,
one of his deaeoas, informed him that
three spies were supposed to be in the
loom: That the declarant accordingly
Bsentioned this to the audience, and never-
theless prooeeded with the discourse:
That the declarant had no notes of that
disooune, or of any other siace hai last
illness: That James M'Ewan used to sit
in the declarant's meeting-house, but the
declarant never heard fiK>m him or any
other, of any seciat association being
' formed, or means used for procuring a
reform ia pailiament: That at different
times the declarant has published some
' little tiacts, some of wfaleh treat of the
politics aad state and condition of the
country ; and, in his evefning sermons, he,
as drfamstaacee suggest, has occasionally
taken opportaoity to animadvert upoa
these topics, but be never did so with any
iBfvidious intention : That in some of his
lale discoBfses he spoke of a chmd which
1nbi|^ OTOr this country, and would soon
b«mt ; by vrhich he meant nothing more
than the misery and wretched state of the
osmmanity from want, as- also the great
VOL, xxxm.
A. D. 1817.
C6S8
progress of infidelity; aad he prayed that
U imght not be allowed to burst : That
the declarant prayed for the prince-regeot
and that he nugfat profit by the affliction*
of his father ; but tie does not recoUept of
having said, that notwithstanding of what
the prince had seen of his father for these
seven years past he had not amended his
ways : That in this discourse he did not
say that seats were sold in the House of
' Commons as merchandise, or that there
was a great deal of corruption in that
house, or that several members of it were
. thieves and plunderers, and divided the
spoil of their rich neighbours among them ;
but he recollects thanking Ood that there
were still some members in our senate
who dignified their own character in
maintaining the rights of the people:
Tbat he took occasion to express his^
disapproval of the suspension of the
Habeas Corpus act, as a measure by which
the accuMd were deprived of the means
of their own vindication ; but he does not
recoUeet of saying that the country had
been condemned without witnesjes, judge
or jury; and the declarant is still of
opinion that parlmmeat never acted so
imprudently as passing such an act on an
occasion where the minds of the people
were so aggrafated : That the dedarant
did identify Britain with the mvstical
Babylon mentioned in tbe 18th coapter
of the Revelations ; and he is not singular
in this, as many commentators think with
him, that Britain,' not Rome, which last
was not a maritime nation, is meant by
the Babylon there mentioned : That when
speaking of the Habeas Corpus act bdng
suspended, he observed, that bad as the
Jews were, they did not condema our
Saviour without a form of trial ; but he
does not recollect of saying anything by
way of contrast as to the present execution
of the law since the passing of this act :
That in this discourse be did not condemn
the expedition to Holland : That he does
not consider that the battle of Waterloo
was a matter of rejoidng, but on the con-
trary, and he believes he did say so.
Denies that he spoke anything of the
profligacy of our rulers, of the unjust ad«
ministration of the laws, of a laxness in
the administration, or that he called the
member^ of the House of Commons thievas
or plunderers.
(Signed) ** Nist Dovolas.
** R, Hakilton.^
The above examination adjourned tiU
Monday next the 17th current, at eleven
o'clock forenoon, when Mr. PougUs if
required to attend.
Ji Okugvm, ike \7ih ManOk, lOlT.
^ In pmenee of Robert Haiailton, esq.
advocate. Sheriff-depute of Lanailtshire,
compeared Niel Doiigles, and' the^ fore-
2 U
659] ^7 GfiOHGE HI.
• 'going declanttion* being read over to'him,
he begs leave to make the followiog cor*
rectioiis on it: That he is'sixty-aeTen
years of age, and has been a preacher
twelve years in 'Glasgow ; for the eight
last of these the congregation has been as-
-senibled in the Andersorrian Institution-
room: That instead of David Young
> saying that the persons were spies, he
said there were three persons suspected to
be spies ; . and with these corrections he
I adheres to his former declaration. De-
<:lares. That in ' reading a passage in the
27th chapter of fisekiel, where it mentions
that the ' rowers have brought us into
deep waters/ the declarant expressed a
wish and prayer that our rulers might not
be allowea to row. the Vessel of state into
deep waters, and left to perish between
the straits ; and if so, he prayed that a
greater than man might be a pilot to a safe
haven. On further recollection he did not
on this 'occasion mention the rulers of the
nation :' That in his discourse he animad-
▼erted* on the impropriety of this nation's
■conduct in regard to the late wars, and in
• the support which they had thereby given
to the ' bourbon family, and to idglatry :
Thai he never recollects of saying that the
present period was thjMnillennium of cor-
ruption.- And beinjpnterrogated, What
ffeason and view he has in animadverting
so often on political matters and the
measures of Q^vemment in his sermons
a^ xomiiients on Scripture, and par-
dcularly when the same are addressed
to Uie lower orders of the people, and at
>a period when, he confesses, they are at
present suffering from want? declares.
That he does not comment often upon the
• * tfaid'subjects : but when in his discourses
. they Qome upon him, he cannot restrain
expressing the spirit of God. And being
interrogated. How he expects to remedy
the abuses he complains of by harangues
to his hearers, instead of addressing and
admonishing those ' persons with whose
actions he is* displeased ? declares. That
when expounding the Scripture, he has
•feit it his duty to point out to the people
• those measures of the government ' of his
country which he has seen, for this some
time' back, to be drawing down the ven-
• geance of heaven upon this country,' which
. measures he has observed for some years
to have been followed by our government,
and the suspension of the.Habeas Corpus act
is a erowning one, and as such he has held
rit. And the following he Hegs,maybe
taken down as part of his decLaration, and
that it may reach the ears of the rulers of
this nation : That his royal highness has
more to apprehend from the measut^es of <
his official servants than fram the madness
4>f his people ; which expression, as to the
madness of the people, is used in the
prayers of the Church of England as to the'
Trial o/NeU Dougj^h TMt
recent esdhpe of bb royal bighneB^, «^f|e
dedannt thinks with < great iminop^ie^y
but he never made this . declaration in
public : That the declarant has published
different little tracts, and, among others,
one intituled, 'Causes of oar Ptiblic
Calamity;' another, intituled, 'The
Baptist ;' and a third, intituled, ' A
Word in Season,' each of which the de-
clarant got printed, and a few of each of
the copies have been at different times
sold by the door-keeper of the meeting-
house after sermons ; and to the said pro-
ductions there is now affixed a sealed
label, which is doaueted and subscHbed
by the declarant, sheriff-examinator, and
clerk, as relative hereto : That of these
publications there were about five hun-
dred printed, and there might be forty
copies at the least sold of them, but ci
the precise number he cannot b^ certain :
Tbat the name of the door-keeper, ta
whom the declarant has given his tracts
to be sold, is Samuel Gourlie, a weaver
in the Westeigate of Glasgow. Dedaro,
That he has frequently inculcated on his
hearers, and declared in public, that no
man who liad the fear of God would be
concerned in the pulling down of one go-
vernment and setting up another, and
that those who did so were destitute
, of the fear of God; and that so far
from approving any violent measures to
oppose our rulers, or compel the legis-
lature to adopt any popular measure, he
is convinced m his cionscience that Chris-
tianity condemns all wars whaitever^ And
being interrogated, If he was never afraid
that the introduction of these political
subjects into his sermons, and especially
his avowed condemnation of the measures
of government, and of the . legislature,
would create a spirit of discontent amongst
the people^ and his hearers inrparticular ?
declares, That in the course of his lectures
upon Daniel, he was naturally led to make
these remarks ; but he always cautioned
his hearers against every thing that migjfat
tend to disturb the peace and good order
of society. In witness, &c.
'' DuMcjkN Clark, vritness.
" JoRK Leslie, witness.
(Signed) 'vNiel Doitglas.
" R. HAllILtt>K.*'
((
" At Gloigow, iSth March, 1817.
In -presence of Robert Haipilton,
Esq. advocate. Sheriff-depute of Lanark-
shire, and in the petition and cocoplaint
presented, &c. compeared Niel Dboglas,
present prisoner in the. tolbooth of' Glas-
gow ; who being examined, iand his
declaration emitted on the 15th and 17th
days of March instant, . being read over
to him,. declares and adheres thereto'; and
farther declares. That his religious^ creed
diffen from that of the church of Scodaod
•61]
Vnhertalut PnadurtforSedkioH.
A. D. 1817.
CMS
r only in tluSj 'of hit bdiering in the uai-
Tenal restoration of mankind,; and he-
. acknowMger no head as sdpreme in the
choich eicept Christ. And bein^ inter-
rogatedy If it is cnsioaiary with ministers
of {usperaoasion of secession, to mingle
their discourses with political obserratious
"> or censures on< measAres adopted by
government, wh#n these last happen to
be disapproved of by the preacher ? de-
clares, That he feels it to be his duty, a^
a preacher in the sight of God, as a sab-
ject and servant of the Prince of Peace,
to- testify in his' doctrine against whatever
. offends God, violates his law, infringes the
essential, right of his* subjects, and is
Erejudicial to the best interests of man-
ind, and. believes that to be the duty of
every professed minister of Christ.. And
being shewn a sheet on which are written
certain heads of discourse, which begins
with 'Jesus said,' declares, That the
same contains his speech delivered at a
meeting at Anderston, held for the pur^
pose of' having it resolved whether they
should petition for reform, and it ^as
copied by a young lad, aa apprentice to
a writer in town, with the exception of
' the lower part of the fourth page, which
\s written by himself:. That it was in-
tended his speech should be publbhed in
the newspapers, but it was never done,
and the said paper is doqueted and sub-
scribed by the declarant, and sheriff-
examinator, and clerk, as relative hereto.
And beiofsbewn a hand-bill, which is nnw
doqueted and siened,. as relative to this
dedhration, and which announces the
publication of the Baptist, &c. declares,
That he got five hundred of these pub-
lished, and he got one of them pasted
upon the door of his meeting-house, bnt
there never was any other of them used ;
and if the Court requi^ it, he will not
make use of them tiil better times, as be
iias no wish, however innocently, to give
I cause of offence. In witness, &c.
** Geoegs Duncan, witness.
• ''James Thomson, witness.
(Signed) ** Niel Douglas.
' '.'• " R. Hamilton."
EVIDENCE for THE PANEL.
AUm Cumcroik sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Jeffrttf,
Do yon know Mr. Douglas at the bar
there f — Yes.
- Are you a hearer of his ? — ^Yes, Sir.
A regular aitender at his place of worship?
— ^I have attended his preaching about eighteen
monlns.
lyo youi remember whether you attended his
JactoreB or prea^iiogs on the Sundny-evenings
in the begining of March last ? — Yes. -
£iranr Sdnday-eirenihg :ddring> that time ?---f
T«s,I^iett'Idid:*'
Do yon remeniher his lecture fxotti Daniel
about Nebuchadnezxar and Belshazxar? — Yes. •
You remember that r — ^Yes. i .
Do. you remember his making ;any com-
parison between the condition of our unfor- .
tunate sovereign king George,- and that i^to
which Nebuchadneszarfell?— Yes, I remend)ei
an imperfect parallel which he drew. . . « .
In- what respect did be make the parallel
bet^ween them ? — As to the duration of their
derangement.
Did he begin suddenly upon that, subject,
or had he gone regularly through Daniel ?— - .
He had been going jegularly through Daniel.
Do you remember .hearing him say any
thing about the cause of this infliction of Pro*
vidence on our sovereign ? — No, he specified
none.
Did he say thM he was smitten by divine
^ viengeance on account of his infidelity .or sins ?
—Never.
You are sure of that? — I am certain of it.
Did he mention anything of his recovery? —
Yes, he prayed and fervently wished the king
might be again restored to his throne ; and- if
not to his throne on earth, to a throne in
heayen.
. In the course of. his leeture, while led to
notice the king's unfortunate malady,, did - he
utter any expression of reprobation or blamt
towards the king ? — No.
Did he speak of him with respect ?—^Yes»
always with respect.
Was he . in the i habit of praying .for .his
majesty 7 — Yes, generally ; he never missed a
day in my recollection without praying for the
king.
. Was- these any thing in these prayers thai
implied blame upon the king ?— No.
To what effect did he pray) — I do not .re*
collect the exact words.
You have attended the established church
sometimes P — ^Yes. ,
You have heard them pray there. for the
To the same general effect ? — I think -Mr.
Douglas^ was more partictilaiXi
In what respect?— He pmyed more fervently
for him than those I had heard.
Do yon remember, on these occasions,
while going oa with his scriptural history, bis
saying any thing of tiie prince regent?— No, I
do not recollect.
Did you ever hear him say the prince regent
was a Vrorship(tor of Bacchus ?— I never did.
Can you take it upon you to swear, wbelhor
he ever said the prince regent was a poqr
infatuated, bewitched, -or wretched prince? —
I could answer upon oath he never did.
Did you pay particular attention, to the
political expression of Mr. Douglas's sermons
about the time I have mentioned P — ^Yes.
Had you any particular cause for this ?-^
Upon the night of the 9th of March I paid
particular attention to what he said. I was
mf&rmed there were spies present, and I
paid attention lest he should utter any thing
that might be charged against him. '
easi ^ GEOBQB HI.
Did yoo Imw bim opoa any occasion aboat
diat time say any thtng^ about the Houses of
periiameaty especially the House of Commons *
-.No, Sir.
Did you ever hear him say the House of
GommoDS was corrupt or mriost ?— No, I nerer
did.
Did yoa ever hear him say the members of
that House were thieres and robbers ? — ^No, I
never did.
Have you heard him about that time, or at
any other time, make remarks about the ad-
ministration of the law in this country } — No,
he always spoke with high respect of the
law.
Did you- erer hear what he said on die
administration of the law ? — He bestowed as
matenooraiums npon the administration of
Sie law as language can vsps^oMf or ingenuity
inyent.
Frequently, Sir? — ^Always.
You say he did this generally; you were
'going on to mention an instance? — He said
after his fon's trial, that he was happy he was
a native of a oountvy where the law was im*
partially administered.
This was after his sou's conviction ?>— Yes.
Do you know what he bad been tried for ? —
Swhidiing. He said it was his high satisfao-
tion to be a native of a country where the law
^ is so impartially admiaistered.
Did he say thb from the pulpit ? — ^Yes.
In express reference to nis son's trial and
€ODvictk>n f .— Yes.
He mentioned them ?«-~Yes, he did.
Are you sure this was said seriously, and
tfMkt there was no irony in what was said ? —
It was said quite seriously.
Are you acquainted with Mr. Douglas in
private life ? — ^i es.
From what^ou have heard him say uniform-
ly in the pulpit, and on other occasions, what
were his habitual expressions about the
ioverign and the prince regent ? — ^He always
•poke with great respect of them.
Was he an advocate for a reform in parUi^
tneiitl — ^Yes, for a constitutional reform.
Did he ever mention publidy or otherwise,
lis sentiments as to the means of pursuing
this object ? — ^Yes, by petition.
Did he express his sentiments about the use
of violence or force of any kind?— Yes, he
« deprecated it very much.
IMd he say any thins of the riots ?*-Yes,
when liott were in the Calton, he desired his
bearers not to give any countenance to them*
Did he do thb earnestly, Sir? — ^Yes.
Upon these occasionsi during February or
Ifaroh, can yon take it upon you to swear,
whether iu the pulpit he ever said that the
prince regent was as lit for a gibbet as a
throne ?— He never did ; I can answer it upon
Trud ^ IMi Dm^itis^
tCM
WWm Worrell sworn.—!
Mr. Cod^jbunk
Arc you a weaker?— YfS*
by
Do you know Ifr. Douglas teie ?— Yes, I
know him.
You know he preaches the gospel?— Yes.
Yon were accustomed to attend him ?— >For
about thirteen months.
The last thirteen months? — ^YeSy sir.
ConsUntly ?— Yes.
Yon recollect doing so during his ordinary
disoouiaes, last F^ruary and March I — Yes.
Do you recollect his lecturing or preaohing
fh>m Daniel ? — ^Yes.
About Nebttchadnessar and Belshanarf —
Yes.
Did he lecture upon these just when, be
came to them in his course of lectaringy or did
he go out of bis course to get at tbem?-^He
took them as they came.
Do you remember, whether when talking
of Nebuchadneaar on that occasioo, he made
any oomparison between him and our king ? —
Yes, witn respect to the length ef tbor safier-
inn.
Merely, or principally upon that ^ — ^Princi-
pally upon the length of their sufferings.
Do you remember his assigning any roasoii
vriiy F^xmdenoe afflicted our sovereign f — He
said, that for the sins of the nation, t^ head
was afflicted.
Did you understand he said or not, that his
majesty was afflicted in this way for his own
sins P — I never heard him mention that.
DM. he mention the fact of Nebuchadnexzar
having been restored to his throne and reason ?
—Yes.
Did he express any wish that such a sesnlt
should happen to George the third W-He
prayed for it frequently.
Was he in the practice in his discourses of
speaking respectfully of the king f— Remark-
anly so.
Was he accustomed to pray with apparent
sincerity and earnestness fov me king f—With
great sincerity.
Do you know him in private ? — ^I never was
at his house more than tnree times altogether.
Was he in the habit of recommending to
his audience to love die king as he seemied to
do ? — He was in the habit oif impressinjg that
upon our minds ; he ordered us to pray for
huB.
Did yon ever hear him mention the House
of Commons ? — Yes, I have heard him mentioa
the House of Commons.
Did you ever hear him say the members
were thieves and robbers ? — No.
Did you ever hear him use language of that
tendency? — ^No, never.
Did you ever bear him make use of tho ex-
■preiBslon, thieves and robbers, to any descrip-
tion of men at all I — ^I believe he did whea
speaking of patronage, of those who did not
come in at the door ; he said thaft those wbo
do not coaM in at iIm door, oeme m seas*
other way.
And he appUed thisN-Not to the mnisleis
of state, but to the ministsss o£ the gDspe)»
Did )W€vesbear hii»taHc^ol. tlss>9«^ in
«6Sl
Vnioaitaliit Frk^ier^for Sedition.
A. IX 1817.
[ieoo^
wUch ibe Ittw is ftdimistiwcd in tbit eomilry <?
— Ye8, I hftT« hewd him pftjr the gvMtMt en-
eoniimM to the adminif trmtieo ef tiM law. He
said he was proud to be a native of a eeuirtry
in which the laws were so well administered.
You never heard him speak of them as ad-
ministered unjustly I — No, never..
Did you ever hear that he had a son tried
let fraud or something? — ^Yes.
• Did you ever bear him speak of his son's
trial 7 — After he came baek mm fidtuburgh.
What did he say } — ^That he had never before
had the honour of seeing a jury impanelled,
and he had a secret pride in being a native of
a country where the laws were so impartially
administered.
This was after the conviction of his own
son ?7-Yefc-
About the 9th of last March, or on any
ether occasion, did you hear hiro say that he
thought the prince regent was fitter for a gibbet
than a throne f — Never in my hearing.
Nor any thing of that purport } — Never at
aU.
If he had said so, could it have escaped
yoa?*-I think not so remarkable an expression
as that.
Is there any thing particular about* Mr.
DoagWs utterance or mode o# speaking ? —
He speaks very rapidly sometimes.
What sort of a dialect Or aeeeot has he ?
As much Highland as any thing else ? — He has
rather a little of the Scottish accent.
Is he distinctly heard, or is an effort re-
quired to hear him ? — ^To me he is distinct*
Have you been long accustomed to hear
him ? — ^Thirteen months.
When vou heard him for the first time, did
you hear him distinctly ^•^Yes, it was so with
me. I always heard him distinctly.
Did you ever hear him mention the prince
legentywhep speaking of Nebachadneizar uk)
Belshazzar? — Yes.
What did you ever hear him say about the
prince f — ^Tbat he is a benevoletit prince.
Did you ever hear him say be was a poor
tnfotuated wretch ? — Neve^
A devotee of Bacchus ? — Never.
' A poor bewitched creature?— -No. He said
he was a humane and compasstdnate prince,
having pardoned more crimmals since he came
to his station than had ever been done within
eo short a space he believed.
WilUam NUhet sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Grtmi^
Yon are a weaver by trade I believe, and
lende at Glasgow I-— Yes.
Are yon acquainted with Mr. Donglas the
prisoner?— I know the .gentleman.
Yott have attended his chapel ^— For seven
^ycars and more.
00 yov temembet having been at bis chM)el
ome taday in the beginning obtest March f—
J am ahhost always thMein' tile evenings.
V. Do yen lemeMbes Sunday the 9tb of MaichT
I Wattheieaaytbiag that evening thai earned
yon to pay particular attention to what Mr*.
Dpuglas said ? — No, sir.
Do you know a person of the name ^ James
Pirie, town<^iBcer? — Yes.
Have yon seen him to-day? — ^Yes.
Was he at church that night? — He was.
Were any other strangess these ?-^Tbere was
another town-officer there. ^
And how did that other employ himself #1
What was he doing ? — ^He was sitting beside
Msccallom.
Was there another town-officer? — There wan
a third.
Where was be sitting ?-^Up towvds the
baick of she place of woi^p.
Did they seem to be paying great attention;
to |ir. Douglas ? — I did not see what the one
who was back did ; but the one in the for*
part sat and wrote ai times.
Do you tecoUect the subject of discoocse
that evening ? — A passage in the 5th of Daniel.
Was he lecturing upon it, or was it a dis-
course from one text ?-^Ue was lecturing upon
it.
Had he come to that chapter in the course
of lectures he was delivering, or had he fixedl
upon the subject of that night's discourse by
itself? — In the course he was delivering, be
took it in rotation.
How long had he been lecturing in this ro*
tation in the book of Daniel ?— For two years ;
at times leaving it and returning to it oeca^
sionally.
And when he had left it and returned to it,
did be return to the place at which he had
stopped ? — ^Yes.
la it the 5th chapter of Daniel which treats
of Nebnchadnezsar ?— -Yes.
Do you remember particularly what Mr.
Douglas said upon that occasion with regdrd
to Nebnohadnesiar ? Did he mention the'
i^iction with which he was visited ?^Yes.
- Did he draw avf patallel between our
sovereign and kino* Neouchadneisar on that
occasion? — i heard him draw one stnule or
parallel.
How did he exptess himself ?— That as Ne-
buchadnezzar was raised up from his affliction
to his throne and dignity, if it was the will of
God, he hoped that our sovereign might be
raised up to his throne and dignity, and be
enabled to adopt the song of the good old
Simeon, " Lord lettest now thy servant de-
part in peace, for mine eyes have seen thy
salvation.''
Are you positive about these expcessions ? —
Yes.
And can swear to their having been used b^
Mr. Douglas that night ?-rMany nights.
Upon that tiight? — I cannot say as to thai
particular night, but he always prayed fbr*
irently in these and similar words.
And that night, did he diaw any parSllel
between his majesty and NebuchadnesEar, cal^
enlated'Md inte«d«d to the bnr^, prejiidice|
anddishoaoitrolhisiM^e8tjFf-*^V«« '
«67J
57 GEORGE IlL
TruU ofNM DoMg^^
[&B»
Did b0 «ia« this exprasflkm, thai Us miietty
like Neboobadnezzur, driven from the
sooiety of meo for his infidelity mod cormp-
tioo i — No.
Did be use aay words of this import? — ^No.
Did you ever hear him use words of that
import f— No.
l>id you hear him make meBtion of the
prince regent upon that occasion 2 —He alwaya
mentioned the prince regent.
In what way f — ^In praying for him.
Pid he, upon that occasion, say .any thing
about anv body being an infatuated wretch,
a poor infatuated devotee of Bacchus ? — -No.
Did you ever hear him apply these or
similar eipressions to his roysil highness the
prince regent? — ^No.
Did you e?er hear him speak of the prince
regent in terms at all of that import ? — ^No.
Did you ever hear him say toat the prince
regent was fitter for a gibbet than a throne ? —
No, never.
Are you quite sure of tliis ?~Yes.
Gould he have made use of this expression
without your having observed it f — No.
Could he have used those other expiesaiens
without your observing it ? — ^No»
And you now swear, upon your solemn
oath, that you never heasd nim make use of
the expressions which I have mentioned?-^
No, I never did.
Were you there every Sunday evening in
February and March last ? — No, I canndt say
I was.
How many nights were you absent f — I can-
not recollect but of one.
You can speak to the night when you saw
Pine there !— Yes, I am very certain as to
that night, Mr. Douglas did not use such
expressions.
Did vou ever hear him mention the fiUe of
the fiabvlonian empire, in the course of his
lectures r^ Yes.
He did not then make use of anv of the ex*
pressions which I have mentioned) — No.
Did you hear him talk of the administration
of justice in this country ? — Yes.
In what terms ?— With great praise*
Did you ever hear that he had the misfor-
tune of having a son tried for any offence ? —
Yes.
Diid you hear him preach after his son's trial
liad taken place? — I did.
Did he make any allusion to the adminis-
tration of justice upon that occasion? — He
extolled the just laws of our country.
Did he make use of any particular expres*
dons or remarks? — He said it was a great
blessing to liVe in a nation in which such
laws were observed, that no man. could be
harmed without proof being regularly led of
his guilt.
Did you eyer hear him talk of the members
of the House of Commons as thieves and
robbers ?-T No.
Did you ever, bear him apply these ^pithet^
to any description of penons ? — ^Yes.
• To whom ?^To the miniates of the Gospels-
To what description of the ministers of- the
Gospel? — ^He was applying the words o^
Scriptave to them.
What are these words ?— -All those that do-
net enter by the door to the sheep-fold, but
climb op sooM other way,, are uiievoe andr
robbers*
Was Mr. Douglas in favour of patronage in
the Church, or against patronage f— The voice
of the people,, accoiding to the word of God^
as he held forth, was the door.
JbAn RaitoHl sworn. — Examined* by
Mr. Jeffrey,
You are a candle-maker P — ^Yes.
Do yon know Mr. Douglas ? — ^Yes. •
Do you attend his place of worship?— »
Yes*
Have you done so long?— A doeen of
years.
Have you attended peetty reguiariyi — ^Yes,.
I think I have.
I ask you, in particular; were you regular in.
attendance since the beginning of this year, in
February and March? — Yes, I have heta^
him three times every day when he wns<
preaching.
All the Sunday evenings ? — ^I am certain I
have.
Do yon remember that about Ih^it time he
was lecturing on the book of DanielP — ^I mind
that well.
Do you remember his coming tathe history
of Nebuchadnezsar and BeUhaasar ? — ^Yes, I
think I do.
Do you remember upon that occasion hi»
making any kind of parallel between Nebu*
chadnesxar and George the Third ? — ^No. ■ •
Qid he make any mention of the king upon
that occasion ? — NotUng farther than mention-
ing his name. I cannot exactly say what wem
tiie words that he used.
Did he make any observation as to the king
being afflicted .with a malady ?— Never in any
reproachful wav. I have heard him often
prayinff he might have a lucid interval before
nedied.
Do yon remember his making aUusion to '
Nebucfaadneznr's restoration to his throne? —
1 do not recollect
Do you recollect his ever saying that onr
king had been driyen from the societv of men,.
on account of conduct like Nebuc^adneuar's ?
—Never.
Did you attend to his discourse at that time?
—Yes. r .
Could he have used such an expression
without yott obeerving it ?-^I don't tnink he
could. I have. heasd him say that infidelity
prevailed from the palace down to Uie street
scavengers.
CooM • you swear he did not make use of
th^ expression to which I have already allnded ?
— ^It. was not done to my knowledge. ^f.
'You mentioned he was in & habit. ^
praying for the king?— Yes.
VniverHOht Preacher^Jhr SedUiotu^ A. D, 1I?I7. [670
* How dM yo6 yourself take faioi up at first ?
«rNot wbU at tot, bfit I nciw ibUow, him
. pretty well. , .
Are you acquainted with Mr. Douglas in
private life ? — A little.
You have attended his ministry for twelre
years, and know him a little in priYate ; what
sentiments has l^e been in the haoit of express-
ing as to his majesty and the constitution ?-— I
have always heard him speak favourably of
them.
Hare you ever heard him recommend the
use of violence or force in procuring a reform
in Parliament?—! never did.
Did you ever hear him say it would be a
good or a bad thing to use such means? —
About the time of drawing up petitions for
reform^ he exhorted the people to conduct
themsdves peaceably and to act constitu-
tionally, s . .
' . To avoid ail disorder ? — Yes.
David Y&mg swomw— Examioed by
Mr. Codtham.
Do you know Mr. Douglas who is sitting
between the soldiers there? — Ye^yl Juiow him.
, Do jou attend his chapel?^— I do. .
How lopg bad you attended^there before he
was apprehended ? — About six years.
Did you attend regularly in February and
March last?— I did. ,
How often ? — Generally three times a-dav.
Did you attend every evening during mat
time ? — Every evening except one, I oouUl not
get in, early in March.
Do you remember his being apprehended?
—Yes.
Did you hear him the Sunday evening be-
fore he was apprehended ? — ^Yes.
Had you heard that spies had been sent to
hear his discourses ? — ^Yes. . .
And you were there at that time? — Yes.
On what portion of Scripture did he dis-
course ? — On the fifth chapter of DanieL ■ '
About Nebuchadnexzar and Belshazzar? —
Yes.
Do vou remember his comparing our king to
Nebucmadnezzar ? — No.
Did he spieak of Nebuchadnexzar at all f —
Yes.
What did he say ? — ^In bis pmyer, he prayed
that our king, like Nebuchadnezzar, might be
restored to his throne, and that his last days
might be more glorious than the first.
JDid he say that Nebuchadnezzar was driven
from his throne on account of his sins ?-*-Yes.
that Nebuchadnezzar was.
That George the Third was ?— No.
Did he use disrespectful langpage towards
the king ? — The very reverse.
If not upon 'that night, did he upon any
occasion use disrespectful laognage to^ardk
the kinff? — On the contrary, he soils etimes
prayed n>r him three times a -day, and r'eisom-
mend^ loyalty send obedience to the law. '
^ ^id he mention Belshazsftr upon this occa«
siOh'-^Hedid. '^
«69l
"••' T)fd be pray eam*tly'fbr himP^Eamestly,
wore SO tlwn any mniiier I ever, heard.
Did you ever hear him use ' disrespeetfiil
terms in speaking of the king ?---No, never.
How. did he speak of him ? — He always
spoke of him with respect.
Do you remember his saying any thing as
to the prince regentin going over this chapter?
— I really cannot remember. I cannot be
positive what he did say about him.- •
Did he call him a worshipper of Baochns P
— Never.
. Aa infatuated prince or poor wretch? —
Never.
If he had used these expressions you must
have heard him? — ^I think so; but I never
ilieard him, to my knowledge.
Have you heard him speok of the House of
•Commens ?-— Yes, I have heard him.- •
•«> Did you «ver hew him speak of the mem-
bers being corrupt or unjust f'-^I heard hkn
once mention, that if he could believe the
public prinu, a member of the House had
.ofimd to prove thatther^ had been seats
bod^tand sold. ■ ■ ,
• Did vou ever hear Mr. Donglas call mem-
bers* of the House of Commons » thieves or
clobbers? — No.' - ^ , *
Did you ever hear him apply these mthets
'40 airy other description of pessons P — I -have
lieasd him make some obeenvtions on the way
ministers were thrown by patronage into some
places of the country.
•. And he used these expressions in reference
to that circumstance ?— That was my opinion
of it. ' '
Did you ever hear him say any thing in his
dbcotirses about theodininistration of the law
in 4his country?— He. commended it fre-
^pently.
Often ^ — I could not sa^ how often. He
said be was happy to live ma country where
^the law was so justly administered.
Did you ever hear him make any ob-
servations of an opposite tendency? — I never
did.
Do yon happen* to know he had a son tried
for some ofence last summer ?-^Yes^
. Do you remember Mr. Douglas making any
remarks after his return from Edinburgh on
that occasion ? — ^I do not remember the exact
words he used, but he was thankful that justice
was administered so ^rly.
That was the substance of what he said ? —
That was the way I took it up;
; Do you knaw whether Mr. Douglas was a
reformer, whether be wished a reform of Mr-
liaroent'Or not?— I have heard him speak of
€ffeeti0g reform in a constitntional manner.
Do you remembef his saying anything as to
the -manner in which it should berpursued ? — ^I
cannot say enctfy*
Was there any tiling ' particular in Mr.
Douglas's manoer -of "delivery /in the ^Ipit?
Did he ^speak. fiEBt or islow ?— I< don't think a,
strangei" could. make much of him the first
tine ofheartng* him.*
671) 57 GEORGE III.
' Did yoa hear Ihid eomptre ^y body to hlin f
•^Ho. I did Bdt hetr hioil compare any body
te him.
Did he compare the prince regent to him?
•—No.
Did he call any body a poor infiatuated
wretch?— No.
Or devotee of BacchttS ? — ^No.
Then he did not call the prince inch?— No.
If snch an expression had been used, must
you have heard it P— Yes.
You know his mode of speaking f — ^Yes.
Were you quite within nearing of him ? —
Yes.
IMd he say any thing that night, or upon
any ooeanon you ever heard, against the mode
in which the law is administered ?— The very
reterae. The first time he preached after his
son's trial, he spent a whole discourse upon
the justice and equity of the law, and the im<*
partial administration of it in the kingdom,
and more eepeeiaUy in this hi^ CowL
Did you ever hear him use language incon«
littent with that which you have mentioned ?
—1 never did.
Did yon hear bim upon the occasion when
the spies were there, say any thing of the
House of Commons f — ^I do not remember tiiat
I did.
You did not hear him call any of the mem-
bers of the House of Commons thieves and
robbers P— *No.
Did you ever hear him use that expres-
sion f — As to dergymen who come in by
patronage.
Did you 9rei hear him sav that seats in the
House of Commons were soli like bullocks iii
«'m«riretf— Ko.
Do you know Mr. Douglas in private life ?
-^I have had a good deal of private conveha-
tion with him.
H he peaceably disposed ? — ^He is peaceably
dlniosen.
Is he a friend to refbrm f — Yes.
How did he wish to get it? — By petition-
ing.
Did be fecommend violence ?— "Dke veiy
veverse.
Did you ever hear him discourage it? —
Often. In his sermons he discharged his peo-
ple fn>m having any thing to do with either
riots or private meetings.
Cowrt, — By private you meaa secret .meel-
wg»r — ^Yes*
John Chdmen sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Jeffrey,
Do yo» kpow Mr. Douglas ?— Yes, I do.
Have you been in the habit of attending his
«httndi ?— Yes. I have heard him often 4ese
u nootbe peat«
Werayoutheve the Sunday evenings in' Fe-
.bciMiy end March lest ? — Some of them*
W«¥« yon there when he was lecturing u|>Qn
Jh* fifth chapter of Dawel ?-*! heard sooie of
his lectures upon it.
Trial of Nml Doiti^
im%
His lectures about Nebuchadiienar end Bel-
shassar?*— Yes, I hevd some of hts diaeottsiei
upon thai subject.
Did you hear him make any oomparison b^^
tween the case of our king and Nebuchadnes-^
zar 7 — I do not remember of «ny comparison
between the two. I heard him pray fervently
that the king might be restored to his reason
aJbd his government.
Upon what oeoaaioo ?— Upon the oecasioB
above alluded to. And he prayed fervently
that the affliction might be sanctified fer Uie
anStfuctioa of the natioa and his own son, and
that we mi^ht all learn to fear God uni levt*
Tence the k^ng.
Did he say the malady was the ooMsquenee
of infidelity and wickedness ^-^-I never heasfi
him «se s«eh an expraseioo.
Did he pray for the king? — Ferveotly, for
his temporal and spiritual welfeie ; and he ve-
oomaaended to his hearers lo do ao likewise.
Did you ever hear hun use terms of disre-
epect or reproach towards the king? — ^Nevtr
towards his OMf eS^, his person or government.
Towards the prince regent?— -I do not ve-
member of any <expfessioiis of disrespect to*
ward* hsm. He prayed fervently for him, thit
he might reign for the glory of God, aad the
good of hts people ever whotti he presided.
Did you ever oeathim call him an infirtnatod
wretdi? — I never heard him use any words
likethaL
Did you ever hear him say any tinng abont
the House of Commons ?-*I remember some-
thing about that. He said there were aome
things about the House of Commons that he
thought it would bo of benefit to have Kformed.
He professed himself a well-wisher to the
minority in the House. He mentioned it was
stated in the newspapers that seats were sold
ii in a asarfcet; and he said diis certainly was
odious.
Did he point out in what way a refofi^
should be set about ? — I do not recoUeet what
he said as to tiiat. He exhorted the people lo
petition in a legal and constitutional form.
Did he evtt faint tbut good was to be done
by violence or ibrco?*— The reverse. He al-
ways recommended loyal and peaceable mea-
sures.
Did yon ever hear him say any thing about
the administration of the laws ?— I do not re-
collect of him speaking of that particular point.
Is there any thing particular in his manner
of delivery ? — I was several days hearing hlln
before I could understand his mode of delivery.
It was difficult for me also to follow bin, his
views being diiferent from those to which I
had been aoeustoraed. I heard' him several
tioMS before I was able to nndeistand him.
Does he speak fast?— The pecnliari^ of hb
delivery arises rather from his age and frailty.
Hie is nemmsi and his voice is extended too
hxA and then fells aw^. On account of the
inlmiity of l:is-vDioe» he^ndeavonst to raise it.
Mr. Jeffrty.'^Tt^re ^xt otiber s>rtdessss in
am
VnioemdUt Prtttektr,Jbr StiMim.
A. a i8ir.
t6U
aitvndtnoe; Vat H appears touanimtoessary
to take up the tiiDe of the Court by caUiag in
Lord JuOkt CZer^.— You judge rightly; to
call any more witn^es to the same point must
he quite unnecessary.
' Mr. SoUdior Geiwrvi/. — From the coorM
which, in the present circttmstaiicet, I deem it
proper to pursue, the duty now to be performed
oy you will not be attended with that pain or
responsibility, from which, at the commence-
ment of the trial, I considered it to be insepa^
nble.
The charge against die panel at the bar is
that of sedition — a charge of which the rele-
vancy has been established by a judgment of
fhe Court, and cannot admit of dispute. The
sedition charged consists— ^in- having uttered a
aeditiotts libel against his sacred majesty the
' king, and against his royal highness the prince
regent — in having uttered a seditious libel
against the House of Commons — and in having
vttered a seditions libel against the administra-»
tion of the laws of this kingdom. And, un-
doubtedly, if it had been proved, that the panel
had endeavoured thus to alienate the affections
of the people from any or all of these objects of
their allowance, he would have been guilty of
• very heinous offence. If such attempts had
been attended with either partial or total suc#
eeas — ^if the fidelity, reverence, and attach-
ment of the people to any or to all of these
objects had been shaken — ^theie would, in the
mie view, have been very little left, and in
another view much of those principles would
be dertroyed, to which the allegiance of the
•ubject must be attached, or by which good
mdix throughout the kingdom can alone be
maintained.
The peculiar circumstance with which this
sedition is attended, is, that it has been com-
mitted bj a clergyman — ^by a person exercis-
ing duties of a very important description,
wUch are far removed from any connection
^th political discussions. And if, in ordinary
aitnations, and b^ persons in the ordinanr avo-
cations of dvil life, the uttering of a seditious
libel be criminal, beyond all doubt it must be
iidUiiiriy more criminal in the case of a person
vhose province it is to impart useful^ moral,
and religioas instruction. A person who has
wmik duties to perform is, in his unjustifiable
m»i vricked abeirattoos from his du^^ guilty
«f a great and dangerous offence, llie fitnc-
tioiis of a clergyman are among the most im-
p^fftini in crnl society, whether the nature
Mid^- purpose of his duties, or the dangerous
JKJitties and great trust with which he is ne-
oesaarily invested, are considered. His duties
8ie^ to communicate moral and religious in-
struction ; and in proportion to the vital im-
portance of these duties and objects wheu well
performed, is the criminalitv of his conduct
when, under the mask and disguise of his
Iboction, he disseminates the poison of dis-
content and sedition, He is latnilted with
V0L.7LXXnL
Ae wteklv power and opportunifjr ^ a^sem^^
bUng ana addressing crowded congfkegationi
for one lawful purpqpe only ; and the danger
of permitting such opportunities to be turned
to any other purpose but that of enforcing the
duties of religion, peace, virtue, and charity^
need not be enlaiiped upon here.
The first part of the seditious libel uttered
by the panel against his sacred majesty and
against me prince regent, consists in a scrips
fursl allusion ;— in the perversion and misap-
plication of a portion of Scripture, of which, I
nelieve, there are few, either in die ordinary or
more intelligent ranks of society, who are ig-
norant; and it is jost as possible, in this indi-'
rtct manner, and by preference to particular
portions of Scripture history, to utter libellous
or seditious matter, as by the most direct word»
which language affords. There h no blas-
phemy or sedition, how abominable and atro^
cious soever, that may not in this form be
spread about. The name, character, and con-
duct of his majesty, whether public or private,
I have been habituated to consider as sacred
Sttlyects, not to be pro&ned by investigatioir
and discussion j either in parliament, in courts
of law, or in churches. This is the true prin-
cinle of the constitution ; and the whole tenor
or the evidence of this day's trial shows, that
it is a principle from which it would be unwise
to depart.
If the case bad stood upon the evidence
brouffht in behalf of the Crown, I should have
called upon you, without hesitation, fbr a ver-
dict of guilty upon two of the diaxges stated
in the libel ; Jint, the charge of uttering 9
seditious libel against his samd majesty and!
the prince re^nt; aind, ieeondy the charge of
uttenog a seditious libel against the House of
Commons. With regard to the third and rei*
maining ground of charge against the panel,
in the minor proposition of this indictment^
there has been no evidence brought before you*
At the same time, I must observe, that the
evidence on the part of the Crown &Us fu
short of what I expected to have laid before
yo». Hie inquiries or precognition taken in
the ordinary course of the duties of local poHce^
when the nets were fresh in Ihe recollection of
the witnesses,' and when they had recentlv
heard the seditious preachings of the panels
exhibited to me a case on whidi I entertained
not a donbt of the measures to be taken, and
on which I am confident vou would not have
entertained a doubt as to what yourduty would
have required of ^ou. From the interval of
time, however, which necessarily has elapsed^
the recollectioQs of the witnesses have become
more imperfect and upcertain. In these ob»
servations, I am far from saying, or meaning
to insinuate, that you ought to believe, or be
at all influenced by any. thing which has not
been laid regularly in evidence before you. f
merely sttfte these things in explanation of the
course of conduct which I am in this case t»
adopt.
On the supposition that fbU credil is^diie Wk
2 A
§J^^ 57CyBO»G»HI.
the tritMsaea on botili side9» Uiere «m aont
chflurget inad^ oul agaiast Um pandl^ which
render his oooduct highly cnminal— which
•aUhlish against him a very great malveraatioa
of duty, and .which briog^ home to him a chini-
aatity not to be diatidgtushe^^ from aeditioo.
It is proved by aU the witnesses lor the
prowo^-^t is proved by thoae witnesses for
the panel to whom any credit is due — it i|
gro?ed by lus own declarations, which cannol
e beard without pity for his foUy, and indigv
nation for his impiety, that he is a political
preacher. To all who hare paid attention to
uie prozreas of the trial, it must be clear that
he has oeen in the habit of arraigningi in his
discourses, the measures of government, and
of infusing among his hearers political diasar
tisfaction. I say, that this general conduct is
most dangerous, criminal, and seditious, whe-
ther occurring in a sectarian like the panel, or
in a minister of the establishment. In a sectap
lian like the panel, it is more dangerous, be-
cause he is liable to no ecclesiastical supenn-
tendance and jurisdiction. Such conduct, in*
deed, might lead to doubts as to the eaq;>edienoe
of that unlimited toleration which Uie benignity
of our constitution confers. In the one caae or
the other, I repeat it, it is a prostitution and
malversation of one of the mosC important
duties of civil society.
That the panel and all Christian pastoca
ought 10 pray lor the prosperity of the uind in
which he lives-^hat he should pray for tran*
S^uillity and good orders— that he should pn^
or all sorts and conditions of men — that he
should pray for his majes^, as the first and
highest personage in the land — that, above all,
he should earnestly pray, that this venerated
person, who is followed into his retirement by
the reverential sympathy and tenderness of afi
his subjects, should be relieved from the cala-
mity with which he is afflicted, are essential
parts of his duty. But, beyond this, all is for-
bidden ; imd the anraignment of present public
measures, and the discussion of daily politics^
is equally a criminal departure from bis duty
m a Christian pastor, and from his duty jm a
Bntiah subject.
That a general eriminaUty ehaneterises his
eonduet in these respects, no ipan can doubt.
But, besides all this, the evidence of particular
Offsnoe is not slight. That he did presume to
draw a parallel between Nebuchaduezzar and
our sacred soivereign, admits not of a doubt
Such a parallel was most criminally imprudent
^nd indiflcreet. Of this fact there can be no
dispute; but then does exist ^ome oh8<;urity
•s to the extent to which that pamllel was
drawn. Ti^ witnesses for the. Crown prove
that it was drawn to. the utmost lingth of the
^riptuK history. The witnesses for the panel
saw chat it was not drawn to any improper
eroct — some of them say that it was drawn
partially — some of them aay that.it was onlv
drawn as to the duration of the infonity with
which the Babylonish king was by the special
visitation of Heaven alBicM. But I do affirm,
TfM^fMtDimglM,
fey*
i
thai k was impossible to draw my parallel—-
it was impossible to allege asiag^ point of re-
semblance, between his most sacred mt^estf
and the personage mentioned in Scripture,,
without seditious criminality. Whether the
cause, nature, or duration of that awful inftrmi^
be referred to, it was impossible, without cn-
miaality, even ia the ovist remote degree, to
insiauayte the resemblance or paralleL If the
resemblance waa pUcod on the duration of tha
infirmitv, what was Itl It was till his heart
returned to his God-^t was till ^ he knew
that the mq^t high God ruled in the kingdom
of men." Who is there with the heart of a
Christial), or with the loyalty of a British sub-
ject, that can dare to impute the resemblaQoe ?
With regard to the lioel against the House
of Commons, there is some contraidiction ia
the evidence. The witnesses for the Crown
do certainly say that the panel did uae, to-
wards that branch of the constitution, the ex*
preasions charged in the indictment, or eome*
thing of similar meaning. It is proved by his
own declaration that he discussed the merits
of that Uouae in a way not la^o\uabla to its
dkaraoter; and the witnesses whom he h<»
adduced in defence do not give such an at*
planation as to exculpate him. They jujf that
he mentioned the expressions narraiad in the
indictment as having been uttered in that
House by some of its members, in stating the
manner in wjiich seats in it were acqmred*
There are many things, however, repgrted to
be decljdmed within. the walls of parliasaaai*
which would be sedition if uttered 9ay when
else; and the most wicked and seditious hhala
might in this manner be diasemiuaied with
impuni^, if such a justification wera aufficient.
It is impossible, therefore, io hold the paael
as guiltless. Even if he had been a la^raiaB^
he would have been criminal, and much «v>re
ia he culpable as a clergyman, emoyiog the
free exerciae of teaching religion to his feUow-
pubjects, and professing to toach a feligiion of
whKsh the characteristic is charity.
Notwithstanding these cireumstaoces, hoi^
over, I am satisfied that the proof has faltaa
short of what J expected at the institution oT
this trial. In some part of the charge tha
evidence is not sufficiently certain and esqAicaut:
in some part of the charge there is room to
doubt if ikerobe not some misuadentandiair
in the witnesses for the Crown; and in ana
fart of the charge there is no evidenca at ^1*
n one particular, perhaps, the evidence for
the panel has affbraed something like an ex*
planation. of a suspicious circumstance, alp-
though the greater part of the evidence )ed am
his behalf exhibits a degree of tutoring and
preparation not in lavour of its orodihililjr*
But, on the whole, I am dear that the evidenoa
is not such as to be pressed on a jury, and ssa
this opinion mv inclination and oifikaal duty
coincide. I submit to you, that while a Tordiei
of Noi GuiUjf cannot be reconciled with tlia
evidence, the proper return fo« yaa to giva ia
th^t of Noi JPrvtMn.
Vunermlut FrtaAeftfir Sedition.
htard, I Ao«ld tUnk ayself grettly to Wwnt
if I were to detain jrou with lomy words.
K^w tlMt the prisoner at the ber is safe, wi-
c|tiestioiiably toy great anzietjr is reaoved.
At the sane -timey I canoot help regrettiBg',
thai my learned and faonoarabie friCTd^ who
htts made^ on the whole, each an use of the
•vidence as is to the credit of his sagacity awl
candour, did not carry fab liberality a little
fiirther; for had he only said, as I think he
nost have felt, that you should ftnd a verdict
ef Nat Chaity, instead of a Tordict of Nti
Fnvtny I should not have been called on to
address you at all. But, fe^ng that the pri-
soner is entitled to be freed altogether from
the grievous charges in the indictment, I must
trouble you with a very lisw repiarks.
No doubt there is some contrariety on the
fece of the evidence. The witnesses lor the
Crown, youvriU recollect, said, but with the
utmost hesitation, that their impression was,
tfiat certain wbrdi vrere used, which, if you
could folly believe to have been used, would
vidoubtedly have attached blamo— and blame
of considerable magnitude — to the prieoner.
But even if that endenee had steod uncontrat
dieted, the singular hesitation and uncertainty
of their statements, and the manifest bias
which some of them had obviously received
tkoat the character of their employment, do eo
aieet their testimoay, that you could never,
upon the strength of it, think for a moment of
touching the liberty of a fellow subject.
But, when you take into consideration the
fects disclosed in the evidence for the prisoner^
H appears to me that you can have no hesitsl«
tioo in finding him not guilty of the charges
Mefcned against him. hi saying thi% I am
ine I9 state, that I have no inclination, and i
feel great satisfaction that I am not obliged,
toinspeachthe veradtvof any of the witnesses
yoa have heard this day. But the witnesses
te the Crown were one and all substantially
stnngen to the preacher, and altogether no-
■eenslomed to his manner, which, as you have
haasd, is so rapid and peculiar, aa to render
hnm nearly umntdligible to those to whom it
is not femiliar* Omr witnesses, on the other
hand, were aU persons who were in the habit
of attending his ministry. Some of them had
heafi many months his hearers, and were quite
feniliar with the general strain of his remarks ^
mod passages difficult to be followed by others,
on aeeount of the preacher^s pecuharity of
style, or infirmity 01 organs, were to tkem
perfectly plain and intelligible* If, then,
thore had been any discrepancy in the evidence
oata vrtml he said on the oeoasioD in question^
Aoee who anderBtood the language he en»-
floyed were, beyond aH doubt, tha best judges
<tf what was meant by him when he may have
Won etacure and nninteUigilde to> 6r mis*
HBdetsiood by sttangets.
But indepeiidently of thai allogether, it is a
cireoBolanoe^ ja this easey quite overwhelming
and decisive, that the peaona whom we ad^*
A. D. 1617.
r«7t
1
dueed as witneises knew periRBCtly what waft
<he general strain und tone of this gentleman's
political observations. All of them were his
hearers the whole time libeled on, and for
many months before and afterwards, down to
the period when he was apprehended. They
wem all femiliar with the character of his
topics, and the tone, tonper, and import of his
elnervations. Can you, then, hesitate to believe
this set of witnesses in preference to the other?
Can you hesitate to believe those who heard
and understood all he said, and who swear
positively to the words he employed?^* and
that too when their statement is precisely co»-
formable to the strain that he had uniformly
maintained for months and for years before ?
To hesitate between these two classes of wit-
nesses would be to hesitate between the report
of persons who understood a language, and
perMws who had but a smattering of it ; or to
construe an ambiguous expresMon without any
reference to the general scope of the composi*
tion in vdiich it occurred.
Some of the witnesses for the Crown went
to Mr. Douglas's church in order to discoTcr
whether he uttered any thing improper or
seditious; and is it to be supposed that^
ikem he abondoiied his usual counef It is
proved that he had been accustomed to pray
m, and to speak in fevour of, the prince regent,
and the royal femily, for a long time before;
and the persons who were quite aware, by
furevious experience, of the nature of his sei^
timents, language, and deliveiy, all speak
positively as to what took place on that occa^
sion, and on all other occasions. Their evi^
dence, therefore, must completely annihilate
and swallow up the contrary evidence; and tlyit
without supposing any, malice or intentional
mis-statement on the part pf the witnesses for
the Crown, some of whom were perfect
strangers to Mr. Douglas, and others were
sent to hear him vrith their minds biassed by
the magbtratesb . I am- not saving that it was
improper to send them, but the errand upon
which they wove sent was aft unpleasant one,
and must naturally have Jbiassed their minds.
The snlneet at which Mr. Douglas had ar-
wved, in the course of his lectures, was the
menial derangement and subsequent restora-
tion of Nebuchadnezzar, and the incurable
profligacy of his successor. Could any thing
DO more natural than for my client, when talk-
ing of the unhappy malady of itoA ancient
sovereign,, to be struck with what had hap-
pened to our own sovereign, and at one and tne
seme time to dxaw a parallel between their
sttnaUons, and a contrast between their cha«
raaters— between the infidelity €4 Nebuchad*
nesBur aad the piety of our king 1 He thought
it feir and reasonable to point out what was
similar tn their situations and diiTenent in their
eharactsB.' Is it necessary to suppose that»
because he remarked a oonfornnly in one
point between Nebuchadneisar and ouf sovo*
ftign, he maintained that this conformity
existed as to nil pniaui Yom hnvn it prored.
«9D]
57 OBOROE UL
TVUqfikUDomg^
C6B0
<by abmidaiiM of tcftinoiqr that Mr« Dooglas
«nteflitDed the most loytl •entinents towaras
Ins soTereigii^ and that he ferreiitly ptayed for
liim three times a-day<— that he expraaed
loyal sentiinents in loyal language. It is
proved he expressed a wish that onr sovereign,
like Nebachadoenar, might be relieved from
l&ts suflertngSy and that the glories of his dosing
lifo might be greater than those of his early days.
Is it in anyrespect unosnal or improper^ that
11 minister of the gospel shoold make such an
improvement and application of these remaik-
«ble events f But, at the same time, is there
-any thing mote likely than that persons coming
^th a prepossession that they were to hear
eedition, and finding a parallel drawn between
•N^vchadneiKar and the sovereign of this
jcountry, should fall into the mistake of think*
ing, that the parallel extended to the whole
liistory, and that when the preadier repsesented
Nebuchadaenar as cast down from tne throne
«n acconnt of his infidelity and sins, he made
the same statement with regard to oar king ?
T%e witnesses do not even pretend to remem-
"ber the words which he usea ; and they plainly
liave no right to give their impressions instead
of his woras^ Ibey have an impression ; but
they did not remark, or do not recollect what
was said. It :s evident, therefore, that they
are not giving testimony aa to facts, but pro>
aoundng judgment upon facts which they do
not know. Thay are usurping your province,
without any evidence before them ; and even
if they were entitled to ffo upon vague impres-
•ions witliout any distinct recollection, they
ahould have been aware that it was impossible
' Slot to commit mistakes, prepossessed as thejr
4iere, and exposed to the incalcidable disad*
vantage of not hearing distinctly the words
arhioh were uttered.
The same observations aj^ly to all the other
fMurts of the case.
As to the House of Commons. — ^This gen-
tleman's sentiments are no doubt in favour of
reform in the Commons* House of Parliament.
But he thought this reform should be set about
only by constitutional means; wad he had fre-
quently taken occasion to exhort his hearers
to abstain from violence. He was a friend to
petitioning; but he stated that a prayer to
Ood would have more effect than a body of
armed men. I really cannot think that per-
sons who advocate the cause of reform by^such
instruments and such means, are very danger-
ous reform^ra — or very fit objects for pro-
eeeution.
^e vrhole strain of the evidence for the
Crown is of the same nature upon that part of
the indictment which relates to the adminis-
tration of the law. The witnesses may have
supposed he was talking of the administration
of the law of this count^, when he was speak*
ing of otlwr ,<countries where it is notorious
iJboA men have been treated with injustice, and
liave been iudidaHy murdered. One memo-
vahle proot of his sentiments in regard to the
#iiiBin»tratioil of ihe Javia this emutry was
dalaited to -yov in evidtMew Tkia tevuend
person was afflicted in his old age, by tbnmia*
CQudnct and public aiTaigninent of hie eon at
this bar. He went, for the first time in his
life, into a court of Justice, to support his
unhappy bov on that occasion ; and coming
home with laoerated feelings upon the event
of the trial, he showed the healing efieet of
religion and patriotism; and, bowing under
the dispensabon of God,' kissed the rod of
divine oiastisement, and next paid a tribute to
the justice of the country, by which the libeiw
ties and lives of his nugesty's subjects ar«
guarded, and by which no person can be con*
victed without convincin|p proof of his guilt.
In the course of that trial, being impressed
with the solemnity and cautiousness of tne pro*
ceedings, and with the impartiality and mer^
with which Uie criminal law is administered in
this tribunal, he took the earliest opportuni^
of delivering an encomium upon that law,
under which he was then sufierins in his feel-
ings as a parent, on account of we ignominy
and disgrace of his unhappy child.
In these drcumstances, I say, he is entitled
to a complete verdict of not guilty under this
indictment: and I am persuaded, and think
you must feel, that no issue can be attended
with such good effects, or can be so likely to
promote love of the oon8titutioa^--4ove of the
Iaw,-^and duty to the sovereign, as that wliiic^
shall send him home again to testify in favour
of that law under which hb son fell, and by
which he is saved. It will be your duty to
send him back with his character untainted,
and his voice uuiropaired, to praise more loudly
than ever the blessings of that constitution
under which he lives, and to inspire worthy
and ferourable sentiments on this subject into
his hearers, who are stated to form a pret^
numerous congregation.
And here I must take leave to intimate, my
dissent from what was said as to the duties of
the clergy of this country. It is their first and
appropriate office no doubt, to teach the doo-
trines of rdigion and morality ; but it is their
Srivilege and function also to allude to our
uties to government, as wdl ae to those we
owe our neighbours. In those cases espedally^
in which the hearers are indebted for all the
information they receive to thdr aftteodanon
in church, there would be something wantiM^
if, besides the exhortations and spiritual ad*
vice which are afforded, allusions were not
occasionally made to the public duties of the
peofde, as well as to their other moral and
xdigious obligations.
In the political sentiments of the defendant^
affection tor the coostitoftion has always been
tibe leading feature; and it is dear, from his
whole discourses mid character, that he wee
not given to disguise or ooneeafanent of any
kind. The whole of his diseouiaes have been
remarkable for thdr loyalty, and respeclfor
the constitutioii as by law eatablislied, and
were soc^ indeed es to be ie ^ points dMHio*
teristtc of a good dtisen^ .
VnhmmUt^PrmQkmJir 8$dUm.
«B11
I«OBon.v<8^ in* your rudidt} and yotf will not
do jwtioe, if joa do odt toad Mr. DoogUs
tent witib hiiivpiitatioB allogcdier tuittaiiMd :
yMA 70Q can do in 00 otlior way than hy a
Twiyol aoqmltinffhiinenluefyof tliachaifeay
and pioaoimcing mai not gnilty>
Lord Jugtice Clerk. — ^I am extremely happy,
that from the course this trial has taken, you
are relieved from all anxiety with regard to the
result. The Solicitor-general has. stated, that
he cannot ask you to find a verdict of guilty
against the panel as to any part of the charges
contained in the indictment The only ques-
tion for you to decide, on considering all that
has taken place, is, whether you are entitled
to express in thererdict your opinion that the
prisoner is not 'gidUy of the charges, hy which
you will free him from all hlame, or whether
you must limit yourselves to finding that the
charges are not proven. In such a case, I
flhoiud deviate from my duty, were I to say
more than that the if sue is in your hands, ana
that you will return that verdict which io your
consciences you think right.
The jttiy tetirad; a^, after n few minutes
cation, they retained an unanimous
of Not Ooaty,
JL D. 1«17.
fiM
Lord Justice Clerk, — Gentlemen, I am happy
to relieve you of any further attendance.
Neil Douglas, in consequence of the verdict
which a Jury of your country has returned,
pronoundiDg you not guilty of the crime of
sedition charged against you in this indictment,
it is now the duty of the C!ourt to assoilzie you
sm^lidteTj and to dismiss you from the har.
It mat dNngft ba a aatiafimiaalo the Cottft,
when the dicamatanoes of any case are auch
as to wanrant a vaidict of not guihy. I oon*
gcatalate yon upon that verdiet;:DQt, at the
same time, I feel it my duty to state to yon,
tha^ if you consider your interest in fiiture,
yon wiU, in the discharge of your sacred func-
tions, be careful in the selection of your topics.
Notwithstanding the verdict which has oeen
returned, I cannot at all commend ^e taste
which you have shewn in selecting the subjects
vpon which you have been accustomed to
dilate* I trust and hope, however, that you
will see the proprietor in future of selecting
onl^ those passages in Holy Writ, which,
while they eiud>le you to discharge yonr sacred
fanctois to your God, may not give rise to
oaBMnents susceptible of such a construction,
as to lead hearers, even by mistake, to suppose
that you utter or inculcate seditious sentiments.
Neil Douglas, attend to the interlocutor of
the Court upon the verdict now to be read.
^ The Jury, by the mouth of James Dondas
their chancellor, find the said Neil Douglas,
panel, Not Guilty.
<< The Lord Justice Clerit and Lords Conn
asssioners of Justiciary, in respect of the ver-
dict above recorded, assoiMe the panel mm§U
eHeTf and disaiM him from the bar.
« D. BOTLB, I. P. D."
Neil Boi^lat. — ^I cannot refrain from declar*
ing, before I leave this Court, that I lutve a
high regard for his majesty and for the royai
family, and I pray that every Bnton may have
the same. I return you and the whole Court
and Jury cordial thanks for this decision.
702. The whole Proceedings on the Trial of Arthur Thistle-
wood*, for High Treason, before the Court holden under a
Special ComoiissioD, for the Trial of certain Offences therein
mentioned, on the 17th, 18th, and 19th days of April:
1 Geo. IV. A. D. 1820,
•^
On Monday, the 27th of March the
Special Commission was opened at the
S^ons^Hoiise on Qerkenwell Green.,
• Ftesentf
The Eight Hon. Sir Charki Abbott,
lent Lord Chief Justice of his majesty's
€onrt of King's Bench.
The Rl. Hon. flr JRofierf JDallat, kut.
Lord Chief Justice of his majesty's Court
of Common Pleas; and' othara his ma-
^s JnstioeSy kc.
^ CoDcenung him see the case of James
VTatiOD the eldtt^^K Iht pnoadi&g Toluiiie of
After the Commission had heen read,
the Sheriff delivered in the pi^el of the
Grand Jury, when the following gentle-
men were sworn : —
The Grand Jmy.
Job Raikesy esq. Fore- J. H. Pakenham^ esq.
John Warren, gent.
fiuzn.
John Stocky esq.
Thomas IVlUroy, esq.
Robert Batson^ esq.
William Hills, gent
G. F. Yoongy ship-
builder.
R. Meaoock, gent
Richard Jennings, eiq«
H. Thommouy brewer. James Taylor, esq.
Richard Uibbi, esq. John Johnson, esq.
TlMiaas L«^^tte,«sq- Fiaoda Douce, esq.
tfM]
1 GECiKjQE IV.
TrM qf^rikat IStmikmod
[«M
Jftnei Gtfnton, es^. J. W.«ll<ffiky» «tq«
W. Andtfsesy e^i.. W. V«BmBf, gent.
WiUiam Fwry, est}. Stephen Xi jlor, esq.
Jobn Boothy esq.
C&AftdE.
Lord Chief Judke ilMD/t.«-Oettt}eiiMn
o£ the Grand Inquest ; we afe assembied
in this pUoe under ^e antliority of kis
majesty s special cenasissicfny issued fl>r
the purpose of inquiring into and bearing
and deteraDining certain ofiences therein
particularly menttoned t
These offences are.
First, all High Treasons^ eiueptMcb m
relate to the coin :
Secoudiy, MisprisioBS of Treasoa t
Thirdly, The murder of one Bichaid
Sim tbefSy deceased, and any other crime Off
offence touching thedeatk of that person :
Fcnrthly, All offences agunst tne per-
.aon of Ftrederick Fiti-aamiice, Wimam
Iieggy James EUis. Johu Surman, Willij^
Westcoatt, William Chaiies Brooks, John
' Muddock, and Benjamin Gill, or any of
them, contrary to the form of an Act passed-
in the 43rd year of the ^ign of his late
mijesty, for (amongst other things) the
fiuther preteotiott of malicioas whooting
and attevDiiiig to dischaige hiaded fiie^
atmi, .stabbing, cutting, and wounding.
It is my present duty to offer to your
consideration sqme remarks upon each of
' these subjects, for your assistance in the
exercise of the important functions that
will presently devolve upon you, when
bills of indictment shall be laid before you«
' The particular kinds of Treason, to
which it may be proper for me to call your
MteaiMHi, sure ui part vo ve mvbv mi cBe
ancient Statute of the 25th year of the
reign of Kiqg Edward the Tnurd» an4 in
part in a Statute, passed ror very wise
punKwes, ih the reim of his late majesti^.*
ay tne former ox these Statutes^ it is
dtdared to be Tieaaon, if a man do com-
, . pass or imagine the death of our lord the
King ; m if a man do levy war against our
lord the King in his realm. By the latter
Statute it is enacted, That if any person
shallj within the realm or without, com«
Sass. imaeine, invent, devise, or intend,
earn or aestruction, or any bodily harm
tending to death or destruction, maim or
wounding, imprisonment or restraint of
the person of our lord the Ring ; or to
deprive or depose him Irom the style,
honour, ,or kingly name of the imperial
crown of this realm, or of any other His
majesty's dominions or countries; or to
" ' levy war against his majesty witMn this
^alm, in order by force'or constraint to
compel him to change hie measures or
counsels ; or in order to put any force or
conttraint upon or overawe both Houses
^ Sttta6.0.drd,eifv
w litbwr liiiMd ef FaiiiMunt _ wr^nrser.
eon to offenduig shail oe dewsd and
adjudged to be a. Traitor.
You Witt have oheenrad thsttin ilie
aeveral desoriptiens of ofame which I
have enwDCMled (esoeDi the levying war
mentioned in the ancient Statnte) the
crime is made to consist in the compass-
ing, imagination, or intention (which are
all words of the same import) to perpetrate
the acts, and not in the actual perpetration
of them. But it is further required, by
the ancient Statute, that the party accused
of high li'reason shall be thereof proveably
attainted of open 4eed ; and by the modem
Statute, that the party shall express* utter,
or declare his intention, by publishing
some printing or writing, or by some
overt act or deed. The law has thus
wisely provided (because the public
safelj requires it), that in cases of this
kind, which maoifestly tend to the most
eztensiye public evil, the intentipn shall
Constitute the crime ; but the law has at
the same time with equal wisdom provided
(because the safety of individuals requires
it), that the intention shall be masiifosf ed
by some act tending towards the necon*
plishment of the criminal, olijeet.
Before the passing of the late Statute it
had been settled, by several cases actually
adjudged, and by the opinions of tiie text-
writers on this branch of ihe law, that
aU attempts to depose the Kin^ from his
royal state and title, to restrain ms person,
or to levy war against him, and all conspirai-
cies, consultations and agreements for the
accomplishment of these objects, were
overt acts of compassing and imagining
oretieBni Of tne mng. uy mn otatun^ ine
compassing or intending to commit these
acts--that is, to depose hismajestyj^ to
restrain his person, or to levy war agunst
hiffl for the purposes timt I ha^e mentioned
—is made a substantive treason; and
Ihenby the law is mderad more clear
and plain, both to those who are bound to
obey ir, and te those who are engaged
in jthe administration of St. It mav be
proper for me to add, that it has been
established, in the like manner, that the
pomp and circumstauces of militanr array,
such as tisually attend regular warfare, are
by no means necessary to constitute an
actual levying of war, within the trae
meaning of the mident Statute. Insor-
rections and risings for thn pittpooe of
eiieotin^ hjfowe Muln«mbe»— however
ill-arranged, piovided or ovganiied*-«-aiiy
innovilioii w a pnbUe natwe^^sr redress
of supposed pnuiegrinnAQsSy in which
the parties had no wgrneiaX or particular
interest or concem^ have been deemed
instances of tiie actual levying of war i
and, consequendy, to compass or imagine
snch an iBsarrectioD,'*in order, b^- force
and nukbers, to compel Me-mi^esty to
99&}
Jir l^i SV«MHi<
A- D. X9».
CfM
alter hi» inaimtt^ or ooumU, wtXi be to
cpmpass or imngiae tbe levying of war
againet hU latgestj for that pvrpeeef wi^-
in the just neaaiaf of the a(ie4er9 Sutate.
Bebellioii, at ks finliioninieiiceaient, ii
rar^y foepd in military discipline or array
althoegh a little eapee^e nay eooa enable
it tf9 aisavA tlieiii*
I have already ii|^ate4» UuiJt any act
manifesting tbe cnminel intention, and
tending towards the accomplishment of
tj^ cnmii)^ Q))ject is» in the language
of the laW) an ewrf «c(. It will be. obvious,
that overt i^cts may be almost infinitely
various ; biit ia ee^ee wbem the criminal
object h^ not been aoeompliBhedy the
overt acts have frequently consisted of
i^eeting^. coneultatioqsy and conlerences
about the object proposed, and the
means of its accomplishmeQt ; agreements
and promises of mutual support and as-
sistance ; incitemeait to othera lo become
parties to and engage in the scheme;
assent to pvopoeed measures; or the pre-
paration of weapons or other things deem-
ed necessary to their fulfilment* AU these,
and other matter* of the like nature, are
oompetent overt acta of the particular
kind of treason^of the particular com-
passing and imagination to which they
Em happen to a^y.
In Uif^ Treason the law acknowledges
no acoeMaries ; all who, ia «»y way* or at
any tioie> become partekecs in the |woject,
are oowdered as prinoipali* And in con-
epiraeies of a treasonable natiire^ a$ well
as in inibiior eonspiraciei» it will be found
almost universally to happen, ^at some
persons are pustive in forvarding one part
«f the. means of ezeeutiiig the design,
others another part ; some are imxe zeal-
cms mid ardenty others more eool and
resenrad; some engage theosselves in
an earliest others in a later, sUfe of
the cwfeddiracy ; but the act of each
iodividijial, in puraneiv^e and prosecu-
tion of Ae general design, is con-
sideied as the act of all who beoome pri^
^uid «Hisenting.to the design, although it
ney hf ve taken place out of their presence,
or evep before they had engaged in the
des^^ because, by their subsequent
engagement, they adopt ail that may
have been previously done toward the
psomotion of the general object, urhich
they ultimately engage to accomplish;
A I w^eBBt Ihat strictly and properly
relates to the fi>rwardi&g and ftdfilment
of that object.
Frem what has been said, it will appear
that the emr^ aet$ are mOst important
matters in a judicial investigation of any
alleged treason; and the law requires in
fi&vouf of the accused, that the overt acts,
t(y the proof f^Mweef ^ aecnsation is to
be fliftpported, eball be set forth on the
itidmtment, in order U^et he may bare
notice ef Uwn, aai' be prepared for his
delMMe. But it is not required that all
tbt artMaSf eitenmalanoety and nutters
|e tegisM in eetdfnm should be disclosed
by the ittdiotment ; *t is enough that the
aptt whether ef meeting, oonwiltation, iu-
eiteeiteat, oeosent^ preparatiaa^ or other
mafttei^ be ebarged with eonveniiBlit cer-
tain^Ty leaving the nroof of the aet to be
made eui by suitaUe teeiimeny in this,
as IA oUier ceees. It if farther required
by Statute, that there shall be two wit-
nesses to prave the evert acts ; not two
to one and the same overt act ; hnt either
two to one end the same evert act ; or
one to one evert ayst, and aaetber to
anedier overt act, of the aame species of
treason.
I should add that seese one overt act
must be proved to have takea place in
the eonni^ wherein the bill of inaictment
if preferred, which is, in the ^reoent in-
stance, the county of Middleaea. If this be
done, tiie proof of other orert acts in other
eowities is to be received ac cemprtent
to sustain the indiotm^st. And if several
overt acts be charged, satisfaetory proof
of any one in the proper county is suf-
ficient.
liamg made these general observa*
tions, it will be expect^, that I should
new adveit in some manner to the par-
tleolar case which is UkeLy to bocame the
eid)je(t of yoar inqniry. It is Act my pur*
poseyhowiever, to enter intoaaydelailor cir-
enamt^nces iip<m this subject to the eitent
even of the limited knowledge that I now
possess. Sueh detail is not necemaiy for
your goidaAce, and might by pomibility
operate injurioosly upon the persons ac-
cused. It is, howsTer, proper for me to
describe the subBtanoe and general out-
line of the n«ttcrs of faet that are likely
10 be laid before yon, ia order that my
pbeervations upon Ae law, as apptieable
to these or the like mattersi may be ren«
dered intelligible.
It has bein supped (and for the
present yon wSk oonsider what I am aibout
tO'Sayas anppooition 9tAy% that a con-
spiiaey was formed to. assassinate the
several persons chiefly intmstea by his
mijesty with the administmtion of the
affairs of his goterpment^ when they
should h» assembled at a dinner at
the house of one of them on the 23ni
of February last; and that other and
more extensive measures of treasonable
hostility against the existing government
and constitution of this country ^ere in-
tended by the conspirators, to accompany
and fottow this intended assassination.
|t has forther been supposed that, this
design having by some means been di»-
cov^ed, several .persons assembled for
its alnuet immediate perpetration, were
iMmd together, in m stabrn or loft in an
06fl
1 GE0R6E IV*
Trial ^Afikur TkitUmbood
cestf
obsenN sCMet, with mau and ^/(kumw
weuMM fuiublt to tlie iceomplishment
«€ ttt propoMd MMMUMtiiM^ and per^
liapf also 0f otW tndtONOt porpMM ;
tiiat theie pexsoBs lentted the peace offi-
cers by whom thej were fcNwdy and
the military who cane to the aid of the
officers ; that inthe course of theiscresist-
•nee and endeavours to escape (which as
to many of them were for tiiie time at
least successftil) Riduurd Svithersy one of
the iMrsons named in this commission^
lest his lifcy by the act of one of diose
whom it was intended to arrest; and that
pistols were discharged and weapons
pointed against some or aU of the other
persona therein also named. Of these
matters, or such as these» you have all,
irithoBt doubly pievioasly heard and read ;
and I therefore take the liberty most
earnestly to cautioir yon to confine your
attention, on the present occasion, to the
evidence that will be laid before you,
and to banish from your minds all such
information as you may have previously
received, either as to the nature or object
of the supposed conspiracy, or as to the
conduct or character of the paiticular
individuals supposed to have participated
in it, or to nave been actors in these
transactions.
Upon the law u applicable to diese
supposed matters of met, I shmdd tell
vou, that a conspiracy to murder a num-
oer of individums, whether in a private or
public station, hovrever high or miportant
the pubUe station may happen to be,
grounded only upon prioate maiioe bar-
Domed against them in the minds of the
conspirators, and for the mere gratification
of private revenge, and not meant to be
accompanied or followed by any other
act or matter, or to bring about any object
of a public nature, however odious and
criminal such a conspiracy may be, does
not in law constitute the offence of high
treason. But if the assassination be meant
as the signal for or commencement of a
tumultuous insurrection of larse num-
bers of persons expected to Join the
conspirators, and with a view by force
and numbers to take the government
of the country into the hands of the lead-
ersy or to compel the sovereign to adopt
s«di measures as they may Ubi'Sk fit to dic-
tate to him, then the conspiracy to assas-
siaate will assume a di£ferent character^
and become an overt act of those species
of treason, which consist in an intention
to depose Uie King, or to levy war against
him lor one of the purposes before men-
tioned, and may also be an overt act
of treason in compassing his death ; be-
cause we know from experience, that the
death of a sovereign has been the usual
consequence of his d^)osition; and every
penMi muf reasonably be presumed to
contemplate and intend the probable and
untmal consequences of his own act^
Utttd the contrary be deaify shown.
I^ therefete, a conspira^ to take away
the lives of his muesty's ministers, either
in the way that I have supposed, or in
any other manner, shall be proved before
you, you will naturally look out for some
evidence manifesting the object and pur-
pose to be attained ; and in weighing the
nature and efiect of such evidence, yon
vrill doubtless bear in mind the number,
rank and offices of the persons thus de»
voted to destruction. The difficulty of
supposing^ an intended assassination to be
grounded only upon private midice,* and
meant for the ^tification of private
revenge alone, without any further pur-
pose or object, increases not only widi
the number of the conspirators, but' also
with the number of the intended victims :
because, although history fomishes many
examples of deep and deadly private
mayce and revenge, borne by one person,
and adopted or aided by bis family, de-
pendants and friends, against another
pCTMU, his fomity or dan ; yet I believe
an instance vrill scarcely be found <^
malice of a private nature entertained by
any considerable number of persons not
connected vrith each other by blood or
other b<Hid of private union, against any
considerable number of other persons
alike unconnected by any private circum-
stances of association. It is still more
di€k»lt to conceive a case of merely
private revenge, limited and confined to
the intended assassination alone, where
the intended victims happen to be a
number of peisons conducting the ad-
ministration of government, aiwi not ap-
pearing to be known to the conspiiutors
otherwise than by their public charbcler
offices and conduct. - In such a case it is
natural to suppose that the object in View
must be of a more public and extensive
nature than the mere gratification of vin-
dictive feelinp|.
But the focibty of one supposition, and
the difficulty of the odier, must not sup-
ply the place of proof; they only conduce
to the reception of the proof that may be
offered, ana to the credibility of evidenoa
tending to the manifestation of ulterior
designs. Such ulterior designs, if 'Ihmf
shall appear to be of the nature to whi»
I have alluded, and to relate tc^ die
usurpation of the govemment of thia
nation, or of this metropolis alone, in
ODposition to the constituted authoritiea
or the realm, even for a season, will appear
to the calm eye of sober reason to be wild
and hopeless : But you, centlemeB, knovr
that rash and evil^ninded men, brooding
oter their own bad designs, gradualW lose
sight of the difficalties that attend tlie
accoBplishmeiit of thair schemes, and
6601
f» IBgk Trtaton.
BOMfpiify Ibo adTwntagwr to b« derived
fea tbtfoi. ' Aad as il is the natural
dttnctef of neieus mM to tJiiak- others
not less TioioiiS' tbas tbemseives^ those
who^ fbrm wicked pleAs of a public nature
easily believe that they shaU have name-
vans supporteit^ if they can manifest at
once tlieir designs and their power by
strikioig some one iaif>offtant. Mow. .This
belief lead% in- some instances^ to a rash
and hasty eommunicatioD of the vricked
pttSpose to others, who are thought likely
to adopt it and join in its execution, but
who in {ad are not prepared to do so,
and tiiereby oecasioBally fttniishes. evi-
deooe agtfinst tiM)se, by whom the pur-
peee has been engendered and oonmu-
nicated. Dark aad deep designs are
seUom fully developed, except to those
who consent to become participators in
them, and ean thevefoie be seldom ex-
posed and brought to light eiteept by the
teslimeBy of accomplices. Suoh testi-
mony is, as ^on well know, to be received
on all occasions with gieat caution ; it is
to be eareiuUy watched, deliberately
weighed, and amdously considered : it is
competent in law to be received on all
ooeeaions; its credibility on each par-
ticainr. occasion dopende on its own par-
tioulBff character, with reference to the
mailer to which it relates, and the con-
firmation it may receive from pore and
nnsuapecied quarteie, and on the proba^
bility of the tacts related, raither than on
tlie> personal credit of the relator. He,
who attlmowledges himself to have be-
come a party to a guilty purpose, does
by that very acknowledgment depreciate
his own personal character and credit.
1£f however^ it should ever be laid down
as a practical rale in the administration of
justice, that the testimony of accomplices
should be rejected as incredible, the most
misduevous consequences must necessa-
rily ensue ; because it must not only hap-
pen thai many heinous crimes and onences
will pass unpunished, but great encou-
ragemeni will bo given to bad men, by
withdrawing from their miiids the fear of
detection and punishment through the
instrumentality of their partners in guilt,
and thereby universal confidence will be
substiiuted for that distrust of each other,
whidi natumlly possesses men engaged
in vricked purposes, and which operates
as one of the most effectual restraints
i^;ainst. the commission of those crimes,
to which the concurrence of several per-
sons is required. No such rule is laid
down by the law of England or of an^
otfaea country. The credit of such testi-
mony is, by the law of this country sub-
mittnd, in .the fiorst instance, to those who,
liJbe: you» are called together to ^lercise
tbO( loaetiens of a grand jufy, and, if re-
ceived-in the first instance, is then sub-
VOL. XXXIII.
A. D. 1890. [fOO
jeeted to the fbrther and more perfect
scrutiny of that other jury, who are finally
to pronounce upon the guilt or innocence
of the atscused, after having heard both
him and his accusers.
The next subject of inquiry, mentioned
in this commission, is the offence deno-
minated Misprision of Treason, which by
the common law, is said to be, ^ when a
person knows of a treason, though no
party or consenter to it, yet conoNils it^
and doth not reveal it in . convenient
time."
In high treason, there are no accessa-
ries, as in cases of felony ; but all .who
in any way consent to become parties to
the crime, are considered as principalrtrai-
tors« High treason being an offence against
the general safeW of the state, it becomes
every good and raithful subject^ wbdmaj
happen4o have a knowledge of any trai-
torous design, to communicate such know-
ledge to some magistrate or other perK>n
in authority, in order that proper measures
may be taken to prevent the aooomplish-
ment of the design.
The law, therefore, considen the wilful
concealment of treason as an ofienee of
very great magnitude, and has annexed
to it very severe punishment; no less
than the forfeiture of the goods of the
criminal, the loss of the profits of his lands
during life, and imprisonment during
life.
But in a case to be followed by conse-
queOces so highly penal, there must, in
order to constitute ue crime, be a know-
ledge not only of the tieason, but also of
some at least of the traitors. He who has
barely been informed of an intended iui
surrection, without any knowledge of the
particular circumstances or persons, does
not become a criminal by forbearing to
communicate what he has so vaguely
heard. And for the protection of persons
accused of this crime, the statute requires
that the treason, supposed to be concealed,
shall be proved by two witnesses, both
of them to one overt act, or one of them
to one, and another of them to another
act of the same treason, as is required in
the case of those who ace charged with
the treason itself.
If any bill for this offence of misprision
shall be presented to you, it may be pre-
sumed that the treason charged vrili be
of the same kind, and arising out of the
same matters as that upon which I have
already addressed you.
You will understand, that it cannot be
necessary to inquire into the knowledge
or concealment, until you shall be first
satisfied of die treason ; and if you ^all
be satisfied of that, then I have no doubt
you will conduct the further inquiry with
all the care and caution that a matter so
highly peiMd requires at youx hands.
2 Y
691]
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of Arthur Tkisikwood
reea
Con^talment, as yon well know, is pro-
perly a negative fact; and therefore, if
the treason and the knowledge of it be
proved, and the knowledge shown to have
existed at such a time, and under -such
eireumstances, as afforded a reasonable
opportunity for discoveiy, the proof of a
discovery lies properly upon the party
eharged, thongn on the one hand, there
may possibly be circumstances from which
a discovery may be inferred, and on the
other hand, there may be circumstances
manifesting an intention to conceal, and
eonsequendy excluding any presumption
in your minds in favour of tne acctlsed,
though not excluding the proof of a disco-
▼eiy, before the juiy by whom (he party
may be tried, if he shall be able to offer
it, when he makes his defence against the
charge* «
The consideration of all such circum-
stances roav, I am persuaded, gentlemen,
be veiy safely entrusted to you, so ftir as
your duty extends, without further obser-
vation on my part.
The third subject of inquiry, is the
murder of Richard Smithers, or any other
erime or offence touching the death of that
person.
This is the person who is supposed to
have lost his life on the occasion of the
attempt made to arrest some of those who
are now in custody under a .charge of
high treason. It will therefore be mate-
rial for you to direct your attention to the
place, the time, and tl^e circumstances
under which that attempt to arrest was
made. ,
The caution required by the law of
England in the conduct of ofiBcers and
ministers of justice proceeding to arrest
for criminal matters persons who may
happen to be in a dhoelUng'^lunae^ whereof
the doors are closed^ is confined to a dweU-
kig'-funue alone. All other buildings, or
places of meeting, may lawfully be opened
and enteried for the purpose of arresting
criminals, without any notification of the
purpose previously made ; and the persons
who may be found within, deriving no
protection from the place where they are
found, are bound to yield themselves upon
the same demand or notification as if they
were' met with in the field or open street;
and this need only be in the first instance
a general notification of the character and
purpose of the officers, conveyed in any
words, or in any form or manner, that
may be intelligible, to those who hear or
iiee them. ' If the persons thus required
to submit desire further information as to
the authority to whidi they are called
np<m to yield, it behoves them to demand
ft ; for, if af^er such notification they resort
to instant resistance; and to the use of
deadly weapons, and happen to slay any
of those to whom they are required to
yield, they do so at their own peril; and
provided their arr^t would ' oe lawful,
then he by whom a death-wound may be
inflicted, and all who unite with him in
the resistance, become guilty of the crime
of murder.
An arrest, under the authority of the
warrant of a competent magistrate, for a
criminal matter specified in the vrarrant,
by any of the persons named therein, and
by any others whom they may take to
their aid, is a lawful arrest* So also is an
arrest by peace officers, without warranty
for fieleny, or other higher crime actually
committed or reasonably alleged to them
to have been committea by the persons
arrested. So likewise is an arrest b^ su^
officers of persons actually engaged m any
breach of the peace ; or of persons as-
sembled, and arming, and preparing them-
selves for the immediate perpetration of
murder,. or other felony; becntusesudk
assembling and preparation are in them-
selves criminal acts, and the arrest of the
persons assembled may, in many oases,
be absolutely necessary for the prevention
of the accomplishment of their still more
criminal purpose. «
I have mentioned these instances of
arrest and resistance, because I anpr^end
the cases likely to be submittea to yonr
consideration will fall within one or other
of them.
But, in order that no inference may be
dnwn from my silence on another topic,,
it seems proper to add, that it must by
no means be taken for granted, that per-
sons required to yield themselves to officers-
of the peace, even in case- the officers be
not duly authorized to arrest them, may
instantly and before any actual assault ok
their persons, and without warning to the
officers to withdraw or stand off, attadL
with deadly weapons and slay the officen,.
without subjecting themselves to the crime
of murder. A killing, uader sudi cir-
cumstances, would undonbtedly be man-»
slaughter at the least ; and as the ciicum- *
stances appeaf to denote a wicked hearty
a mind grievously depraved, and motives
highly criminal (which is the general notiotn
of malice in our law)^ such a case, if ever
it shall unfortunately happen, will require
grave and serious consideration*
In speaking of those who may beoome
guilty of murder, by the slayieg of «ii
officer under the circumstances that I have
mentioned, you will bear in mind .that I
used the expression, ^*all who unite ia
resistance with him who gave the death
blew." -, . .♦
I used these words, . becai^se wben
several persons are assembled for aay
purpose, be it lawful or unlawful, and
something wholly unexpected and Ibreiga.
to the general design nappens to ocoar
on the sudden, upon which one or mem
i603]
for High TreatOH,
A. D. 182a
\seiA
fly to aurmt, and ^eath ensvesy those who
take no part in such new and unexpected
occurrence are not to be inrohred in the
^ih of their companions, as they may be
in the case of an unlawful act committed
in furtherance and prosecution of their
general design «
If, therefore, an indictment against
aeveral persons for this alleged murder
shaU be submitted .to your consideration^
yon will attend to the conduct of the
di0erent individuals charged therewith
. throughout the whole course of the evi-
dence that may be laid before yon on such
indictment; to their conduct before tlie
meeting at that particular place ; to the
act and. manner of assembling in that
place, and to their behaviour there, as
well at the first appearance of the officers
as afterwards, until the fipal arrest or
escape of. those, who were originally as-
sembled; and you will judge from the
conduct of each how far, in your opinion,
he may have concurred in that resistance,
wherein the death of this person unfor-
tunately ensued.
Having said so ranch on the third sub-
ject of in<](hiry, very little remains to be
added on the fourth and last : which com-
prises all offences against tlie persons of
rrederick Fitz-Clarence, William Legg,
James Ellis, John Surman, William West-
coatt, William Charles Brooks, John
Muddock, and Benjamin Gill, contrary
to the form of an act passed in the 43rd
year of the reign of his late majesty, the
title whereof is set forth at length m the
commission. So that you will observe
that the jurisdiction given by this com-
tnission does not extend generally to all
offences against the persons of the indivi-
duals before-named, nor to all offences
against the form of the statute therein
mentioned, but is limited to such offences
against these persons as are contrary to
the form of that statute.* That statute is
one which has probably been brought
tinder the view ofmany, if not all of you,
on former occasions, so that I need trouble
yon the less upon it.
It is thereby enacted, that if any person
or persons shall wilfully, maliciously, and
unlawfully shoot at any of his majest/s
subjects, or shall wilfully, maliciously, and
unlawfVilly present, point or level any kind
of loaded fire arms against any of his ma-
jesty's subjects, and attempt by drawing
a trigger or in any other manner to dis-
charge the same at or against his or their
person or persons ; or shall wilfnlly, ma-
liciously, and unlawfully stab or cut any
of his majesty's subjects, vrith intent in so
doing, or by means thereof, to tnurder or
Tob, or to maim, disfigure or disable such
' * 48 Geo. lil. 0. 58, commonly called
Jjord WenborougVi Act,
subject or subjects, or with intent to resist
or. prevent the lawful apprehension and
detainer of the person or persons so stab-
bing or cutting, or the lawrul apprehension
and detainer of any of his, her, or their
accomplice or accomplices, for any offences
for which he, she, or they may respectively
be liable by law to be apprehended, im-
prisoned, or detained ; in every such case,
tlie person or persons so offending, their
counsellors, aiders and abettors, knowing
of, and privy to, such offence, shall be
declared to be felons without benefit of
clergy.
There is, however, an express proviso
or exception (which probably would have
been implied from the language of the
enacting part itself), that if the act be
committed under such circumstances as
that if death had ensued therefrom the
-same would not in law have amounted to
the crime of murder, the person indicted
shall be acquitted of the felony.
As the cases likely to be presented
to your consideration upon this statute
will have arisen out of the resistance
made to the peace officers, and to the
military or other persons who, sooner or
later came to their aid, to which I have
already referred, it vrill be obvious to you,
that the observations which I have already
offered upon the subject of arrest and re-
sistance, m relation to the death of Richard
Smithers, may in general be applied to
this part also of your inquiry, and it is
unnecessary for me to repeat them here.
If there should be an instance of any
of those malicious acts mentioned in the
statute committed, not in resistance of the
intended arrest, or in the endeavour to
escape, but wantonly and wilfully against^
the persons of any of the individuals
named in the commission, by any person
not intended to be arrested, or who had
so far effectually escaped as to be for the
time out of all danger of immediate arrest,
such act, if any such there be, can hardly
be attributed to any other motive than a
malicious design to murder, or do' some
grievous bodily harm to the person who
was the object of it, and therefore can
hardly fail to be a felonious act, within
the description of this statute ; except,
indeed, it shall appear to have been the
hasty result of a contest vrith unlawful
aggressors, vrfaerein the blood may have
been so far heated as to reduce the crime
to manslaughter, if death had ensued :
but as I do not apprehend that any case
of this nature is likely to come before you,
I forbear to trouble you with any remarks
upon it ; being well assured that in this
case, if it shall occur, as in all othei: parts
of the important duty for the discharge of
which you are assembled, the best security
for a due execution of the trust reposed
in you, is to be found in your own good
0|»f J 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial^jirHmr TkitOmood
tflee
sense, and in your own geoeod knowledge,
.lemper, and discretion.
It, however, any unexpected difficulty
shall arise in Uie progress of your inves-
tigations, the court will be at aU ^times
ready to assist you with such further ad-
vice as you may have occasion to require.
GeDtfemen, having detained you so
long, with such observations as I thought
necessary to offer to your consideration,
you will now withdraw to your chamber
to consider of such Bills as may be laid
before you.
Ihe Tower to Newgate, and Richwd Brad-
bumaJphn Shaw Strange, James Gilolinst,
and Charles Cooper were deliYered by the
governor of the House of Correction for
the county of Middlesex into the OMPtody
of the keeper of Newgate*
Od Tuesday, March the 28th, the grand
jury returned a true bill against Arthur
'Thistlewood, William Davidson, Barnes
Jngs, John Thomas Brunt, Richard Tidd,
James William Wilson, John Hax^ison,
Richard Bradbum, John Shaw Strange,
James Gilchrist, and Charles Cooper, for
High Treason.
The Court, on the motion of Mr. At-
torney General, ordered that the Sheriff
should deliver to the solicitor for the pro-
secution, a list of persons quali^d to
serve on Juries upon trials for High Trea-
son to be returned for the trial of the
defendants, and directed that notice should
be given to each of the prisoners, that an
indictment was found against him, and
that on application to any of the judges
named in the commission, counsel would
be assigned to him, and ap order made for
such counsel and his solicitor to have
access; which notice was given accord-
^ly-
On Wednesday, the 29th of March, the
grand jury returned a true bill against
Arthur Thistlewood, John Tliomas Brunt,
Richard Tidd, James William Wilson,
John Harrison, and John Shaw Strange,
for the murder of Richard Smithers.
A true bill against Arthur Thistlewood,
for maliciously shooting at William
Westcoatt.
A true bill against James Ings» for
roaliciouiily shooting at William Charles
Brooks.
A true bill against Richard Tidd, for
maliciously shooting at William Legg,
A true bill against James William Wil-
son for drawing the trigger of a loaded pis-
tol, with intent to shoot John Muddock.
On the 3rd of April, Mr. Maule, solici-
tor for the treasury, delivered to each of
the prisoners a copy of the caption, and
of the indictment for High Treason, a list
of the Jury for their trial, and a list of the
witnesses to be produced on their trial for
proving the said indictment.
On Friday, the 14th of April, Arthur
ThisUewood, William Davicfson, J[ames
Ings, John Thomas Brunt, Richard Tidd,
James William Wilson,and John Harpson,
wer^ removed by Habeas Corppra from
SESVSIONS HOUSJS, OLD BAILEY.
Satubdat, April 15th; 1820.
The Bifjt^Kim. Lord Chief JmtkeJbkati.
The Right Hon. L(fni Chief JtuCioe Dtdim.
The Right Hon. The Land Chirf Barm [Sir
R. Richards.1
The Hon. Mr. Juatice Bkkardmn.
The Comtnmi Sergeant.
And other His Majesty's Justices, Ice.
The several indictments found under
special Commission, were delivered into
court with the following Caption :
Caption, f Be it BEKEKBSfiEn TkMi at a
iliu/<^ejr> special session of Oyer and
towU. J Terminer of our sovereign
lord the king of and for the county of Mid-
dlesex holden at the Session House on
Clerkenwell Green in the said county on
Monday the twepty-seventhday of Mardi
in the nest year of the ^igQ of our so-
vereign lord Qeorge the murth by tiie
grace of God of the united kingdom of
Great Britain and Lreland King Pe/knder
of the Faith before the Right Honourable
Sir Charles Abbott Knight Chief Justice
of our said lord the King assigned to
hold pleas before the King hi^ejf &r
Robert Dallas Knight Chief Justice of onr
said lord the King of his court of pom-
mon Pleas and others their Fellows Jus-
tices and commissioners of our said lord
the Kine assignejd by letters patfint of our
said lora the Kins under his great seal of
the united kingdom of Great Britain
and Ireland made to them and otheup and
any two or more of them (of whom one
of them the aforesaid Sir Charles Ai>bott
and Sir Robert Dallas amongst others in
the said letters patent named our said
lord the King willed should be one) to
inquire by the oath of ffood and Ifiwfiil
men of the county of Middlesex pf all
high treasons and misprisions of high
treason (other than such as relate tp the
coin) and of the murder of one Richud
Smithers deceased and of any other crime
or offence touching the death of the' said
Richard Smithers and of any offiBo^ or
offences against touching or conceming
the persons of Frederick Fits-Charence
William^Legg James piis John S^ilnncui
William' Westcoatt William Caries
Brooks John Muddock aod Be^|amiu
Gill or any of them contrary to the Imna
pf an a^ mad« aad ftssAdiv tbe forty,
third year of ^ iei|tt0{ Jto Iftto n^esty
eerl
fir Higfi TreasoUi
EiMOem^fJu^ ibird iDtitnled ^Ab act
fi»r'^e^tolher pwientiftii of viaUcious
#liootii^ Mid attempting to dtaekarge
.londed Aro arms stebbiog cutting woand-
iog poisooiog ftud the maliooMi «W)g of
BMaiM to pnoeuie tbe nitcaivtage of wo-
men and aiflo the malicio«a tettiag fire
to buildiags aad also for repealing a cer-
Uin act made in England in the Iwenty-
firat year of the late King Jamee the
§ni intituled ** An act to prevent the des-
troying 4»d murtbering of bastard chil-
dren'' and atoo an act OMide in Ireland in
the sixth year of the reign of the late
Qaeen Anne, also intitalea ^ An act to
prevent the dettsoying and murtbering
of bastard childrany and for making
other provisioBe in lieu thereof ''
and also the aocessafies of them or
any of them within the eoonty afore-
eaid as well within Itbertiesy as with-
onty by whomsoerer and in what manner
eoever done committed or perpetrated
when how and after what manner
And of all other articles and cironmstan-
ces ooneeming the premiaes and every
or any of tbem in any manner wfaatsoeyer
and the said treasone and other the pre-
mises aoeofding to the laiws and onetoms
of England for this time to hear and de-
termine by the oath of Job Rdkes esquire
John fileck esqnim Thoasas liilny es-
qaire Robert Bataon esquire William
Hills gentleman Henry Thompson brew-
er Kii^ard Gibbe esquire Toomai Ler-
mette esqmre James Gordon esquire
William Anderson esquire William
Parry esqnire John Booth esquire John
Henry Pakeoham esquire John Warren
f^cntleman George Fr^leikk Yovng ship-
builder B<obeit Heacock gentleman Rich-
ard Jennings esquiie James Taylor esquire
John Johnson esquiie Francis Douce
esqnire John William Horsley esquire
William Venning gentleman and Stephen
Tayler esqnire g<K>d and lawfol men of
#he £awity aforesaid now here sworn and
charged to «nqnire for our said lord the
lUng for the body of the said county
tonchiag and oonoeming the premims in
the eaid letters patent mentioned It is
.pfeseatodin manner and form as foiloweth
<that ie to say)
Alirfrfrsor } The jnron for onr lord the
io wU, I King upon iheir oath present
tbat Arthur Thistlewood late of the parish
0i Saini Clanent Danes in the oouDty of
Middlesex gendeBmn William Dandson
Inle 4b4 the parish of Saint SCaiylebone in
tiw eoonty of Middleaaa labonnr James
lags late of London labonnr John Hiomas
Bnmt late of Ifce paiiBh of Saint Andrew
Holbom in the eonn^ of Middlesex
labeusee Bichard Tidd latetyf the parish
mi Saiat Andrew Holbom in the eoonty of
Middlesex labeunr James WiUiem Wilson
iMa of the panib of Saint Mwyiebone in
A. D. 18Sa [i
the cannly of Middlesex labourer John
Hanison late of the parish of Saint Mary-
lebone in the county m Middlesex labourer
Bichaid Bradbnm late of the parish of
Saint Giles-in«-the-fields in the eounty of
Middlesex labourer John Shaw Strange
late of London labourer James Gilchrist
late of London labourer and Charles
Cooper late of London labourer being
suliyects of our said lord the King not
having the fear of God in their hearts nor
weighiug the duty of their aUegianee but
being moved and seduced by ^ instiga*
tion of the devil as ialse traiton against
our said lord the King and wholly with-
drawing the love obedience fidelity and
aUegianee which every true aad foithfol
subject of oar smd lord the King should
and of right ongkt to bear towards our
said lord the King on tiie fifth day of
Febmary in the first year of the reign of
our said poesent sovereign lord George
the fourth by the grace of God of the
united kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land King Defender of the Faith and on
divers other days and times as well before
as after with force and arms at <he parish
of Saint Marylebone in the county of
Middlesex maliciousfy and traitorously
amongst theasselves and together with
divers other false traitors wnose mmes
are to the said jnrors unknown did com-
pass imagine invent devise and intend to
deprive and depose our said lord the King
of and from the stj^e honour and kingly
name of the imperial erown of this realm
And the said compassing imagination in-
vention device and intention did then and
there express utter and declare by divers
overt acts and deeds heveinafter mentioned
that is to say IN onnxa *ro fuvil perfect
and bring to eS^ct their most evil and
wicked treason and treasonable compass*
ing imagination invention device and in«
tention aforesaid they Uie said Arthur
Thistlewood WiUiakn Davidson James
Ings John Thomas Brunt Eiehard Tidd
James William Wilson John Harrison
Bichaid Bradbum John Shaw Strange
James Gilchrist and Charles Cooper as
such felse traiton as aforesaid on the said
fifth day of February in the first year of
the aeign aforesaid and on divers other
days and times as well before as after with
foroe and arms at die said parish of Saint
Marylebone in the said eoonty of Middle-
sex malieiously and traitorously did assem«
ble meet conspire aad consult amongst
themselves and together witii divers other
4ahe traiton whose names are to the said
juron unknown to devise arrange and ma-
tuTO ptans and means to subvert and
destroy the constitution and government
of this reslm^as'by law established Akd
rvsnxa to tvlhis perfect and bring to
efiect'tbeir most evil and wicked treason
fnd trsMonable compaisipg imagioiition
0991
1 GBORGE IV.
Trial ^Arthur HHtOraood
[700
inTentioa device and intention aforesaid
they the said Arthur Thistlewood William
Dandion James Ings John Thomas Brant
Richaid Tidd James William Wilson
John Harrison Richard Bradbitrn John
IShaw Strange James Gilchrist, and Charles
Cooper as such false traitors as aforesaid
on toe said fifth day of Febiuary in the
first year of the reign aforesaid and on
divers other days and times as well before
as after with force and arms at the said
palish of Saint Marylebone in the said
county of Middlesex maliciously and trai-
torously did assemble meet conspire con-
sult and agree amongst themselves and
together with divers other felse traitors
whose names are to the said jurors on-
known to stir up raise make and levy in-
•nrrection rebellion and war against our
«aid lord the King within this realm and
to subvert and destroy the constitution
and government of this realm as by law
established And further to vvlhl per-
lisct and bring to effect their most evil and
wicked treason and treasonable oompass-
ing imagination invention device and
intention aforesaid they the said Arthur
Thistlewood William Davidson James
Ings John Thomas Brunt Bichard Tidd
James William Wilson John Harrison
Bichard Bradbura John Shaw Strange
James Gilchrist and Charles Cooper as
such folse traitors as aforesaid on the said
AfUi day of February in the first year of
the reign aforesaid and on divers other
days and times as well before as after wiUi
force and arms at the said parish of Saint
Marylebone in the said county of Middle-
sex maliciously and traitorously did as-
•emble meet conspire consult and agree
amongst themselves and together with
di?ers other false traitors whose names
are to the said jurors unknown to assassin-
ate kill and murder divers of the privy
council of our said lord the King employed
by our said lord the King in the adminis-
tration of the. affairs and government of
this kingdom And further to fulfil
perfect and bring to effect their most evil
and wicked treason and treasonable com-
passipg imagination invention device and
intention aforesaid they the said Arthur
Thistlewood William Davidson James
Ings John Thomas Brunt Richard Tidd
James William Wilson John Harrison
Richard Bradbum John Shaw Strange
James Gilchrist and Charies Cooper as
such false traitors as aforesaid on the said
fifUi day of Febraary in the first year of
the reign aforesaid and on divers other
days and times as well before as after with
force and arms at the said parish of Saint
Marylebone in the said county of Middle-
sex maliciously and traitorously did pro-
cure provide and have divers large quan-
tities x>f arms to wit guns muskets blun-
derbusses pistob swords bayonets- pikes
pikehandles and ' pikeheads and divers
large quantities of ammunition to wit
gunpowder leaden bullets slugs and hand*
grenades with intent therewith to arm
themselves and other Mae traitors in
order to assassinate kill and murder divers
of the privy council of our said lord the
King employed b^ our said lord the
King in toe administration of the affairs
and government of this kingdom And
FURTHER TO FULFIL perfect and bring to
effect their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compassing imagination
invention device and intention aforesaid
they the said Arthur Thistlewood William
Davidson James Ings John Thomas Brunt
Richard Tidd James William Wilson
John Harrison Richard Bradbum John
Shaw Strange James Gilchrist and Charles
Cooper as such fabe traitors as aforesaid
on Uie said fifth day of February in tibe
first year of the reign aforesaid and on
divers other days and times as well be-
fore as after with force and arms at the
said parish of Saint Maiylebone in the
said county of Middlesex maliciously and
traitorously did procure provide' and
have divers large quantities of arms to
wit guns muskets blunderbusses pistols
swords bayonets pikes pikehandleS^ and
pikeheads and divers large quantities of
ammunition to wit gunpowder leaden
bullets slugs and hand-grenades with intent
therewith to arm themselves and other
false traitors in order to raise make and
levy insurrection rebellion and war against
our said lord the King within this realm
and to subvert and destroy the constitu*
tion and government of this realm as by
law established Akd'furtber to fu]>'
FiL perfect and bring to effect their most
evil and wicked treason and treasonable
compassing imagination invention device
and intention aforesaid they the " said
Arthur Thistlewood William Davidson
James Ings John Thomas Brunt 'Richard
Tidd James William Wilson John Harrison
Richaid Bradbum John Shaw Strang^
James Gilchrist and Charles Cooper as
such false traitors as aforesaid on the
said fifth day of February in the first year
of the reign aforesaid and on divers other
days and times as well before as after witfi
force and arms at the said parish of Saint
Marylebone in the said county of Middle-
sex maliciously and traitorously did aasem-
blemeet conspire consult and agreeamongmt
themselves and together with divers other
false traitors whose names are to the said
jurors unknown to seize and take poeses*
sion of divers cannon warlike weapons
arms and ammunition in divers pla«2es
deposited' and being with intent by and
with the said cannon warlike wei^pons
arms- and ammunition to arm themselves
and other fislse traitors and to raise levy
and make insurrection re^Dion aiid.^ar
701]
for High Trtaum,
A. D. 1820.
t70«
agHinst our laid lord the King within this
reBdm and to subvert and destroy the con-
stitution and government of this realm as
by law established And furtheb to
FULFIL perfect and bring to effect their
most evil and wicked treason and treason-
able compassing imagination invention
device and intention aforesaid they the said
Arthur Thistlewood William Davidson
James Ings John Thomas Brunt Richard
Tidd James William Wilson John Harrison
Richard Bradbum John Shaw Strange
James Gilchrist and Charles Cooper as
such false traitors as aforesaid on the said
fifth day of February in the first year of
the reign aforesaid and on divers other
days and times as well before as after
with force and arms at the said parish of
Saint Maiylebone in the said county of
Middlesex maliciously and traitorously
did assemble meet conspire consult and
agree amongst themselves and together
with divers other false traitors whose
names are to the said jurors unknown to
set fire to bum and destroy divers houses
and buildings in and in the neighbourhood
of London and divers barracks of our said
lord the King used for the reception and
residence of the soldiers troops and forces
of our said lord the King ana to provide
and prepare divers combustibles and ma-
lerials for the purpose of setting fire to
burning and destroying the said houses
buildings and barracks And further
TO FULFIL perfect and bring to effect
their most evil and wicked treason and
treasonable compassing imagination inven-
tion device and intention aforesaid they
the said Arthur Thistlewood William Da-
vidson James Inss John Thomas Brunt
Richard Tidd James William Wilson
John Harrison Richard Bradbum John
Shaw Strange James Gilchrist and Charles
Cooper as such false trailbrs as aforesaid
on the said fifth day of Febraaiy in the
first year of the reign aforesaid and on
divers other days and times as well before
as after with force and arms at the said
parish of Saint Marylebone in the said
county of Middlesex maliciously and
traitorously did compose and prepare and
cause and procure to be composed and
prepared with intent to publish the same
divers addresses proclamations declara-
tions and writings containing therein
solicitations and incitements to the liege
sulnects of our said lofd the King to aid
and assist in making and levying insur-
rection rebellion and war against our said
lord the Kins within this realm and in
sabverting and destroying the constitution
•nd government of this realm as by law
established Avd fubtbrr to fulfil
perfect and bring to effect their most
evil and wicked treason and treasonable
ccMipaasing imaj^ation invention device
and intentiihi aforesaid they the said
Arthur Thistlewood William Davidson
James Ings John Thomas Brant Richard
Tidd James William Wilson John Harrison
Richard Bradbum John Shaw Strange
James Gilchrist and Charies Cooper as
sudi false traitors as aforesaid on the said
fifth day of February in tlie first yeaur of
the reign aforesaid with foree and arms at
the said parish of Saint Marylebone in the
said county of Middlesex maliciously and
traitorously did compose and prepare and
cause and procure to be composed and
prepared a certain paper writing purport*
mg to be an address to the liege subjects
of oursaid lord the King containing therein
that their tyrants were d^tioyed and that
the friends of liberty were called upon to
come forward as the provisional govem-
ment was then sitting with intent to pub-
lish the same and thereby to solicit and
incite the liege subjects of our said lord the
King to aid and assist in making and levy-
ing insurrection rebellion and war against
oursaid lord the King within this realm and
in subverting and destroying the constitu-
tion and govemment of this realm as by
law established Akd fubtheb to fulfil
perfect and bring to efiect their most evil
and wicked treason and treasonable com-
passing imagination invention device and
intention aforesaid they the said Arthur
Thistlewood William Davidson James
Ings John Thomas Brant Richard Tidd
James William Wilson John Harrison
Richard Bradbum John Shaw Stitmg»
James Gilchrist and Charles Cooper as
suchj false traitors as aforesaid on tfa»
twenty-thiid day of Febraaiy in the first
year of the reign aforesaid with force and
arms at the said parish of Saint Marylebone
in the said county of Middlesex msdicioua-
ly and traitorously together vrith divers^
other false traitors whose names are to-
the said jurors unknown did assemble
themselves with arms that is to say with
funs muskets blunderbusses pistols swords
ayonets pikes and other weapons with
intent to assassinate kill and murder divers
of the privy council of our said lord the
King employed by our said lord the
King in tne administration of the affairs
and goverament of this kingdom and to
raise make and levy insurrection rebellion
and war against our said lord the Kinar
within this realm and to subvert and
destroy the constitution and goverament
of this realm as by law estabUshed Aan
further to fulfil perfect and btmg Xxy
effect their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compasnng imagination
inven&n device and intention aforesaid
they the said Arthur Thistlewood WU-
liam Davidson James Ings John Hiomas.
Brant Richard Tidd James William
Wilson John Harrison Richard Brad-
bum John Shaw Strange James Gilchrist
and Charles Cooper as such fidse traitors
TOdQ
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial qf Arthur TMstUfmod
[7M
a» aforesaid <m the said ttventy-third day
of February is the first year tit the reign
aforesaid aad onr diners other days and
tines SB well before as after with force and
arms at the said parish of Saint Marylebone
in the said county of Middlesex together
with divert other false traitors whose
names are to the said jurors unknown
armed and arrayed iis a warlike manner
that is to say with guns muskets blunder-
busses pistols swords bayonets pikes and
other weapons maltctously and traitorously
did ovdain prepare levy and make public
war against our said lord the King within
this' realm io contempt of our said lord
the King and his laws to the evil example
of all others contrary to the duly of the
allegiance of them the said Arthur Thistle-
wood WiUiim Davidson James Ings John
Thomas Brunt Richard Tidd James
William WUoon John HarrisoD Ridiard
Bradbum Joh« Shaw Strangle James Gil-
christ and Charles Cooper against the
form of the Statute in such case made
and ptovided and against the peace of
eur said lord the King his crown and
dignify.
Seeind Coi0ir.r— And die jurors afore-
said upoKlhear oath aforesaid do further
Bieseat that the said Arthur Thistlewood
WilKam Davidson James Ings John Tho-
mas Bnltit Richard Tidd Jaaes William
Wilson John Harrisoa Richard Bradbum
Joha Shaw Strangle Jamies Gilehrist and
Charles Cooper being subjects of our said
lood the King not having the fear of God
m their hearts nor weighing the duty of
their allegiance but being moved and
seduced by the instigation of the devil
aa Mat traitors agsainst our said lord the
King and wholly withdrawing liie love
cA>edUence- 6delity and allegiance which
every true and fiathful subject of our said
lord- the King should and of right ought
•to- beer towards our said lord the King
o» the fifth day of February in the first
year of the reign aforesaid and on divers
other dayd and timea a» wdi before as
aftcSr with force and arms at the said
parish of Saint Marylebone in the said
ceuafy of Middlesex maliciously and
ftraitors^ly amongst- themselves and to-
gether withdi^rS other false traitors whose
names aie to the said jurors unknown did
cempast imagine and intend to move and
excite insurrection rebellion and war
against our said lord the King within this
vMhtt and to subvert and alter the legis-
lature rula and government now duly and
happUy: established within tine realm, and
to bring and put our said lord the King to
death [The lUditstmanl! then states the
aanre eieteii orbrfractd duugiad in the first
Coant].
27Mrtf Ctt<ii4»*«AadDfhe jukon'itfdvesaid
upon their bath' afoeeMad de> tether ^re-
aent Hisit tfat aaid Acthur Xhiktevood
William Davidson James Ings J«lin Tho-
mas Brunt Richard Tidd James William
Wilson John Harrison Rickaid Bcadbum
John Shaw Strange James Gikhrial and
Charles Cooper being subjects of oub said
lord the King not having the foar of God
in their hearts nor wei^og the duty of
their allegiance but being iMved and se-
duced by the instigation of the deiil as
folse traitors against our said lord the
King and wholly withdrawing the love
obedience fidelity and allegiaaoe which
eveiy true and faithfui subject of our said
lord the King should and of right. ought
to bear towaids our said lord the King
on the said fifth da^ of February in the
first year of the reign aforesaid and on
divers other days and times as well before
as after with force and asms at the said
parish of Saint Maryld>one itt the. said
county of Middlesex midickuisfy » and
traitorously amongst themselves and to-
gether with divers other false traitors
whose aaaus are to the said jurois un-
known did compass imagioa invenlE de-
vise and intend to levy war- against our
said lord the King withm thia realm in
order by force and constraint to compel
him to change his measures and counsels
and the said last-mentioned compassing
imagination invention device and inten-
tion did then and there express utueii and
declare by divers overt acts and deeds
hereinafter mentioned (that is to say)
IN OR DEE TO FULFIL perfect aod bring
to effect their most evil and wicked trea-
son and treasonable compassing iooagina-
tion invention device and intention last
aforesaid they thesaid Arthur Thistlewood
William Davidson James lags John
Thomas Brant Richard Tidd James Wil-
liam Wilson John Harrison Richard Brad-
burn John Shaw Stmnge James Gilehrist
and Charles Cooper as such false traitors
as last aforesaid on the said fifth day of
February in the first yeas of the neiga
aforesaid and on divers oth9r dagpe and
times as well before as after with force
and arms at the said parish of Saint Mary-
lebone in the said county of Middlesex
maliciously and traitonmsljf did assemble
meet conspire and consult aaaongst thenw
selves and t(^ther vnth divers other false
traitors whose names are to the said jurors
unknown todevise arrangeandmatuie plans
and means by force aadconstraint to com-
pel ouE said lord the King to change his
measures and. counsels And puKTBaa to
FtTLFTL perfect and bring to effect their
nmst evil and wicked treason and treason-
able compassing imaginatioa inventioii
device ana intention last afionnaid thej
the said Arthur ThistlewioBod Williana
Davidson. James IngsJdhii ThousB Aunt
Riehaid Tidd Janms WUfiam Wilson Jobia
Harebon Ricfaand Bradburu John Shrnw
Stmngv Jame* GUclsist stod Charles^
70^
fi» High Treawn,
A. D. 1890.
f70<5
Co«fMrjM sttebfifebetrattoraaiUatiifofe-
Mid on tb^ caid fifth day of Febrmur in
thft fiif t ywt of tha rei|o aforesaid and on
difeit o&er dayi and tinws as well befoie
as after with force and arms at the said
^ttish of Saint Maiylebone in the said
oo«nty of Middleses maliciously and
tNitOfoaaly did assemble meet eonspire
consult and agree amongst themselves and
together with divers other felse traitors
whose names are to the said jurors un-
known to stir up raise make and levy in-
surrection lebellion and war against our
said lord the King within this realm - And
FvmTBEE TO tvufiL perfect and bring to
offset their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonaUe compassing imagination
invention device and intention last afore-
aaid they the said Arthur Thbtlewood
William Davidson James Ings John
Thomaa Brunt Richard Tidd James Wil-
liam Wilson John Harrison Richard Brad-
bum John Sbaw Strange James Gilchrist
and Charles Cooper as such false traitors
as last aforesaid on the said fifth day of
Febmanr in the first year of the reign
aiorasaid and on divers * other days and
times as well before as after with force
tad arms at the said parish of Saint Mary-
lebooe in the said oouoty of Middlesex
maliciously and traitorously did assemble
meet conspire consult and agree amongst
tbenmelves and together with divers other
ftjse traitors whoM names are to the said
jurors unknown to assassinate kill and
mmder divers of the privy coundl of our
said lord the King employsd by our said
lord the King in the administration of the
aAdn and government of this kingdom
AvD vvBTHBR TO FVLFiL perfect and
bring to efieet their most evil and
wicked tieason and treasonable compass-
ing imagination invention device and in-
tention last aforesaid they the said Arthur
Thiatlewood William Davidson James
logs John Thomas Brunt Richard Udd
Jaaies WiUiam Wilson John Harrison
Richard Bradbum John Sbaw Strange
James Gilchrist and Charles Cooper as
such &lse traitors as last aforesaid on the
aaid fifth day of February in the first year
of the reign aforelaid and on divers other
daye and times as well before as ^fter
wnk ibroa and armsat the said parish of
Saint Marylebone in the said county of
Middlesex maliciously and traitorously
ittd procure provide and have divers large
qiiasrtities or arms to trit guns muskets
Muiderbusses pistols swords bayonets
pifcee pikehandles and pikehaads and di«
TCia large quantities of amm^ition to
wit gunpowder leaden bullets sh^^ and
bnndgrenades with intent iheKwHb to
am themselvea aasd other false traitors in
ordier to assassinate Idlland murder divers
pf the privy council of our said lord the
King emploved by oar said lord the King
V0L.XXX1IL
in Ike administralion of the affairs and
government of this kingdom Avn Fua^ '
THEE TO FVLViL perfect Aud bring to ef-
fect their most evil and wicked treason
»id treasonable compasein| imagination
invention device and intention last afore-
said they the said Arthur Thistlewood
William Davidson James Ings John
Thomas Brunt Richard Tidd James Wil-
liam Wilson John Harrison Richard Brad-
bum John Shaw Strange James Gilchrist
and Charles Cooper as sudi^ false traitors
as laist aforesaid on the said fifth day of
February in the first year of the reign
aforesaid and on divers other days and
times as well before as after with force
and arms at the said parish of Saint Mazy-
lebone in the said county of Middlesex
maliciously and traitorously did procure
provide and bare divers laige quantities
of arms to wit guns muskets blnnder-
btisses pistols swords bayonets pikes pike-
handles and pikeheads and divers large
quantities of ammunition to wit gun-
powder leaden bullets slugs and handgre-
nades with intent therewith to arm them-
selves and other false traitors in order to
raise make and levy insurrection rebellion
and war against our said lord the King
within this realm Avn fuethee to ful*
FiL perfect and bring to efiect their most
evil and wicked treason and treasonable
compassing imagination invention device
and intention last aforesaid they the said
Arthur Thistlewood William Davidson
James Ings John Thomas Brunt Richard
Tidd James William Wilson John Harrison
Richard Bradbum John Shaw Strange
James Gilchrist and Charles Cooper as
such felse traitonr as last aforesaid on the
said fifth day of February in the first year
of the reign aforeAid and on divers other
days and times as well before aa after
with force and arms at the said parish of
Saint Marylebone in the said county of
Middlesex maliciously and traitorously
did assemble meet conspire consult and
agree amongst themselves and together
with divers other false traitors whose
names are to the said jurors unknown to
seise and take possession of divers cannon
warlike weapons arms and ammunition
in divers places deposited and being with
intent by and with the said cannon war-
like weapons arms and ammunition to
arm themselves and other felse traitors
and to raise levy and mak» insurrection
reb^onandwar against our said. lord
the King within this realm Avn FunTHcn
To FULFIL perfect and bring to effect their
most evil and wicked treason and treason-
able compassing imagination invention
derice ana intention last aforesaid they
the said Arthur Thistlewood WiUiam
Davidson James Ings John Thomas Brunt
Richard Tidd James William Wilson
John Harrison Richard Bradbum John
2Z
7CII7J 1 oeORGfi IV.
Triat tf Arthur TkuUewood
r7o«
Shttw Sttangtt James Gilchrist tnd Charies
Cooper as such false tiaitors as last lifore-
said 6d the said fifth day of Febniair in
the first Tear of the reign afoiesaxl and on
divers other days and times as well be-
fore as after with force and arms at the
said parish of Saint Marylebone in the
said county of Middlesex maliciously and
fnitoroosly did assemble meet conspire
consult and agree amongst themselves and
together with divers other false traitors
whose names are to the said jurors un-
known to sec fire to bum and destroy
divers booses and buildings in and in the
neighbourhood of London and divers
barracks of our said lord the King used
for the reception and residence of the
soldiers troops and ibices of our said
lord the King and to provide and prepare
divers combustibles and materials for the
purpose of setting fire to buminff and de-
stroying the said houses buih&ngs and
barracks Avn fubtbeb to tvlfil per-
fect and bring to effect their most eiil
and widced treason and treasonable com-
passing imagination invention device and
intention last aforesaid they the said Ar-
thur Thistlewood William Davidson
James Ings John Thomas Brant Richard
Tidd James William WUson John Har-
rison Richard Bradbum John Shaw
Strange James Gilchrist and Charles
Cooper as such false traitors as last afore-
said on the said fifth day of February in
the first year of the reign aforesaid and
on divers other days and times as well
before as afler with force and arms at the
said parish of Saint Marylebone in the
said county of Middlesex malidoosly
mid trailorouslY did compose and prepare
and cause and procure lo be composed
and prepared with intent to poblisn the
same divers addresses prodamatioos de-
clarations and writings containing therem
iolidtations and indtements to the liese
subjects of our sdd lord the King to aid
and assist in making and levying insur-
rection rebellion and war against our said
lord the King widiin this realm Avn
TUETBxa TO FULFIL pcrflbct Qttd bring to
eifect their most evil and wicked treason
and treasonable compassing imagination
invention device and intention last ftfore-
aaid they the said Arthur Thistiewood
William Davidson James Ings John Tho-
mas Brunt Richard Tidd James William
Wilson John Harrison Richard Bradbum
John ShawL Strange James Gilchrist and
Charies Cooper as such false traitdrsas
Mst aforesaid on the said twentT-thiid day
of February in the first year of the reign
aforesaid with f4»ee and arms at the sud
parisii of Saint Maxylebene in the said
ooanty of Middlewx malidoualy and
ttaitoiously toMliir with rdivers other
fUse tndtoff wiioee names are to tlM said
jiMon anknowii did asMmbie tbemieliies
with arms (that is to say) with guns mus-
kets blundeiAiusses pistms swoids bigronet»
pikes and other weapons with intent tit
assaMinate kill and murder divers of the
privy ooondl of our said lord the King
employed by our said lord' the King in
the administration of the a£birs and go*
vemment of this kingdom and to -raise
make and levy insurrection rebellioD and
war against our said lord the King within
this realm Ann fukthxe to fulfil per-
fect and bring to effect their moel evil
and wicked treason and treasonable <coaft-
|>assing imagination invention device and
intention last aforesaid they the said
Arthur Thistlewood William Davidson
James Ings John Thomas Brunt Richard
Tidd James WilUam Wilson John Har-
rison Richard Bradbum John Shaw
Strange James Gildirist and Charies
Cooper as such false traitors as last afore-
said on the said twenty-third day of Febru-
ary in the first year of the rdgn aforesaid
and on divers other day v and times as well
before as after with force* and arms at the
said parish of Saint Marylebone in the
said county of Biiddlesex together witb
divers other false traitors whose namte.aie
to the said jurors unknown armed and
arrayed in a wariike manner (that is to
say) with guns muskets blunderbusses
pistols swonis bayonets pikes md other
weapons maliciously and traitoitrasly did
ordain prepare levy and make pnbhc war
against our said lord the King within
this realm in contempt of our said lord
the King and his laws to the evil ex-
ample df all others contiary to the
duty of the allegiance of them the said
Artimr Thistiewood William Davidaon
James Ings John Thomas Brant Richard
Tidd James William Wilson John
Harrison Richard Bndbura John Shaw
Strange James Gilchrist and Chariea
Cooper, against the form of-tiie staante in
puch case made and provided and against
the peace of our saia lord the King his
crown and dignity.
Famik Omnt.-^AaA the jurors afore-
said upon their oath afofesaid do fiiirther
present That the said Arthur Thiatie-
wood William Davison James Ings John
Thomas Brant Richard Tidd JaoDes W^il-
liam Wilson John Harrison Ridmd Brad-
bum John Shaw Strange James. Giicluist
and Charies Cooper \mD% subjects of our
said lord the King not having tiie fissur of
God in telr hearts nor wdgfaing dM dntw
of their allegiance but hmxi% mnved aM
seduced by the instigation of ^ devHk
as foiss tndtors agaiost our said le»d tfao>
Kins and whoUy wiihdiawwg tlUft lowe
obefienc^ fidditT aad allsghiiwe "uribiok
•veiy. true and faithfal sohjeet of ovr asmd
knd tiM King shoaM and of rig^t on^bt
to hear towards oar said lord the Kine
on the said twenty-third day of February
7091
Jbr High Hytanm.
A. D. 1820.
1710
in lh« tint y«w of tht reign aforasaid
with tofOB and arms^at tha said pariah of
Saint Maiylebone in the said oonnty of
Middlesex together with divers other
false traitors whose names are to the said
jurors unknown anned and arrayed in a
warlike manner (that is to say) with guns
muskets blunderbusses pistpls swords
bayonets pikes and other weapons being
then and there unlawfully maliciously and
traitorously assembled and gathered toge-
ther against our said lord the King most
widtedly- maliciously and traitorooslv did
levy and make war against our said lord
the King within this realm and did then
and there maliciously and traitorously at-
tempt and endeavour by force and arms
to subvert and- destroy the constitution
and government of this realm as by law
established and to deprive and depose
our said lofd the King of and from the
style honour and kingly namd of the im-
perul crown of this realm in copntempt of
our said lord the King and his laws to
the evil example of all others contrary to
the du^ of the allegiance of them the said
Arthur Thistlewood William Davidson
James Ings John Thomas Brunt Richard
Tidd Janes William Wilson John Har-
rison Bichard Bradbum John Shaw
Straoge^ James Gilchrist and Charies
Cooper against the form of the statute in
such case made and provided and against
the peace of our said lord the King his
ccown end dignity.
The prisoners, Arthur Thistlewood,
Wilham Davidson, James logs, John
Thomas Brunt, Richard Tidd, James
William Wilson, John Harrison, Richard
Bradbum, John Shaw Strange^ James
Giiehnst, and Charles Cooper^ being f>«t
to the bar and arraigned upon this in-
dictment, severally pleaded Not Guilty,
with the exception of Wilson, and for
their trial put themselves upon God and
their Country. James Ings, however, in
the first instance, to the question, — ^ How
will you be tried?" having answered ** By
the laws of Reason,"— on the governor of
Nevrgate remonstrating with him, he re-
eed, '^By God and my Countiy — the
vs of Reason are the laws of my country.'
Wilson refused to answer to the name
of James William Wilson, stating that his
name was James. Wilson, and tendered a
plea of misnomer which was verified by
nis affidavit: the plea was directed by tl^
Court to be recorded, and time was given
to the attorney-general to reply.
Arthur Thistlewood, John Thomas
Brunt, Richard Tidd, James William
Wilson, John Harrison, and John Shaw
Strange, were arraigned on the indictment
for the murder of Richard Smithers.
-Wilson again {beaded in. abatement his
jnisaomer; the others pleaded not guilty.
£^d— «My lofd, I wish to know how we
.are going to be tried, whether together or
separately ? My wish is to be tried se-
pwatelys I know. I can clear up the
charges made against me.
Lord Chid'Juitke AlfboU.^VrohMf you
will have tibat opportunity; but this is not
the proper time to make application : by
and oy it vrill be attended to.
Arthur Thistlewood, William Davidsons
James Ings, Charles Cooper, Richard
Tidd,' John Shaw Strange, Richard Brad-
bum, James Wilson, and James Gilchrist,
were arraigned, on'^the Coroner's inouisi-
tion, for the murder of Richard Smithers,
and sevendlv pleaded not guilty.
ArUiur Thistlewood was arrai^ed on
the indictment charging him with ma- .
liciously shooting at William Westcoatt,
to which he pleaded not guilty.
James Ings was arraigned on the in-'
dictment charffing him with maliciously
shooting at William Charies Brooks, to
which he pleads not guilty.
Richard Tidd was arraigned on the in-
dictment chamng him with maliciously
shooting at William Legg, to which he
pleaded not guilty.
James William Wilson was arraigned
on the indictment charging him with
drawing the trigger of a loaded pistol,
with intent to shoot John Moddock, to
which he again pleaded in abatement his
misnomer.*
At the request of the several prisontit
the following gentlemen were assigned
by the Court as their counsel :— For
Arthur Thistlewood, William Davidson,
James Ion, John lliomas Brunt, Richard
Tidd, and James. William Wilson, Mr.
Cnrwood, and Mr. Adolphus. For John
Harrison, Richaid Bcidbum, John Shaw
Strange, James Gilchrist, and Charles
Cooper, Mr. Walford, and Mr. Broderick.
Mr. AttonK^ General, — My lord, the
gentlemen who are assigned as counsel
for the prisoners, having intimated that
it is the intention of the prisoners to
challenge separately, I am under the ne-
cessity of desiring that they may be tried
separately. I propose beginning with the
trial of Arthur Thistlewood, on the in-
dictment for high treason, on Monday
morning.
* On Monday, April 24th, an indict-
ment for high treason, found under this
special oomminion, against James WiU
son, to th^ same effect as the former in-
dictment found against him by the name
of James William Wilson, an indictment
against him .for the murder of Richard
Smithers, and an indictment acainst him
for drawing the .trigger of a lo^ed pistol,
with intent to shoot John Muddock, were
delivered intp court.
7in
I GEORGE IV.
Trial 0/ Arthur ThhUiwod
CTlfl
Lord Chif JuMtiee AIMt.'^Ut the
•pnsoner Tbistlewood b« inibraiedy that
bis trial for high treason win commenoe
on Monday morning, at nfaie o'clock.
_ •
. The piisoner.Thistlewood was informed
accordingly, by the derk of Arraigns.
fiBBSIONS HOUSE, OLD BAILBY.
MoxDAT, Apkjl 17| iBiO',
PtetaU,
The Right Hon. Lard ChirfJuUiee Abbott.
The Right Hon. Lord ChitfJuttice Dallat.
The Right Hon. the Lord Chief Baron. [Sir R.
RichardsJ.
The Hon. Mr. Juttiee RichardMon^
The Common Sergeant.
And others his Mi^esty's Justices, &c.
Countelfor the Crown.
The Attorney General [Sir R. Giffoid ; alter- I
. wards snccessiTely C. J. C. B. and Master
oftheRc^lsl.
The SoMtor General [Sir J. S. Copley].
Mr. Gyrney,
Mr. Uttmale [aftenfrards one of the Justices
of the Court of KiagVbench].
Mr. AeynoUr.
Mt.BoUand.
Solieitor.
fteerge Mauley Esq. Solicitor for the afiairs of
his Mijesty's Treasory.
Gowudfor ike Frieomr.
Mr. Cwvfood.
Mr. Adolphu.
SotkUor.
^r. Jama Harmer»
The Court bttng oponed) Arthur Thistle-
jwood was set to fine bar.
The Jurors returned by the Sheriff were called
over, when it was ascertained that the fol-
lowing were not freeholders of the county of
Middlesex to the aqiquAt of «f ip a-year.
Geor^ Ksid^ esq.
Jamei Hammam, plombtr.
Charlet Bowen, esq.
(horge LaieeU, grocer*
- Jmepk Mcnyari^pai^QMttmB.
John (hdhiake, rope-iaakef .
Tbomae Snodt, shipirrigliC.
Tkoma$ Savage f waichmaker.
JiMPiUtey ihipwiight.
Bobert Soldiagf esq.
TAmms Lamherif builder..
Samiael Smkh^ esq.
WiUiam Atlee, cupenter.
f^tBiam-Ymoigf esq.
ffiSUkm Lamtficei baker.
Vahit9ne LtAraWy dAMist.
ffuncst Search f feather hi rasscr>
Peter Fiaky leather-eetter.
Thomae Barfbot, gentleman.
John 9ammer$y esq.
Joibi Broufhf esq.
2Vmtdt LUtkwood, farmer.
haae Bryant, timber*merchant.
Jamea Arid, watchmaker.
Jamee WhiAm, painter.
Joeeph Warren f gentlemm.
Job Leader, joiner.
William Afukreon, gentieman.
WiUiam Meredith, watchspring-maker.
EAoard Harefkll, gentleman..
Thomae Beach, market-gardener.
Jame$ Cooper, japanner.
WiUiam Fountatn, sibetsmiliu
Michael Bomne, milkman.
Jo/m Lee, stationer.
John Themai Gmm, coackmaker.
Thomai Hollingt, lightermtti.
John Ctnpage, esq.
Henry ijamon,esq,, andpiano-fortemaker.
Chartee Neat, teaoier of music.
nomas Gabriel, esq.
George Ihfkx, TictuaHer.
James Bason, china-man.
JohnLodtett, gentleman and tavere-keeper.
John Marrington, dyer.
George Mnny, geimemaii.
The following Jurprs were excused.
Bdamrd Bushes, gendeman, on aecoont of ill*
ness.
Edieard Grant, cowkeeper, on account of ill*
WUHam Stark, gentleman, not properly de-
scribed in the panel.
Thomas Framton, dkeesemonger, on account of
deafness.
WiUiam Jasony rope-maker, on aecount of deaf-
ness.
Thomas Mitcheson, cooper, on aocoont of deaT*
Hasry Ramsey, boat-buiMer, on account off ill-
ness.
Robert Brmne, gentleman, on account of deaf-
ness.
James Thompson, gentleman, on accouftt of iR.
ness.
John ReynMs, watch-chain maker, on account
of deafness.
Joseph Clements, market-gardener, on account of
illness.
Alexander Ross, esq., on account of age and
illness.
Thomas Austin, esq., on account of iUnesa*
nomas Phillhs, jeweller, not properly de»
scribed in the panel.
William Winser, gentleman, not sumasoiked^
haying removed.
Rkhard Norton, gentleman, on aoeovnt off we.
Robert Craneh, gentleman, not properly de-
scribed in the paneU
Thomas Gmrett, gentleman, on account oif a|^
Samuel Wimbush, horse-deder, for the preaent^
713}
^ Higk Tf'iuuaii*
A. IX USa
1714
not bdng pnputi to ieptu vivlher h$
was a freidioldw in kUMm rigbt*
JMmi Qreawmf gentlaaua, on acoomit of ill*
JoAm Belij esq. and briidir^ not piopaity de-
scribed in the paneL
CharUi J^fery, gentleman, not piopeiiy de-
scribed in the paneL
Patrkk Bmiletiy esq., not boving received the
summons in time*
Eijfak Prtce^ jentleman, on aocount of age.
WUku Booii^ siWeramitby npt properly de-
scribed in the paneL
Aiktrt Ooocfty watchmaker, not }iaTing been
sorvod with the snmnonsy being on a journey •
WiUUm Bmigeif esq., on account of age and
nomm Bmhtt^ timber-merehant, not properly
described in the panel, his name being
Hacker.
Tk&mm HeiUky om). and tea-dealer, on account
of age and illness.
JnHm UmiU, ^ntleman and calieo*printer, on
account of illness.
Tkomat Fenjf larmer, on account of age and
dealness.
JMn Fnuier, pentleman, daimed his priTilege
as a practising attorney and solicitor which
was allowed.
JMNiPdbsr, gonllemanien aeeountof iUness.
ChaHa Cotkf tojrmaker, not suinaionedy no
such peteon bemg known.
T%omai GftsvdryyShip-dMmdlery not summoned,
havngremcired out of the countv*
S^SBMt Mb^ esq., on account ol iuness.
Himry IWend^ esq., on aooonat of illness.
PeUr RokerlBim, gentleman and builder, on ao-
count of illneas.
Jbkn Jleiserqpy grocer, not properly described
in the panel, his name bemg Moeciop.
Bemy Knevd, maxket-gaidener, on account of
deafiiess.
JcKpk IVocfer, gentleman, nothsiving luoeived
the summons*
Wiilum fbrfyfA, esq., on account of illness*
Jbkn Bnah, sprtnget and liner, on aeoount of
illness.
l^t^fvni Ptiety gentlemaB and currier, on a^
count of illness in his ftmily.
Join Appkf druMffinder, on aocount of ilhMss.
Prwmer. — ^WUl your lordship be pleased to
allow me a seat f
U^ Ode/ Ju$tke ilMoff.— Considering
tin lengtii of time tte trial may be IHtely to
Mscupy, tiie court will allow you Hud in^
dnlgenee*
The list having been gone through^ the Do-
iaulters were oJled over.
AMmellilflqp^S^ baker, eacqsed on neoount of
iHnen*
Johi JFaArook^ brickmaker, fined for non-at-
tendance, but the fine aftarwardi remitted,
on proof of illness.
JMn Mttt, undertaker, fined for non-uttend*
mice, but the fine afterwards remitted #n his
^qppearance.
The Jurors who had answered to their names
were again called over.
WiUiam Plauon^ gentleman, challenged by the
Crown.
Alexander Barclay ^ gentleman and grocer sworn.
Thomai LetUr^ bookseller, challenged by the
Crown.
Jmqh Sh^gfddf evq. and ironmonger, chal-
lenged by the prisoner.
Tkomai Goodchilif esq. swort.
mpHim
Crown.
JoHtpA] flayuet, bri
eso. swo
ickiayer.
challenged by the
Koberi Sitpkamm, anchorsmitii, challenged by
the Crown.
Skhard Bbaa, gentleman, challenged by tilo
prisoner.
Jmoc Ommi, baker, chiHeuged by the Crown.
WUliam ChurddUy gentleman and wine-mer-
chant, challenffed by 4he Crown.
TRomof S^Mi lUeney, esq. sworn.
Thomai wuhmonf farmer, challenged by ^
prisoner.
Stumid Fiihf tobacconist, challenged by the
- prisoner.
Einond CoUmgridge^ water-gilder, challeUg^
• by the Crown.
Wmiam Shorty farmer, challenged by the Crown.
nfantt turhtfi^ carpenter, sworn*
Mm Shooier, gentleman.
Mr. SkaUr^ My name is incorrectly spelt,
I speQ it ftmter.
Lord Chief Juitiee Abbott-^Th^ sound seems
to me to be the same, that is no importani
variation as it appears to me.
Mr* Aofsr was sworn.
Jotiak BarthoUmiewy watch-maker, diiltenged
by the prisoner.
j€km Jmrn, carpenter, challenged by the
Crown.
Tkomoi Brrnkmy ooadimaiLer, diallengedl^ the
prisoner.
Smmtd Oratigeff lichterfiiail, sworn.
George Dictaissn, builder, sworn.
l^smst PorMwon, wpholsterer, challenged by
the prisoner.
2%0Hlai AeMon, mt^* and ship-chandler, dwl^
longed by the prisoner.
Jamee WUmi, maiket gardener, diallettged by
the Crown.
George PhUSpe, jeweller, challei^ by ^
prisoner.
l^omas Bird, distiller, challenged by the pri-
soner*
WUliam hhaam, baker, ehaHenged by llie
Crown*
John Edmatd Sh^ihard, gentleman, swoin.
Samael Omdd, celico printer, challenged by the
Cro^nib
Jasict IF«isior8^esq.,ohaUeUffedby the prisoner.
lHhsmt BrtNBN^ oinnn, chuenged t^ the pri-^
Gsor||v Mm^ bitss fiMndor, dnHengedby the
prisoner*
iriMMMi Meedf esq., challenged by the prisoner*
Otorgp Dmdtf cdOper, challee^ed by the ftU
sener* .
7W
1 GSOSGE IV.
Trial ofAr&var ThkOetoood
1716
John FktnieB, brewer, challenged by the pri-
soiier.
JtmaihaH Tauhngham^ fonner, chifllenged by
the Crown.
JoKpA Drakcj draper, challenged by the pri«
soner. «
Jckn FcwUr, iron-plate-worker, sworn.
Satrnxl BMetf esq., and cow-lceeper, cfaal-
Unged by the prisoner.
Wiiian OAU Roberti, cooper, sworn.
Bkhard Smiihf esq., challenged by the Crown.
JcMph Pefidered, iion-plate-worker, challenged
by ttie Crown.
IVeiet Garrett, shipwright, challenged by the
Crown.
Matthew Aiktanf coachmaster, challenged by
. the prisoner.
Bi^ard Hatchetty esq., and fiumer, challenged
. by the prisoner.
J<^ Dicheruony builder, challenged by the pri-
soner.
John Dobeonj esc|.. sworn.
Thomat Dicks, silversmith, diallenged by the
Crown.
ThmoM Wood, painter, challenged by the pri-
soner.
Jamei Gnotoi, joiner, challenged by the prisoner.
Mobert Welk, fturmer, challenged by the Crown.
WUiiam FUhy, brickinaker, excused, not pro-
perty described in the panel, his name being
Edward BraeAridge, watchmaker, challenged
by the Crown.
John Jonei, stockbroker, ohallenged by the
Crown.
TTtomat Partridge, farmer, challenged by the
prisoner.
BiSmy HUlard, watch-gilder, not property de-
scribed in the panel, his name, being Hil-
liard*
Otorge flbw, ship-chandler, diallenged by the
Crown.
Thomas Harby, es^., and rope«maker, chal-
lenged by Uie prisoner.
WiiUnn Jarrett, watch-engraver, challei^ed
by the prisoner.
John Butfti^y gentleman, and tailor, chaU
lenged by the Crown.
VTUuMi DaweSf farmer, challenged by th^.
Crown.
Cooper, gentleman, sworn.
TH£ JU&Y.
Alexander Barclay,
Thomas Goodchild,
T. Snffield Aldersey,
James Herbert,
John Shuter,
Samnel Granger,
George Dickenson,
John Edw. Shephard,
John Fowler,
Wm. Gibbs Roberts,
John Dobfon,
William Cooper.
Lord Chitf Jmtke AhhoH^^As there aie
feTeral persons chai|;ed by this Indictment
whose trials may come on snocessiTcly, the
Court thinks it necessary, for the furUierance
of justice, strictly to prohibit the publication
of the proceedings on this or any other trial,
wifil all the trials shall bs gonethrougl^i It is
highly natasaiy, for the pinpoMS of justioe,
that the public aiad, oritfae minda* of those
who may be to. senre.as jurors on trials here-
after, may not be influenced by the publicatioD
of any thins which takes place on toe present-
trial. We nope all persons will observe this
injunction. *
The Jury were charged with the prisoner in
the usual form.
The Indictment was opened by 9fr. BolktmL
Mr. Attorn^ General* — Gentlemen of the
jury ;— You are assembled to disdiarge one
of the most important duties that can devolve
upon a jury— to decide upon the giuH or
innocence of a fellow subject diarged with
the crime of high treason; the h^est of>
fonce known to |he law. Upon such an
occasion, I am satisfied it is unnecessary for
me to bespeak your ptftient attention jlo the
statement which it will be my duty to make to
3rou; still less to point out the necessity of
entering upon the investigation with unbiassed
and unprqudiced minds— of discarding from
your recollection every thing you have heard or
read, relative to the chaiige preferred against
the pri^ner, of, confining your attention ex-
dusivdy to the evidence which will be adduced
in support of that charae, and of forming your .
ded^ion upon that eviaence alone.
The charge is, as I have stated to yon, (me
of the highest nature known to the law ; other
crimes, generally speaking, however heinous
and enormous, terminate, except so for as oc-
ample is concerned, with their perpetration ;
but high treason, not only in its inception*
but stiU more if it be successfuL draws aner it
consequences of the most dreadful kind, afiect* .
ing not only individuals, but the community
at large.
I shall not trouble you with any lengthened
obsttvations upon the law, as it appUes to the
crime imputed to the prisoner, because, if I
mistake not greatly, that law is so undis*
puted, and the foots which will be proved to
you wiU so clearly and satisfoctorily establish
the charge contained in the indictment, that it,
would be an idle parade in me to refer either
to the authority of decisions, or to the opinions
of our ablest commentators upon the subject.
If the overt acts laid in this indictment, or «,
sufficient number of them, shall be 8atisfo<>-
torily proved, I will venture to affirm that no
man who hears me will entertain the slightest
doubt, that they will establish one or other of
the counts of this indictment, and bring home
to the prisoner at the bar, the high treason
with whidi'he stands ehaiged.
The four counts in this indictment wiU aU
be proved to you by the same evidence ; and
*See the proceedings on April 34th and 35th
upon this subject, during the trial of John
Ihomas Brunt; and the further proceedings
on April 38th at the conclusion ouibe trials»'
under this Special Commission, v^hu .
7171
far High TreatM.
A. t>. 18^6.
[718
the evidence which establishes one, >win« I
believe^ completely support the others. The
offences char^ are compassing and ima^«
ing the deposition of the king from his throne;
compassing and imagining the death of the
king ; conspiring to \ery war^ in order to cota-
pel the king to change his measilres ; and lery*
ing war against the king. It is hardly neces-
sary for me to state, that in proof of these
charges it is not essential that the plans of the
patties accused shonld aim directly and im-
mediately either at the deposition or at the
life of his majesty, becanse ii they werepointed
against that form of goTemment which now
exists, if they were intended to bring about a
change in the established system by means of
force, they naturally and obriously, in the
event of their being successful, tended to
effect the removal of the kins from his kinglr
dignity, or the destruction of his life. It will
therefore be quite sufficient for me to apprize
you, in the first instance, that the plans or the
conspirators were of such a nature and de-
scription, that though, in their primary opera-
tions, they were directed against the govern-
ment, as they will indisputably be proTod to
have been, and not immediately aimed at the
destruction either of the authori^ or the life of
his majesty, they would, in their oonseauences,
inevitably lead to those results. And there-
fore, not to bewilder you in the inquiry upon
which you are about to enter, I think it quite
sufficient in the outset to state to you — that in
which I believe I shall be confiiined by the
highest authority the law knows when this
case shall be summed up to you — that if the
overt acts, that is, the &cts stated in this in-
dictment as indicating and evincing the trai-
torous intention of the conspirators, shall be
proved, they will establish tue chaise laid in
this indictment. It is unnecessary, therefore,
to trouble you at present with anv further dis-
cnsnon of the law applicable to the charge.
Important and anxious as the duty is which
yon are called upon to discharge, mine, I may
say, is no less so. In my address to you, I do
assure you m^ only purpose is, to mak^ you
acquainted with the nature of the charge
against the accused, and the evidence by which
that charge will be substantiated. It is nei-
ther my intention nor my wish to lead you to
any conclusion which the evidence itself will
■ot warrant ; for, God knows, if the facts shall
be proTcd, as I have eveiy reason to believe
they will be, they want no addition to bring
the minds of any unprejudiced persons to the
inevitable oondnsion of guilt. My duty is to
state the cu4 to you Ivrly, as between the
ribfic and the unfortunate man at the bar, as
expect it will be proved, without exagger-
ation on the one side, or timid reserve on the
other. ' If I should unconsciously err ; — ^if,
when the time arrives at which yoo are to
determine upon the verdict you shaH give, you
tfmll think either thai the statement I have
bid before you has not b^en proved, or that
the observalioDS and inferences I have made
and drtt#n are not borne out by the proof,
dismiss them from your nlinds, and confine
your attention to the iBfvidence alone. But if
yon shdl be satisfied that the statement I shidl
have made is supported by the facts ; if you
believe that the observations introduced in the
course of that statement fairly and naturally
arise out of those facts, then you will, as
honest men, give to them that weight whidi
th^ deserve.
Having said ^hus much, I shall, without
further preface, call your attention, as perspi-
cuously and as brieflr as I can, to the drcum-
stances which will be given in evidence to
substantiate the charge.
The prisoner at the bar, Arthur Thistlevrood,
must be already known to you bv name ; bnt,
as I have already said, let nothing that you
have known or heard of him before you came
into 'this Court to discfaarve the soleosh duty
you are to perfbrm, have w least effisct upon
the Terdict you are to pronounce. The
prisoner has, I fear, for some time conceived
Uie wicked and nefarious purpose of attempt-^
ing to overturn the government as by law
established in this kingdom: and it will ap-
pear to you, that all the other persons included
m this indictment, and whose names will
occur in the course of the investigation, were
paridcipators with him in this guilty design.
Some of them, it is true, entered into the con^
spiracy at a later period than otfiers, but all
concurred in that act which was to luiTe been'
the commencement of the tragical operations
they had in contemplation. At present, how-
ever, I shall call your attention snore particu*
lariy to two of the prisoners, James Ings, and
John Thomas Brunt.
The prisoner resided, during the time of the
transactions which I am about to relate to you,
in Stanhope-street, Clare-market. Brunt wae
a shoemaker or boot-clOser, linng at a place
which will be flrec|uently menticmed in the
course of this inquiry, Fox-coulrt, Oray's-inn-
lane; he inhabited two rooms on the second
floor of a house in that court, in one of whtch-
his trade was carried on, and in the other he
and his mh slept. His family consisted of
bis wife, a son, and an apprentice of the name
"of Hale. —
I shall not carry you Tory far beck in the
narrative of these transactions ; it vHU be suffi-
cient for me, in this statement, to call your
attention to drcumstances which took place
from the close of January, until the S3rd of the
following month. It will appear to you, that
long anterior to that period, the prisoner at
the bar, the two persons I have mentioned^
and several of the others whose names are
indoded in this indictment, had consultiM
together, and devised plans for the purpose of'
overturning the government. Ihey had held
frequent meetinn at a public house called the-
White Hart, in Brook's-nuurket, and in a room
behind that public house. At the latter end
of the month of January, or the commesieeinenC^
of the month of February, they thonghl it
719]
1 GEORGE IV.
Tnat qf Arthur Tkiitkmood
W«^
prudent (o lemove Uieir nettiagi Snw thoio
places, and tjiRt it woold be better tbat tbe¥
•bould be earned oa ui the hiooae ia wfaieb
BniBt reaidedy ia FeK-eawt; and, to avoid
«iiapicioi% they contrived that another room in
that hoiue, and upon the save floor upon
which Brunt lived, ahould be taken for the
Kisoaer logs, who, I beUere, waa bj trade a
tchef . Brant and Ings, it will be proved to
you, hired that room for the avowea porpoee
•fa lodging for the piiaoBerlnny bat for the
secret and reel object of holcung meetings
there, at which they might mature their plans,
aad prepare the means for canying them into
execution, it being a place of more inmediate
secaiity and greater secrecr than they had
previously been enabled to obtain.
Having prepared means for efiectoating
their pliyNf their meetings at the room in
Brant's hoase became more frequent and
numerous* Gentlemen, I here regret that I
have to state in an Enfdish eourt of justice
the horrible plans which liad entered into the
minds of these conspirators, and the act with
which they intended to commence the neforioos
woject they had in view. It was thought by
Ba^lishmen, that the assassination of all hw
maiesty's ministers would be a proper com-
mencemont of the revolution which thev wished
tQ bring about j and you vrill find, that they
frequently deliberatod and consulted upon tlie
means by which that most widied design was
to be aooomplished. They entertained hopes
that th^ should be enabled, at some meeting
of bin ma}est/s miniiten, to perpetrate the
bloody deed >-»having effected that, theyia^
landed to set fire to various parts of this
metropolis, to endeavour to obtam possession
of the cannon at the artillery ground, and at
the sUble of the City Light Hone Volnnteersi
I believe in GnyV4nn-lane — to create ae
much confusion and dismav as they could by
these various opemtions,and then to estabUsn,
what in their vain expectations the^ had
imagined themselves capable of erectiiig^ a
provirional government, the seat of whidi was
to be at the Mansion-house.
They had frrauent deliberations upon these
plans. You wiU rec<4lect his late most ex-
cellent majesty died on the 39th of January.
It was thought at one of the meetings, that tne
night of the king's funeral might be a proper
time for them to commence the work of de«
struction. They had intimation that on that
occasion die greater part of the troops quartered
in the metropolis would b^ removed from it
to Windsor, to attend the ceremony of bi3 m^
Sky's interment; and thsy imbued that would
an c^;>portunejMriod for pottinv their sohemes
ia execution. However, they abandoned that
iateotiaa ; they found that their plana embraced
men ehiacts than they had men to effect ; and
Xifjon tbttttil^a, thenfore, they did not attempt
flfm purpose they bad in view. But, brooding
oapr their ndlarious machinationB, many of theaa
wJM bAQWft extrsmely iawatient at the delays
wm«h WW frem time to tune ist^posed ba^
tween the present day and that which. they
thought would be the completion of their hopes^
and yau will find, that at a meeting wUch they
held at Brunt's, on Saturday, the 10th of
February, the impatience became so great, on
the part of many of them, that they then deteiw
mined to vrait no longer ; but that if no oppor-
tunity in the mean time should ooour,. of their
being able to accomplish the assasrinaUon of
his majesty's ministersy by finding them idl
assembled at the same house, at aU events on
the following Wednesday, the 23rd, some blow
should be struck, and that the revolution whidi
they had in contemplation, should actoally have
its commencement.
Having thus determined, they appointed a
meetins on the next day, the Sunday, at Brunt*»
house, for the purpose of fonoing a committer
upon whom should devolve the organisation of
the plan of operations for the ensuing Wed*
nesday. At Uiat meetina, and indeed at all
the meetings, you will find that the prisoner at
the bar was the leader upon whom they mainly
relied for the success of their enterprise. Yoa
will find that he was generally the person who
addressed them, who suggested the course of
their proceedings, and in whose counsel and
advice th^ placed the most implicit confidence.
It was the prisoner, Thistlewood, who, on tiie
19th of February, proposed that whidi I have
stated to you ; he said, tiiat as it did not ap-
pear from ai^ intelligence thay could collect,
that ministers were lU^ely soon to be together
at a cabinet dinner, they should immediately
asoortain the strength of their respective parties,
and that having ascertained it, those partiea
should be divided into different bodies, upon
some of whom should devolve the horrible task
of destroying as many of his majesty's ministers
as came vridiin their reach; upon others, tfie
duty of settinff fire to various parts of the me-
tn^lis, and that to the rest should be assigned
the execution of other parts of the plot, vriuc^
were then detailed bv tlie prisoner Thistlewood.
This plan vras at mat meeting seconded by
Brunt ; and it vras agreed, ^at on the following
day, the Sunday, a meeting should take place
at Bhmt's room, in order to appoint a com-
mittee to complete the final arrangement of the
operations of the following Wednesday.
Accordingly, on that Sunday a meeting took
place at Brunt's. It was attended tnr the
prisoner lliistlewood, Ings, Harrison, Wilson,
and others of the conspirators. With all their
names I do not at this moment trouble you^
because your attention should be confined, at
present, to the charge against the prisoner upott
trial ; at the same time I must observe, that if
in the course of the investigation, we shafl con-
nect all Uie persons accused in one eommon
Slot, and one common design, the acts aad
ecUrations of all of them will become most
important. They vrill eadi be answerable for
the acts and declarations of the others, made
aad done in furtherance of their commcn o1^
jeet The plan was again detailed by Thisye*'
woady was again approved by the peneas pre-
7ai]
font High TreoMon,
A. D. 1820.
[722
sent (their rnmber being fonrtgen or fifteen),
and it ^tns resolred that no actmty should be
-wwitifig in the mean time, in making the pre-
parations necessary to enable them to eneet
their atrocious deisigns.
Upon that occasion it Was ^^^ that they
should meet agsdn on the following Monday;
and you will find they did accordingly meet at
Brunt's. The same plan was canvassed — ^no
objection was made to it — ^and tfiey then se-
parated for the purposes of communicating it
to their followers, in the difibrent parts of the
town, and of collecting as many persons as
tUey should be enabled to dO| for meeting on
this following 'Wednesday.
On the morning of Tuesday, the 22nd of
February, a meeting took place at Brunt's,
and, upon that occasion, one of the conspirators
communicated to those who were present, that
he had discoyered by a newspaper that a ca-
binet dinner was to be had on the following
day, Wednesday, at the house of lord Harrow-
by, in Grosvenor-square. you wiU be shodced
when you hear the eridence of the exultation
with which this intelligence was receiTed.
Brunt, with an impiety at which eveiy well
regulated mind must reToit, exclaimed that till
then he had disbelieved in the existence of a
God, but that now he was satisfied that the
Almighty was favouring their designs, and
that this meeting was appointed on the follow-
ing day to enable them at one blow to effectuate
that purpose, which had been levelled against
each of his majesty's ministers 5 and that they
might be enabled, by the means they had pro-
cured, at once to destroy every member 01 the
cabinet who should be present upon that occa*
ston. The exultation was notoonnned to Brunt
alone ; you will find that Ings, and the other
persons present, equally rejoiced in the con-
templation of the speedy success of their in-
£unous designs, exclaiming that on the follow-
ing night they should attain that which had
been so lone the object of their desire, and for
which they had been preparing with such un-
remitting anxiety. A newspaper was then sent
for in order to see whether tne intelligence was
true : on its being brought, it was <uscovered
to be so, and then they immediately resolved
that instead of the plan which had been pre-
viously arranged, namely, the endeavouring to
assassinate some of his majesty's ministers at
their respective residences, or wherever they
might be found, the house of lord Harrowby
should be the object of attack ; and that in the
evening, at nine o'clock, after the guests were
assembled, and when they were seated in se-
curity at table, the house should be entered by
a chosen party of the conspirators, and the
ministers should be destroyed by the means I
shall presently describe to you.
Upon this intelligence their activity was re-
doubled ; they met again in the evening ; their
different partizans were requested at' once to
coOect together all the fire*arms they had ob-
tained, tiM ammunition they had purchased,
andthe difibreht instruments of mischief, which
VOL. xxxm.
you wiU find they had prepared for the occa-
sion ; every thing was to be put in a state of
preparation against the following evening.
r should have stated to you, gentlemen, be-
fore I arrived at this part of the narrative, that
a person of the name of Udd, who is included
in the indictment, and who livedo I believe, at
a place called Hole-in-th^Wall Passage, near
Brook's-maricet, had, early in the plot, become
one of these conspirators, and had embarked
in all their plans. His house had been made
a d6p6t for some of their arms and ammunition.
As tneir meetings were at Brunt's, they had a
suspicion that they might be watched and
overiooked, and they considered it unsafe that
his house should be the sole place of deposit.
Tidd's, therefore, had for some time been ap-
pointed to be another receptacle for the powder,
nail, ammunition, and other instruments of de-
struction, idiich they had prepared, and which
will be produced to you in the course of the
trial.
As Brunt's house was at some considerable
distance from Grosven<»-square, where their
operations were to commence, they thought it
better to procure some place of rendezvous
nearer to the residence of lord Harrowby; and
you will find, therefore (though it was not
communicated at that moment to the different
parties who were engaged in the transaction),
that the spot selected was a small obscure
street called Cato-street, which runs into John
street, in the Edgware-Road. In this street a
stable was procured by Harrison, one of the
conspirators, for the purpose of their meeting
on the following evening, preparatory to their
going to the house of lord lianrowbyjin Gros-
venor-square.
It providentiallyhappened in this conspiracy,
as will generally occur in plots of a similar
nature, that some of the parties, previous to
its execution, began to feel compunctious visit-
ings of nature, and startled at the crimes they
were about to commit ; and you will find that
upon the Tuesday (the day on which the intel-
ligence was received by them that there would,
on the following day, be a dinner at lord Har-
rowby's) a person of the name of Hiden, who
will be examined as a {witness— a person to
whom this plan had been divulged, and who
the conspirators had hoped would be a partici-
pator in the execution of their designs — felt
a visiting of conscience which impelled him to
communicate to lord Harrowby himself the
scheme that was in agitation. This person
watched an oppOrtuni^ of lord Harrowby's
going from his house into the park, and there
made his lordship acquainted with the mischief
that was intended.
It will also appear to you, that on Tuesday
some little alarm had beeu'Cxcited in the mind
of one of the parties (a man of the name of
Adams) that their plans were suspected, and
thatHhey therefore incurred some hazard in
meeting. On ^hat day, at Brunt's house,
Adams inform^ Thistlewood and the others,
that a commuoicatJOQ had been made to him
3 A
72S]
1 QEORGE IV.
Trial if Arthur ITaOimdod
C7««
by the landlord of the White Habrt, idtimatiDg
that their meetings at that pabliofaouse had,
he thought, been obseired by some of the police
officers, and Adams expressed his apprehension
ttiat their schemes were discovered, or were
likely to be so. This excited in the minds of
some of the persons assembled the greatest
agitation ; they stated that they were astonished
that Adams should venture, in the presence of
men, some of whom were comparatively
straneers, to hint that there was a possibility
that their plans could be detected. Brunt, in
order to satisfy them whether there was any
ground for the suspicion which had been en-
tertained by Adams, proposed that certain of
the party should be appointed to watch lord
Harrowby's house on that evening, and early
on the following «ioming,- to see whether any
persons were introduced to resist the intended
attack, and to ascertain whether their inten-
tions* were known. You will find that they
carried the proposal of Brunt into effect, by
sending two of their party, one of whom was
Davidson, a man of colour (who will be very
conspicuous as an active partisan throughout
the whole of this transaction), on that evening,
about six o'clock, to watch lord Harrowb^s
house. These watchmen were to be relieved
about eight or nine by two others of the party,
who were to remain three hours at their post,
and their places were then to be suppliea by
two others, who were to continue there during
the night. It will be proved that these watches
were actually set on that night, and that the
men performing the duty were seen by differ-
ent persons in Grosvenor-square. Finding,
as was the case, that there appeared to be no
alarm — that no police officers or troops were
admitted into lord Harrowby's house, or
stationed in the neighbourhood — ^the conspira-
tors felt quite satisfied that the fears expressed
by Adams were groundless, and that there was
no reason to suspect a discovery.
On Wednesday, great preparations were
made by them ; arms were brought of various
descriptions, guns, pistols, sabres, swords, and
engines which, when you see them, you will
perceive to be calculated for the most deadly
purposes. These engines they had themselves
prepared, and their most appropriate appellor
tion is hand-grenades. They are formed thus:
— a quantity of powder, from three to four
ounces, is enclosed in a tin case, to which is
attached a tube for the insertion of a fuse :
round this case is tied a quantity of tow, and
on the outside of that tow ai« fastened, as tight
as they can be, sharp-pointed pieces of iron
of various descriptions. Thus closely confined
the powder would explode with considerable
force, and the pieces of iron would be scat-
tered around in every direction. It was
stated at their meetings, without an^ dis-
guise, that the purpose to which these instru-
ments were to be applied was this: — when
the attacking party entered the room where his
majesty's ministers should be assembled, the
fuses were to be lighted^ and the grenades
thrown amongst them, iBflieUag by their explo*
slon, wounds and death upon the persons is
that room. Of these they had prepared a great
number, I know not how many. They had
also provided themselves with preparationa
which they chose inhumanly to call illumina-
tion baUs ; these were made for the purpose
of setting fire to any buildiLgs which it should
be their intention and object on tliat night to
burn . They had also collected a laige quantity
of ball cartridges, the amount of which wiU
probably surprise you, but it will appear, that
they had between eleven and twelve hundred
rounds; they had also cartridges for loading
cannon, which they had made of flannel bags
in each of which a pound of powder was con-
tained. They had lastly got together a great
number of pikes and pike handles, for the pur>
pose of arming those of their friends and asso-
ciates who might have no other weapons.
These preparations had been, as you may
naturally suppose, the work of considerable
time ; they were ready upon the 23 rd of Feb«
ruvy, for the purpose for which they were
intended.
On the morning of the 23rd of Februarye^
the conspirators assembled at Brunt's house,
.where they were engaged in completing the
hand-grenades, puttiiig flints into their pistol^
loading their arms, and making every prepara-
tion for the meditated attack. I have already
told you, that for the purpose of their meeting,
and for the convenience of having some place
near to lord Harrowby's house, a stable had
been procured by one of these conspirators, in
Cato-street. I know not whether curiosity may
have led any of you, as it has led a great nnm*
her of the public, to visit that spot, but if it
has not, I will endeavour to describe it to you,
and I think you will agree with me, that a
more appropriate situation for the purpose
they contemplated, could hardly have been
selected. It is an obscure street, having a
very narrow access at each end ; it is acces-
sible by a horse or carriage at one end only*
The entrance at one extremity b under an
archway, and at the other there are posts, to
prevent the passage of any but foot passengers.
The east end leads into John-street, the west
into Queen-street; both which streets ran
parallel to each oUier into the £dgware-road.
This stable is the first building on the ri^t
hand side as you enter Cato-street, fix>m John-
street and it is nearly opposite to a small
public-house called the Horse and Groom; it
belongs to General Watson, who is abriNid^
and had been occupied by a person of the nam^
of Firth^ bT whom it was let to Harrison* It
consistSybelow stairs of three stalls, and a small
place adjoining, for the reception of a cart ;
nearly opposite the door is a step ladder, lead*
ing up into a loft, by the side ot which loft are
two^ small rooms immediately over the cart-
house. It will be proved to. you, that previous
to the meeting which was to take place oetweeia
seven and eieht o'clock on that evening, pre-^
paration» had baen nad« by Hanuoiii tad hy
T3tf1
7&r ffijgA IWwM.
A. D. 1890.
C7M
flefenl of tiM peitons who will be nkmed to
you, for the reception, at this ttabley of those
who were oomtng. A piece of oaBras had-
been nailed up against the window of the loft,
to prevent persons observing from the opposite
side of the street, what might be passing with-
in ; and it was noticed by several of the neigh-
bours, that this place was visited by a great
number of persons during the afternoon, who
were carrying in Various things on their backs,
the nature of which those persons could not
discover, but which I tUnk you will have no
doubt, after the discovery made, were the arms
and other instruments of mischief, which were
found collected there on the evening when the
prisoners were taken.
Harrison, who was known to one of the
witnesses who will be called, was observed m
the idlternoon going to this stable, and upon
being asked what was his business there, and
how it was that he had possession of the sta-
ble, he said he had taken it from Firth, and
that he was cleaning it up. About six o'clock
Davidson, the man of colour, was also ob-
served waiting close to this stable, and going
into it, with something upon his back, or under
bis arm, and a number, of candles in his hand,
and ^ou vrill find that he applied at a house<
adjoming, about six o'clock, to light one of the
eimdles, which he afterwards carried into the
stable.
One party was to meet that evening at
Brant's, in order to proceed from thence to
the place of rendezvous. Tidd, whose name
I hare mentioned to you already, was to bring
up another party, and Bradbum was to accom-
pany a third. They had not communicated
to all their associates the precise spot where
the meeting was to be held : some of them
were directed to the Horse and Groom, and
others were told to repair to the Edgeware
Road, near John-street, where persons would
'be in waiting to point out to them the place
•f assembling. Between seven and eight
o'clock, Brunt and some others from his house
took their departure for Cato-street, with arms
which Ihey had provided concealed under their
coats. On their arrival, they found Thistle-
wood, Harrison, Ings, Wilson, and some
others. The party proceeded to the loft ; in
it were collected arms of different descrip-
tioBtf, blunderbusses, pistols, swords, pikes,
hand-grenades, and a considerable quantity of
staves, with ferules fitted to one end, in which
a hole was drilled to admit the screw of a
pike. They are rouffh ash sticks, of a con-,
siderable length and size, and will be pro-
duced to you, together with the other weapons
seized on that memorable night.
At first the party in Cato-streel consisted of
fourteen or fifteen persons only, and some
little alarm and suspicion were evidently raised
in the minds of Thistlewood and some of the
others, at Tidd's not making his appearance
at the appointed time, and a remark being
made by one of the penons present, that their
fuuDb^v were not so large as they were ei«
pected to be, it was stated bv Thistlewood
and others, Uiat mere would by and by as-
semble, and that detached parties, who were
not to accompany them to lord Harrowby's,
were gone on difierent expeditions, about the
metropolis. A short time afterwards, however,
Tidd made his appearance with a man of the
name of Monument, a person who had been
only recently induced to participate in this
crime ; he bad before been introduced to This-
tlewood, and had a communication with him
generally on the state of political affairs, with
a view to the change the prisoners at the bar
wished to effect, but had not till that evening
been invited by Brunt to accompany them to
Cato-street, and probably was not aware of
their exact and precise plans, until he arrived
at the spot ; altooogh no doubt he must have
been aware, that the conspiracy had for its
object some great political change. He ar-
rived with Tidd about seven oVlock, and the
party at that time consisted, I believe, of four
or five and twenty persons, two of whom were
appointed to remain below, as sentries, in
oraer to prevent interruption fcom any persons
who might not be connected with them. Those
two persons (who, I bel«uve, were Davidson
and Ings) were occasionally in the loft when
their plan was talked of, and it was finally ar-
ranged that they were to proceed to the house
of lord Harrowby about eight o'clock. Some
apprehension, as I have already told you, hav-
ing prevailed in the party, that their strength
was hardly adequate to the execution of tluir
design, Thistlewood and Ings said, that the
opportunity must not be lost ; that there were
enough of them to effect the destruction of the
ministers ; that other parties would set fire to
various parts of the metropolis; and that when
the decisive blow was struck, and the town
was in flames, hundreds of the people would
join them, and their body would become too
formidable for opposition. This statement
allayed their fears; and between seven and
eight o'clock they proceeded to a selection of
those who should compose the party to eater
the house of lord Harrowby, and destroy the
ministers. The scheme had been already
settled, Thistlewood was to knock at the dooc,
under pretence of luiving a note to deliver to
lord Harrowby, and having obtained access
to the hall, they were to secure the servants,
whom they expected to find unarmed, and
whom therefore they should have no difficulty
in compelling to show them the room where
the ministers were at dinner. The party wa«
then to make its way to that room, and with-
out remorse to destroy indiscriminately every
one of his m^esty's ministers who should be
there assembled.
I have stated to you already, the exultation
and the impiety displayed by Brunt on one
occasion, and I cannot conceal from you a
fiict, as it affects another of the persons charged,
I mean. Ings. This man had been a butcher,
and he had armed himself, on this occasion,
not only with'' a blunderbuss and a sword,, but
7371
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial tfAHhur Tkiiilewood
[738
with a large butcher's knife, which will be
exhibited to you ; and for the purpose of en-
abling himself to use it with more effect, he
had twisted round the handle a quantity of
wax end, in order that when he grasped it, it
should not slip from his hand, and he then
stated in the most gross and horrible language,
that with that knife he would murder and mu-
tilate some of the honourable persons assembled
at the house of lord Harrowby. This barba-
rous idea of mutilation was, I am afraid, bor-
rowed from scenes which some years ago
disgraced a neighbouring country; and was
formed under the expectation that the exhibi-
tion of the heads of some of his majesty's
ministers, after their murder had been effected,
might inflame the populace,' and thus enable
the conspirators to succeed in their nefarious
purposes. That yeiy knife was found and
taken from the person of Ings, upon the nig^t
of the 23rd of February, in the stable in Cato-
street. I mention that fact as corroborating,
if corroboration shall be needed, the circum-
stances which I have detailed to you, and
which will be narrated by the witnesses.
Happily for this country, that ProTidence
which had been so' impiously profoned by
Brunt on the occasion, interposed to prevent
the accompUshment of the diabolical scheme.
From the communication which had been
made to* lord Harrowby, by Hiden, and from
other information, the gotemment was satisfied
that these persons intended to meet in Cato-
street. Means were taken to secure the parties
after they had there assembled, and oefore
they should proceed to execute the mbchief
they designea.
in order to prevent any suspicion, it was
wisely determined by lord Harrowby, and
those with whom he consulted, that the dinner
which had been provided, and was intended
for his majesty's ministers, should be prepared.
It was evident, that if any alterktion had
taken place in the time or place of the enter-
tainment, and such an alteration had been by
any means made known to, or had been sus-
pected by the prisoners, their course of pro«
ceeding would nave been changed, and weir
meeting would have been postponed to a fu-
ture and more convenient opportunity.
Precautions had been taken to prevent the
accomplishment of this plan; a number of
Bow-street officers, and of the patrole, had
been directed to go to Cato-street, to watch
the movements of those who might assemble
there ; and at a convenient season, before they
should take their departure from thence, to
secure those who were assembled. A party
also of the Guards, who were stationed at
Portman-street bairacks, were directed to
attend in John-street, to aid the civil power ;
and you will find, that at the very momeht
when they were selecting tiiose of the party
who should be the foremost in the execution
of their daring and horrible enterprise : at the
very time when Thistlewood in the loft #as
separating iiom the rest those to whom was to
be assigned this assassination amd murder, the-
officers entered the stable. Upon their en-
trance they discovered two persons ; one will
be proved to be Davidson, he was remarkaUe
from his colour, as he is nearly a black ; he
had cross belu over his shoulders, and a belt
about his loins ; in one of the former was sus-
pended a sword ; he had a gun upon his
shoulder, and pistols in the belt Uiat was round
his waist : he was stationed just within the
door. The other man, who will be clearly
identified to be Ings, was posted at the bottom
of the ladder. He was armed with the knife
I have mentioned, a gun, and a cutlass.
The officers, with a resolution hardly credi-
ble, when you consider the desperation and
the determination of the consnirators who
were assembled above, ascendea the ladder.
The first who went up was Ruthven, he was
followed by Ellis, after whom came an officer
whose name undoubtedly yon must have heard
mentioned, the unfortunate Smithers, who met
his death that night by the band of the prisoner
at the bar. Upon Ruthven's ascending the
ladder, one of the men below called out to
those above, as a signal for them to be upon
their guud; and when Ruthven had gained
the loft, Thistlewood, who was at a little dis-
tance from the landing place, and whom the
officer distinctly saw (for there were lights itt
the loft), receded a few paces ; the officers an-
nounced who they werci and deiiiauded die
surrender of the persons in the loft. Ruthven,
as I told you, was followed by Ellis, who drew
up close by him ; Smithers proceeded forward
in a direction to seize Thistlewood, the prisons,
who instantly retreated into one of those small
rooms' which I have described, and the moment
he saw Smithers approaching, he drew back
his hand, which hela a sword, «md inuiediatdy
thrust it ^i the unfortunate man ; he received
the wound near the heart, and had only time
to exclaim, '* Oh God, I am killed I" before he
sunk into the arms of Ellis and died. EUie
seeing the blow given by Thistlewood, imme-
diately discharged a pistol at him, whidi
missed its aim; a great confusion ensued; the
lights were struck out ; die officers were forced
down the ladder ; many of the party followed ;
Thistlewood amongst the rest came down, and
not satisfied v?ith the blood of one person
whom he had already killed, he shot at one of
the officers, as he descended the ladder, a man
of the name of Westcoatt ; he then proceeded
through the stable with his sword in his hand,
cutting at every one who attempted to oppose
him; and the soldiers at that moment not
having arrived at the spot, Thistlewood ran
into John-street, and so towards the BSgewaie
Road, and was not at that time taken. The
other persons were equally desperate in the
resistance tiie^ made ; eonsdoua of their pur-
pose, they waited not to know on what diarge
they were to be apprehended. You vrill fisid,
that Ings, Davidson, Tidd^ and Wilson, aU
made a desperate resistance^ and each of th^n,
I believe^ fired at the officers and soldkis who
7«9]
fw Higk TrtaiOH,
attempted to amtl tbem ; bat their reeistance
watf ineifectiial, and they were fortunately se-
cured. Davidson, logs, Tidd, Wilson^ Brad-
bum, Stnnge, Gilchrist, and Cooper, were
taken either in the street, or in the loft. The
only persons who then effected their escape,
out of the eleven comprised in the indictment,
were Brunt, Harrison, and Thistlewood. Se-
veral others, assembled upon that occasion,
whose names are not known, also made their
escape.
The officers not only secured the prisoners,
but possessed, themselves also of the various
articles of arms and ammunition that were in
the stable : they will be produced to you in
the course of the trial.
Brunt went home, and you will find by his
apprentice Hale, that he arrived therebetween
nine and ten o'clock; the boots which he wore
were covered with dirt. He was immediatdy
followed by another man, whose name the boy
does not know, but who, from the conversation
with Brant, was evidently one of the party at
Cato-stieet. When he appeared. Brunt was
rejoiced to see him; and from what passed.
Hale collected that they had been together,
and bad both escaped ; but that the stranger
had been seriously hurt by blows be bad re-
ceived. Brunt fancied that having so eicaped ,
his person had not been discovered, and that
no one would disclose the transaction. He
slept at home that night, but on the following
morning be rose early, called the apprentice
boy, asked him if he knew some street in the
Borough which he named, and stated that he
vranted him to take to that street two baskets,
which were in the room that had been let to
the prisoner Ings. Those baskets were tied
up 1^ Brunt, and one of them was wrapped
in an apron belonging to his wife, and which
had been nailed up against the vrindow of the
room occupied by Ings, for the purpose of
preventing observation. He had hanlly ef-
fected this operation, and gone into his ovm
room, when the officers who had received in-
formation that he was one of the party in
Cato^treet, entered the house, apprehended
bim, and at the same time seized the two
baskets. It was most important to Brunt to
have conveyed away those proofr of his guilt,
for in those baskets were contained srrenades,
fireballs, and other preparations which had
been made for accomplishing their design.
He aflected ignorance of the contents of die
baskets; but you will find, from evidence that
cannot be contradicted, that he had just packed
them, to be sent into the Borough.
Thistlewood did not return to his house in
Stanhope-street ; he secreted himself in a house
in White-street, Finsburv-equare, belonging to
a man of the name of Harris. Intimation,
however, was received by some of the police
that he was there concealed, and between ten
and eleven o'clock on the Thursday morning, a
party of officers, headed by Bishop, went for the
purpose of securing him. They first searched
the looms- up atain> and not finding him there,
A. D. 1820. r73Q
they descended to the ground floor, end observe*
ing a idoor, which on trying it was found to be
lodged, leading into a room opposite the sittipg
room of the people of the house, Bishop de-
manded the key, and knowing the desperation
and determination of the prisoner at the bar,
he opened the door as softly as he could. On
entering, he perceived that the window-ehuU
ten were closed ; but there were holes in them
to admit the light, by which he discovered the
prisoner Thistlevirood in bed. Thistlewood
raised hishead : Bishop, immediately recognised
him, and threw himself on the bed to secure
him ; and Thistlewood, perceiving that resist^
ance was unavailing, surrendered.
By these means the prisoner at the bar was
taken into custody, and here the nanrative of
the fiuts would naturally have closed, but theie
is one important ciicumstance whidi I have
omitted to mention, and vdiich I must now
bring to your notice. On the 23rd of February,
when they met at Brunt's room, previous to
going to Cato-street, after their plans were
discussed, tiieir objects avowed, and they had
resolved upon the assassination of his majesty's
ministers (thinking that by that event, such
dismay and confiuion would be every where
excited, that they should the more readily at-
tain the ulterior objects they had in view) they
held some further consultation as to what
should be done after that blow had been strudc.
I have already told you, that part of their plan
was, to set fire to certain buildinss; and
amongst others the King-street barracks, near
Portman-square, yrem fixed upon for conflag-
ration. Harrison, one of tne conspirators
(who had been, I am sorry to state to you, in his
migesty's service), vras acquainted with the
situation of that building; and had stated that
he could easily, by means of a window which
opened at the back part of the premises, and
communicated with a loft in which straw and
hay were kept, throw in one of the fire-balls,
which woula create great conftision among the
troops who were quartered there, and would
prefent their setting themselves and ihdr
horses accoutred, when they were called upon
to act.
Upon that occasion Thistlewood sat down
to write a proclamation addressed to the in«
habitants at large of this metropolis. For the
purpose of writing this proclamation, some
sheets of cartridge paper were wanted, and the
boy Hale v?as sent out to obtain it ; on his re-
turn, Thistlewood vrrote in large letters the
following words, or to the following effect :^
«Your tyrants are destroyed, the friends of
liberty are called on to come forward, as the
provisional government is now sitting." If
any doubt could be entertained of the ulterior
designs of these conspirators, and that they
were not confined to Che assassination of his
majesty's ministers, this proclamation would
put the matter out of all doubt i he vrrote two
or three copies of it— he read it aloud to the
parties assembled, and told them,' it was to b^
stuck up near the bouetf on fire, that the peo-
7311
1 GEOEGE IV.
Triai^AHhut TkuOemod
[73^
pie mig^ the mon leftdily see it. He after-
wards endeawnred to compoee another address
to be issaed to the soldiers. It contained a
call apoQ tkem to join the friends of liberty, and
a promise of their immediate dischaise, with
Aill pay for life, and a donation of 20/. to
take them to their respective homes. Whether
or not that address was absolutely completed
may be doubtiiil on the endence, but the pro-
clamation, of which I gave yx>u die substance,
was read by Thistlewood. . The written pro-
clamations were taken away by the prisoner,
but there will be no doubt whatever or the con-
tents of them ; they will be proved to you by a
person who heard them most distinctly.
I was stating, before I mentionel this im-
S>rtant circumstance, that I had nearly dosed
e narrative of the facts which will be proved
against the prisoner at the bajr, and I ask you,
if these facts §fe proved, wheUier any one of
yout calmly and dispassionately considering
Ahese facts, can entertain a doufai of the guilt
of the prisoner at the bar. What answer can
be given to them, I am at a loss to conjecture.
Will any be given, or attempted ? If no an-
swer be given by evidence, what can be said
by way of observation ? Will it be urged to
yoQ, that this plan was so wild in its nature,
•o impracticable in its execution, that its exist-
ence cannot be credited in a court of justice ?
Is that arffument to be used upon this occasion ?
Yon and I, judging of others by ourselves, are
Tery inadequate judges of the belief to be en-
tertained of the existence of a plan of thb sort.
If en, with heated passions, and a determined
purpose, conceive schemes which in themselves
may be impracticable, or not likely to be brought
to a successful result: but as the inventors
brood over them — as they consider their ma-
chinations from day to day-> they work them-i
selves up into a belief at last, that their
means are more powerful than they really are ;
th^ diminish the difficulties which are inter-
posed between the conception of their plan and
Its completion; they tancy that there are
other persons as widied as themselves, who
though -they cannot be prevailed upon, in the
first instance, to embark in their nefarious
schemes, will, when a blow is struck — ^when
something is done to excite their feelings and
their passions, immediately join the standard
of insurrection. You and I, gentlemen, rea-
soning calml^f may, as I have said, be very in-
adequate judges ot the workings of the minds
of men of this description; but facts will be
proved which admit of no solution, which al-*
low of no explanation, consistent with the in-
nocence of the prisoner and his associates.
Your judgment is not to be formed upon an
inquiry whether the scheme of these men was
practicable, or whether it could ever have en-
tered into rational minds. Those are not the
questions for your determination. If a plan
has been formed for the purposes chargea by
this indictment — however wild and however
visionary it may appear to you — if you are con-
fjinced that such a plan did enter into the
minds of the prisoners^ and that tbey took one
sinffle step towards its accomplishment, then^
and I state it without the hazard of contradic-'
tion, that conviction will justify a verdict of
guilty.
I have no doubt it will be stated to yon, that
many of the facts in the case are proved (for
they can only be so proved) by persons who
were participators in all the criminality of the
transaction : and it will be urged to you, with
great force, that accomplices are not to be be*
Ueved unless they are confirmed by other
witnesses. In plots of this nature, contrived in
secret, and which can only be effected by con-
cealment (I mean in their original concoction
and formation), if the testimony of an acoom*
plice were not to be received, perfect immuni-
ty would at once be held out to the inventors
of the blackest schemes. Fortunately, it is
neither the law of England, nor can it be the
law of any country that has reason for its
guide, that an accomplice in a crime cannot be
a witness to prove its existence. But as in this
case I am far from being anxious to press the
proof one iota further than it ought, m justice
to the community, to be carried, I freely ad-
mit that the testimony of an accomplice would
be received by you with the greatest jealousy
and caution ; you should watch the manner in
which he gives his testimony; you should
wagh the credibility of his story ; but above all
you should see whether he be or be not con-
firmed in the material parts of that stoiy by
other and uncontaminated evidence; not in
every particular, because if it were possible so
to coimrm him, then you need not his testimony
at all ; the witness by whom he could be so
supported would render the testimony of the
accomplice unnecessary. If his account is
corroborated to such an extent as to render his
whole testimony credible; if you find hioa
speakine truth in those parts cutable of, and
which flhall have received, connrmation, you
have a right, you are bound to conclude Uiat
the rest of his narrative is true. There are air-
ways in these transactions some things which
cannot be proved except by the participators
in guilt. No men contriving sudi a plan as
this would ever venture to discuss it iu the
presence of others whom they did not believo
to be fully prepared to go a*ll lengths with them
for the completion of it ; their secret deliber-
ations, known only to themtelves and to God,
cannot be divulged unless the testimony of
their accomplices be admitted. I say, there-
fore, ' to declare that an accomplice is not a
credible witness, that he is one upon whose
testimony a jury cannot act, would oe at once
to establish the principle that the darker the
design, the more netarious the purpose, the
greater shall be the immunity of the offend-
ers, the less their liability to detection. The
more heinous the crime, the more secret it will
naturally be kept ; and it will be utterly impos-
sible to bring to justice those who contrive and
execute schemes of villainy, unless the evi-
dence of others who have been to a certain ex*
7931
Jvir Hi^ TtaatM.
A. O. 1890.
[734
tent particlpaton in the guUt, can b» resoited
tO| and made available.
Not only » it the law of Bngland, but i^
is the daily practice of its courts, to admit the
testimony of accomplices. In trials for mur^
der, how often do you find not only that an
accomplice is received, but that reward and
pardon have been held out to him to induce
nim to become a witness against the accused ?
Happily for the ends of justice in this case,
no question of doubtful confirmation will
occur; a man of the name of Adams will be
called, a guilty accomplice witU the prisoners,
meeting them and consulting with them daily,
from the latter end of the month of January
till they assembled in Cato-street. He will
prove what passed when he was present, and
the acts to which he was a party. The ac-
count be will give you of the treasonable con-
spiracy will, in a variety of its leading circum-
stances, be so confirmed both by the oral
testimony of unimpeachable witnesses, and
the production of the arms found upon the
persons and in the houses of the conspirators,
and in the loft in Cato(>street, as to leave* I
fear, upon your minds, no doubt whatever of
the guilt of the unhappy man at the bar.
Another witness 1 shall present to you is
not so implicated ; I mean the man who first
communicated the transaction to lord Har-
rowby. To a certain extent he had been
made acquainted with the schemes of the
prisoners ; and had listened to the detail of
them, with apparent approbation ; but without
at all engaging in tl\em, he immediately dis-
closed what had been imparted to him.
We cannot idways account for the operations
of the human mind. Some men, if they had
once embarked in such a plot, might mistakingly
consider it an imputation upon their courage
to recede ; others, when the ultimate objects
of the conspirators were developed, might,
from disapprobation of them, or ftrom timidity,
withdraw tnemselves, and still be so unmindful
of their duty to society, and of their allegiance
to the kinff, as not to make known the mischiefs
that were m contemplation ; others, when they
came to reflect upon the matter, might feel that
they were bound to make it public — ^that they
were called upon by the common feelings of
humanity to avert from the devoted victims of
this bloody scheme the destruction that awaited
them. Hiden is of the last description, and is
no a«dit to be paid to this man r is his testi-
mony such as you are to discredit; Weigh it
in the scales of caution, scrutinize it anxiously,
bat permit me to observe that I see nothing
in the conduct of 'Hiden on this occasion to
impeach his Teracity.
A person will W called to you, of the name
of Dwyer, who was supposed undoubtedly by
Thistlewood and some of the others, to be
worthy of their confidence, and who was ex-
jiected to assist them on the eTening of the
23rd. Haring had a previous acquaintance
with Davidson, Dwyer was applied to on the
momiDg of that memorable day; they com«
mnnlatted to him their intention of meeting ia
the evening at Cato-street, for the homble
purpose, of attacking his majesty^s ministers, at
lord Harrowby's. He almost instantly eom«
municated it to an officer in the army, with a
desire that he would make his majesty's minis-
ters acquainted vnth it; and that was accor«
dingly done.
"Box this is not the whole of the case on the
part of tlie prosecution — ^it will not depend
upon the testimony of Adams, Hiden, and
Dwyer only, for there are facts in this ease
requiring, on the part of the prisoner, such ait
explanation as I am afraid it will be impossible
for him to give, but which, unless he does give
will put the seal to his guilt. What was the- pur-
pose for which these persons were assemol^
m Cato-street on that night f Men with no
common bond of union — not related to each
other— not connected with each -other, except
in the nefarious schemes they had in contem*
plation — are found assembled in a stable, ^n
an obscure street, with a large collection of
arms of the description I hare given you. In
addition to those instruments of mischief which
were seized by the officers and soldiers in
Cato-street, there were found in the bouses of
two of these persons, Tidd and Brunt, other
materials and implemeRts of death. For what
purpose, I ask, it their object was confined to
the murder of Ins majesty's nunistess, were
eleven or twelve hundred rounds of cartridaee
procured ? Why were Quantities of grenades
and fire-balls prepared r For other objects
and other purposes than the attack in Grosvenor-
square; for the objects (described, and the
purposes charged in this iiidictment.
I cannot anticipate that the learned counsel
to whom the prisoner has confided his defence^
will put it upon this issue. I am convinced it
will not be contended that this plan was to
begin and end in the assassination of his
majesty's ministers. His majesty's minis-
ters I had they, as individuals, offended any
of these prisoners? — ^Had they, as indivi-
duals, excited in the minds of these men
any motives for reyenge ? No^ gentlemen^
the blow was not aimed at them as individuals ;
it was directed against them for the official
character which thev filled. It was not against
the earl of Harrowby that the dagger was to
be raised, but against the president of the
council. It was not the earl of Liverpool
who was marked by the conspirators for de-
struction— a nobleman whose person probably
they might not know, and who could never have
offended them in thought, word, or action ; it
was the first lord of the treasury they intended
for their victim. Can you doubt that when
they meditated the destruction of his maj^sty^
ministers, they contemplated it as an act
which was to be the commencement of that
wild and visionary reyolution they had ia
view ; and with the intention of establishing
that provisional government alluded to in die
proclamation the prisoner Thistlewood had
I drawn up } Can any in^n^ much len penoBH
7351
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial tfAfihwr TkUUeotood
C736
in yoar ttadoa aiid rank of society. Imagine a
niotiT« for this contptracrf against his majesty's
ministeiSy if the snbTersion of the gorerament
was not the «lterior object «f the conspira-
Ion?
With these ftets before you, I shall not
fatigae you by the detail of many minute dr-
cumstances in which the principal witnesses
will be strongly confirmed. I will not allude
to the eridenee which will come from uncon*
laminated sources, particularly from the ap«
prentice of Brant, who was no participator m
the guilt of his master. If the case rested on
the evidence of those alone who may be termed,
by the prisoner's counsel, partidpators in the
crime, you will have facts proved by them
which must lead you to the unavoidable con-
clusion that the charge in the indictment is
substantiated. What was the conduct of
the prisoners when they were surprised in
die loft f I assure you, I am most desirous
that that conduct should not be considered by
you any further than as it tends to the conclu-
sion of the guilt or innocence of the prisoners
on the charge you are sworn to dedae. The
officejrs endeavoured to secure them. If they
were there for an innocent purpose, why did
not they surrender when tne officers called
upon them to do so P What was their conductf
-—the most determined, the most ferodous ;
one of the officers is inhumanly killed, and
Others are attacked and fired at. Do not mis-
understand me ; as fkr as the death of the un-
Ibrtunate Smithers is concerned, you are not
trying the prisoner at the bar for tliat act ; but
you are bound to take all their acts in the
stable into your consideration, they cannot be
dismissed from it. It is a &ct in the case,
that they resisted the dvil power by all the
means they had, to the utmost extremity. ITie
Erisoner at the bar effects his escape, flies firom
is dwelling-house and secretes himself in a
different part of the town, and is there (bund.
With all these facts before you, if they shall
be proved, let me ask you, as reasonable men,
what conclusion can you draw from them
favourable to the prisoner ?
The issue of this case is undoubtedly of the
very deepest importance to the unfortunate
man who stands before you ; it involves not
only his clnracter, but his life. On the other
hand, reflect upon the importance of it to the
community at large. — If this plot was contrived,
if this man invented or adopted it, and the
means were used which I have described to
you to carry it into execution, can you hesitate
to do that act of justice to your country which
such evidence imperiously calls upon you to
perform?
When the period for making up your minds
upon this momentous question arrives, you
will weigh the evidence calmly and dispas-
sionately ;— if you think the scale preponderates
in favour of the prisoner, an event I own that
I cannot anticipate, you will satisfy your con*
sciences by finding him not guilty ; but if all
Ae facts pio?ed inevitably tend to the condu- 1
don of guilk ; if the charges against theprisoner
at the bar be substantiated, il will be your
indispensable duty, however painful that duty
may be, to pronounce a verdict of guilty.
Mr. Gumey, — ^It will be necessary that the
other prisoners should be present for the pur-
pose of their persons being identified.
Mr. AdoipkuM. — ^My lord, I have to request
that the witnesses forthe crown may be directed
to withdraw until their examinations, I do
not desire it of any persons in a respectable
situation of life, or of the police officers-
Mr. Aitomeu Gtnend, — ^Under those cir-
cmnstances I should wish that all the vritnesses
should retire. The witnesses for the crown
will be out of court throughout the triaL
Lord Chief Jtutke Abbatt-^lhe solidtor for
the prisoner will take care then that the wit-
nesses for the prisoner shall be out of court.
EVIDENCE FOB THE PEOS^CCTION.
Robert Adami sworn* — Examined by Mr.
Sniicitor.Gaieral.
Where do you live?— No. 4, Hole-in-the
vrall Passage, Brook's-market.
What are you by trade ? — ^A shoemaker.
Were you ever m the army ?— Yes.
In what regiment ?^The royal regiment of
Horse-guards.
How long is it since you left that service? —
Eiriiteen years last Christmas eve.
Did you know the prisoner John Thomas
Brunt ? — Yes.
Where did you first become acquainted with
him P — At CttDdbray, in France.
By what name did he then go?— Ibomas
Morton.
How long is that ago?— In 1816, 1 think.
Do you know the prisoner Thistlewood P —
Yes.
When did you first know him? — Oo the
13th of January last.
Where did he live at that time ?— ^In Stan-
hope-street, Clare^market.
Where did you see him first on the 13th of
Januaiy ? — In his own room, the two pair front
room.
How came you to go there? did you go
alone, or did any person go with you ? — ^I was
introduced by Brunt and logs.
When you saw Thistlewood, what conversa-i
tion passed at the meeting on the 13th of
January ?
Mr. Ado^tkui, — I submit that this cannot be
evidence. This indictment charges a conspir-
ing against the person and government of our
sovereign lord the king, that is, the now king
George the fourth ; the witness is talking now
of a conversation on the 13th of January ; that
was during the reign of the late, king.
Mr. Solicitor- General, — I am giving evidence
of the conversation^ not of acts. * ^ «
7371
Jw High Treason.
A. D« 1820.
1738
Lard Ckkf Jmtke AbbatL-^^ppoOiag that
the scheme began in the reign of the late king,
but was intended to be carried into effect in
the reign of the present king, we must hear
the whole story.
Mr. Adoiphm, — T would submit whether that
which passed on the 13th of January, must not
be considered as referring to the then king.
Lard Chief Justice Abbott, — We cannot refuse
to hear the commencement of the scheme.
Mr. AdolpkuM. — ^Then my objection will be
too late.
Lord Chief Jmtice Abbott.—The jury will of
course be informed, that the parties cannot be
convicted on this indictment, ifthe intention was
only to depose his late majesty : but if, having
commenced in his late majesty's reign, they
haye gone on with the intention to depose his
5 resent majesty, then it will apply to the in-
ictment : we must hear the whole of it ; if it
stopped short there, then it would not apg|j to
the indictment.
'b/Lr^Solidtor-GeneroL — When you were intro-
duced to Thistlewood by Brunt and Ings, what
passed P — I was introduced into the room by
Brant ; on going into the room Brunt said to
Thistlewood, " This was the man I was speak-
ing to you about.'' Thistlewood said, ''you
were once in the life-guards.''
He said that to you ? — ^Yes.
What did you say to that i — ^No, I said, I
was not ; I originally belonged to the Blues.
He said, " I presume you are a good swords-
man." I tola him I could use a sword suffi-
cient to defend myself, but I could not say I
was so clerer in the sword as I was some years
back, not being in the habit of using a sword
or anus of any description for some time. On
this he began to allude to the genteel people
of this country, endeaTouring as much as he
could to make them mean and contemptible ;
saying there was not one who was wotth ten
pounds, that was worth any thing for the good
of bis country.
Did any thing further pass at that time ? —
Yea. As to the shopkeepers of London, he
Mid they were a set of aristocrats altogether,
and vere all working under one system of go-
▼emment, that he should glory to see the oay
that all the shops were shut up, and were
Slandered. . His discourse then turned upon
Ir. Hunt; that Mr. Hunt was a damned
coward, and a man that was no friend to the
people ; and he had no doubt, were he to get
nto Whitehall, and exaoune the books, he
sfaonld find Ids name there as a spy for govem-
iBcnt.
That if he, Thistlewood, got into WhttehaU,
he diould find his name on the books of go<i
Tenunent aaa^spy?— rVes. .
How long did this interview last?«~I have
BOt^one. He neit turned bis discourse upon
Mr.Gbbbctt, saying Mr. Cobbett, with all
bin wriliagi, was cf no good to the oonatiy ;
ai|id that ha was a sttn.tbatdidjiot.wifh them.
VOL. XXILIIL
well ; and (hat he had no doubt. he was a spy
equally the same as Mr.. Hunt himself. I
believe that finished the discourse, so fi&r as I
can recollect.
You had afterwards the misfortune to be
confined in White-croes prison for debt ? — ^Yes,
I had.
When was that?— On the 17th; it was
prior to the 17th.
Some other conversations' took place between
you and Thistlewood, before you went to
prison ? — ^Yes.
I do not want to go into the whole of them ?.
— There were several before the 17th.
Where did those interviews take place?—
The next interview I had with Mr. Thistlewood
was on Sunday the 16th.
Where was that ?— At the White Hart.
Where is the White Hart? — In Brook's-
market. It is kept by a person of the name of
Hobbs.
What kind of room was that? was it a
room belonging to the public house, or a room
in a back yard? — ^A room in a back yard ; a
small room.
Was any person present besides Thistlewood,
at that conversation ? — ^Yes ; Ings, Brunt, Hall,
and in the course of the forenoon, before it
broke up, there was Tidd.
Mr. Cun90od,^Wi\l your lordship excuse
me
Mr. SoUdtor^enertd,'-! am not going to
ask as to any thing that passed at that meeting ;
I have no objection to your asking to it ; but
it is not necessary, and therefore I vriH not
take up the time. You afterwards, you say,
went to prison T — Yes.
How long did you remain there ? — I came
out on Sunday, the day after the death of the
king.
Inat was on the 30th ?— Yes.
Afteryou came out, did you go to any place
where lliistlewood was present?— >! saw him,
on the Monday evening, the 31st.
Where was it you saw him t — I saw him in
a room on the same floor where Brunt lives ;
in a back room.
Where is that ? — I cannot exactly tell you
the number in the court.
What is the name of the court ?^FoxpCOurt,
Gray's«inn«lane ; it runs from Gray's*inn-lane
to Brook-street.
Who were present at that meeting besides
Thistlewood ?— There were Brunt, Ings, HalV
and Davidson. I cannot charge my memory
at this moment with any body else.
Whatconvenation took place at that meet-
ing ? — Nothing particular took place that ni^t-
to m^ reooUeetion.
Did you meet them, on the following night,
on the Tuesday 7 — ^I cannot reeoUect wheSieti
I did or not.
When did you meet them again, according
to the best of your recollection? — To the best
of my recollection, I met them on theWcdoaa-
day evening*
3B
1991
I GBOXQE IV.
Trial cfAritur TkisAnood
tMQ
Who wete prtaenl on that Wednesday ?-<«<
ThisUewood, fimnt^ Davidson, Harrison and
£dward!».
What passed at that meeting ?
Mf« Ga'wood.^l moat ob^ to. thai, my
K>rd, because it is an overt act not stated on
this indictment. They hate stated a okeeting
on the 5th of Febraary, at the parish of Mary.
]ie*boiie, and at diveia other tines and places.
I apprehend '^ dken other tinea and pUces*'*
is not a sufficient statement to give the prisoner
notice to be prepared, I am well avare, that
even a substantive treason may be given i« evi-
dence to support an overt act of anoSier treaaon ;
hut in this case, wbeva they have stated the
overt act of meeting, wiAhont designating either
time or phiee, I humbly apprehend it is not
sncb a meeting as can be given in evidence
nnder ihat avemenft. It i& necessary to state
the overt act on the indictment, that the pri^i
sonar maybe prepared to eontradiet thie account
given of that meeting. That is my short
objection ; if I have made it oadeeitQOd, that
is all I desire.
LfFd Chkf Justice AbboU.-'Vxis is the
invariable form of every indictment, drawn
either for high treason or conspiracy, that the
parties met and did such and such acts, and
iio objection has ever been taken to the gene-
rality of such an averment ; if that objection
eould prevail, and* it were held necessary to
setout) the time and place of every conversation,
it wauifad lead to infinite prolixity and inconve^
]»ienoe«
Mr. Cunoood,—! thought it my dqty to
submit thool^ectiou.
Lord Chief Justice Abbott. — I shall be happy
to attend to any objection which occurs to
you, Mr. Curwood.
>i
Mn SoSeitcr Oeneroi.-— What passed upon
diat occasion ?— Nothing particular passed
mpon that occasion, only that I saw a number
01 those pike staves. Thisllewood was anxions
to have them feruled, and as far as I oonld
vndesstand, Thistleweod expressed hiaoeelf
rather surprised that Bradbnra was not oeme.
Is that bfadbnm the prisonet ^--^Yes.
What w^ findhuni by trBde?--That I
cannot say. Davidson in particufair began to
ttpressbtinBelf d isHtisftedbeoanseThietlftwood
said that Bradbum. had been supplied with
S|oney to bey finules to pot upon tboae stavaa,
and that they- wave not done«
Were those staves in the roosn ad the time ?
Wlliey wete.
In what state were ther^-^llKy warn quite.
RreoB, 9CfA appealed as if they had jnat come
ftaaa thi ooanciy*
Sute any thing further that passed at that
ipeeting^^^fter DavJdsoB eipeessed hisieelf
dissati&ed with Bradbum not coming forward
te ierale the scicka for the pikes, he said he
** would not give a damn for the bmui; he
dare fey he bad speot the mooegr ;
like him was not worthy of considefation.'
Do you know any thing else that passed at
that meeting ^--Theie was nothing else Either
than Thistlewood making a reply, ^ No, ao."
I do not ask you as to any thing that passed
relative to these disputes, but on any other
subject? — ^I do not remember that any thing
furmer passed.
How often were those meetings heldf —
Those meetings were held twice a day.
U|> to what time were they held twiee a
day ? — ^Up to the 23rd of February.
from the time you came out of prison I —
Yes, they were in that room.
Did you collect from them who had hired
the room? — Yes, I heard Brunt say he had
hired the room for Ings.
Did he say for what purpose the room had
been hired ? — No, he did not ; I can only con-
jecture for what it was hired.
Was there any furniture in the room f — ^No,
except a stove tiiat was fixed.
But the meetings continued to be held there
from the 81st of January te the 2drd of fe*
bruary, in that room ?— Yes.
When did you go there again? — I oanaee
ehaige my memory exactly, but I can recoilesi
one circumstance particularly. One eveaing
about nine or ten d^ys before the fimeial el tin
king, I went up into the room where a sseetittg
was held ; there was Thistleweod and Har-
rison sitting hf the fire ; they were in deep
discourse, and dieie were two chairs; th^
made room for me to sit down ; Harcisoa sat
in the middle, and Thisdewood on one' side
and 1 on the other : they began to teU me th»
discourse that had passed between tiieak
Harrison told Thistlewood he had aiet wkh
one of the life-guards, who told him, thai all
the life-guaids that ooukt be spared, and eoali
be mounted, erould be at the foneral oi the
king ; and likewise aa many foot^geaids as eonld
be spared, and likewise the- police ofikers*
Hanison said it struck bias, after he left thie
life-guardsman, that this would be a favouMibla
opportunity for whiA they had in view, as the
fcoldiers would be oat of town, and the pobee
officers as well ; that it would be a v«ry la*
vonrable opportaatty to kkk op a row, aad
see what they could do that night..
Harrisan stated this to TUsticwaod ?-^Yes,
and then Thistteweod iasprof ed it ; afteswasda
Thistlewood laid a plan.
What did IWstlewood sqr ?-i«-1h «puts flMt
with' his appBobafion, he said it eertaialy wowidi
be a very flivomrable opportaaity, and'hefaidrBa
doi^ pnoiided they osuld take. theed» nm
pieces of cannon from Oray's-inn-lane^ anii iha
s2x pmes o€ cannon finn th* iUliUeiy ^eaasd,
that ttmy woald have an epportuntty^ bsfinai
morning, to put themself ee latp- the '~
ofLeiJeD.-
IWhat imtlier pasaadt^maliuwoa^
agreed witb the plan> aote as thfie, be woi^.
if onee it began had if coasaBaucalioac
fmaLhadoiLto.WittlK»r /ta inieiBa Qm
74H]
^r High rrMCOfi.
A- D. leM^
174*
her« (hill lfa«y were to o^ne to Le&doii, tfaejr
would be BO tired when they got to London
ihej wovld not be able to do any thing.
What fortber passed ? ^ Mr. Thistlewood
eaid^ he thought oy persevering after thev had
get the cannon, it might be so ordered that
Ibey €0^kl go to Hyde Park and prevent any
orderly leaving London to go to Windsor to
wake any communication ctf what bad pasted
in London.
Was any thing further said ! — ^la the next
|)laee be Mid it would be highly necessary to
go to the telegraph, over the wateri and take
possession of that to prevent any intelligence
being conveyed to Woolwich; he next proj^>tted,
as he thought by this time they should be able to
form a provisional government, to seek for a pro*
visional governmeot| and for that provisional go-
▼emment to send down to the sea-ports to pre*
ventanygentlemen being permitted to leave this
country without a passport from the provisional
government, he particularly mentioned Dover^
Brighton, Ramsgate, and Margate, and last of
all he bethought himself that Brighton would
be the most particular plaee of any ; he said it
ifrottld be neoessary to take a force down there
auficieat to take it, ** not that I suppose the
new king will be able to be there at that time,
or even to be at the funeral of his father," he
did not consider he was well enough, but ** it
ytrill be necessavy to go down there to prevent
any person leaving it; and as to the prince
regent or the king» we cannot think of his ever
wearing tbe crown, the present family have
inbelited the crown long enough.'^
Did any other persons come into the room
during that meeting that evening P — Ings and
brunt.
What did you say about uot wearing the
crown ^ — He said, '*! think it is no use the
new king even thinking of wearing the crown*"
Vou liave told us, at first Harrison and This-
tlewood and youreelf were there ; did any other
persons come in ?— Brunt and Ings were not
iA the room at the time this conversation
pnss^, but they came in aflerwards.
After they came in^ was any thing said to
tbem ? — Thistlewood got up and went to Brunt
and Ings. and oommunicated what Harrison
had brought, as to what might be done on the
night of the funeral of the king ; Brunt and
Ings heard what he had to say, but thfy both
positively declared that there was nothing
short of the assassination wbich they had in
view, that would satisfy them.
The assassination of whom ?-^0f the min-
isters.
Had any conversation taken plaoe on that
sulnect before?— Yes*
At that« or a former meeting ?-<— At a former
WiU you tell us what that eonversatioa was
ttspeetxng the assassination ? what that plan
ivns )-^I asked tbem frequently what was the
pUa, but the first meeting I had with Brunt
he told me what was the intentioQ.
./ Wbaldidbaiay?— AmM thfRwecelwo
or three of tbem who bad drawn out a plan .
wich a view to assassinate the ministers the
first cabinet dinner that they had.
Was there any talk either at that meeting of
which you have just spoken, or at any former
meeting, about this assassination ? *-i- They
never scarcely met but that was the objecV
part of it.
Was any thing said as to what was to be
done, besides the assassination of the minis>>
ters? — Not at that time.
Not before that meeting when the conversi^
tion took place about the funeral ? — No.
Do not speak to any thing which took placf
after that meeting where the conversation took
plaoe about the king^s funeral, because we will
go to that by and by, but do you recoUeet any
thing further respecting the former meeting 1-^
I cannot charge my memory with any thing
further.
You say you saw some pike staves in that
room ; was there any thi^g but the pike staves
carried into that room ?— >Ye8.
Confine your atatement for the present to
any thing previous to the meeting at which the
king's funeral was spoken of, was there any
thing carried into the room previous to that
time ^^— I cannot pay whether there were pre*
vious to that time, afterwards there were, \
cannot charge my memory as to the exact dates
until I come to the 19tlt of February.
What day of the week was that? — The
Saturday.
What time in the day did you go there?— i
Between eleven and twelve o'clock in the fore*
noon.
This room in Fox-<court } — Yes.
Who was there at that time ? — I saw This«
tlewood, Davidson, Harrison, Ings, Brunt and
Hall.
Tell us, in the order of time as accurately aa
you can, every thing that took* place at that
meeting, every thing that was said and every
thing that was done ? — On the Saturday the
19th, on my going into the room they were all
set round the room seemingly in a sort of con*
fusion, in a deep study. I had not been in
scarcely a minute before they all got up and
turned themselves short round upon their heels«
saying, '< Well, then, it is agreed we are come
to the determination then if nothing eeeurs
between this and neat Wednesday night, next
Wednesday night we will go to work.'' It was
said that they were all so poor that they coukl
not wait any longer. Thistlewood directly pro*
posed that a committee shenld sit to-morrow
morning, on the Sunday at nine o'clock, in
order to draw out a plan to go by what they
were to do. Thistlewood said to Brunt *' you
bad better go round this afternoon and ao<}uaiiit
what men you think you can bring forward, in.
order to bring tbem to the committee to-aer-
Xow morning." Brunt aaid he had sot some
work to finish, and he did not think he should
have any time^ but he might get up in the
morning and acquaint a fow that they might
I nHeadf but they did not want ^ great many to
748]
1 GEORGE IV.
Triat tfArtktr TUHUmod
[744
be in the rooniy Brant appeared as if he was
leaving the room, and Thistlewood seemed to
recollect himself, and said, ^ oh, Brant, it will
be highly necessary for all that attend the com-
mittee to>morrow morning to bring arms with
them in case any officers should come up/'
On this Brant said, ** damn my eyes, if any
officers was to come into this room I would ran
tiiem through, murder them, and take care after
I bad done it, it should never be found out.''
This, to the best of my recollection, finished
what I saw on the Saturday in the evening, I
did not go up on the Sunday moraing till just
turned of eleven o'clock I entered the room.
Who were in the room at that time?
how many? — On going into the room, what
with the fog and thickness of the snow, the
room was in a state of darkness. I made to-
wards the fire-place, but it was so dark I could
scarcely tell who they were till one spoke to
ine ; that was Tidd : he said, *' How do you do,
Adams" f— I said, '^Is it you, Tidd 1 1 did not
know who it was."
Did you afterwards collect, from the con-
versation and the looking around you, who
were there ? — ^Yes, I did.
Who were there P— There were Thistlewood,
Brant, Ings, Hall, Davidson, Harrison, Cook,
Bradbura, Edwards, myself, and Wilson.
Will you tell us what took place at that meet-
ing P tell us it in the order of time ? — A very
little while after this, I found that the business
they had met upon, which was to begin at nine
o'clock, had not been entered on. Mr. Thistle-
wood, on looking round and counting the
number of heads, says, ** I think it is high
time gentlemen to begin the business." Count-
ing the heads and seeing there were twelve,
he said, " I think that is quite enough to form
a committee.*' On this Mr. Tidd was pro-
posed to take the chair.
Thistlewood proposed that Tidd should take
the chair ? — ^Ycs. Tidd takes the chair, and he
takes a pike, and he sits with a pike in his
hand.; Mr. Thistlewood standing up on his left,
and Brant upon his right. Thistlewood began.
Says he, *' Gentlemen, I presume you all know
what you are met here for," tuning his head to
the door with an allusion tliat he would not
name what they had met for, or call the names
of the different ministers over, but he turned
to the door and said, ^* the west-end job.*'
Brant perceiving this, said, ** Damn my eyes,
never mind, mention their names, what signi- .
fies ? *' He was called to order directly from
the chair. On this Thistlewood speaks again
he says, ^'Gentlemen, we are come to this
determination, as we are all of us tired in wait-
ing so long for the doin^ this job, and as we«
find there is no probability of their meeting
all together—*'
Of whose meeting til together ?-~Of the
ministers. ** If in case they do not dine all
together between this and Wednesday night
we are come to a determination within our-
selves to take them separately at their own
Jiouses; we shall not have such an oppoitwiity
i
of destroying so manj as provided they were
to dine all together: it we take them separately,
we must content ourselves with getting two or
three or four, as we can get them. I sup-
pose,'' says he, ** it will take as much as forty
or fifty men to do the west-end job with : and
I propose, at the same time, that the two
pieces of cannon in Gray*s-inn lane shall he
taken, and the six pieces of cannon at the
Artillery-ground shall be taken.'' Cook pro*
poeed himself to take the lead, and take the
command upon himself, at the taking of those
cannon. He proposed, after these were taken,
taking the Mansion-house as a seat for the
provisional government; then they were to
make an attempt upon the bank of England : he
directly proposed, that Mr. PaUn should be the
man that should be intrasted to set fire to the
different buildings in different parts of London.
Was Palin to do this by himself ?— If you
will let me go on in m^ statement. To the
best of mv recollection this pretty well finish-
ed Mr. Inistlewood's plan tnat morning, and
he said there was time enough between that
and Wednesday night to improve it, as they
could not come to any decision what time to
begin, but they should have time between that
and the Wednesday night to settle all that.
He said he should drop the subject for the pre-
sent, as Brant, or Mr. Brunt (I cannot exactly
recollect which of the two), had a proposition
to make to them, respecting the assassination
of the ministers, how it was to be done. On
this Brant coming forward to state his pian,
Thistlewood said, ** Stop, this proposition I
have said to the men in the room had better
first be put from the chair, to see whether
tiiey are all agreeable to what has been said."
Thistlewood said to the chairman, " Yoo had
better, before you put the question, ask them
all round separately whether they are agreeable,
or whether any of them have any thing to say
on what has been said." It was put by the
chairman. The chairman asked several of
them whether they had any thing to say on
what had been said ; nobody speaking, it was
Imt from the chair, and was carried unanimona-
y. Mr. Brunt now came forwards with a
proposition that he had to make. He propo^
sed that as many of the ministers as they conld
form an idea that they could assassinate, that
it should be done on Wednesday night, witk-
out an opportunity occurred that the miniateta
dined all together between this and the Wed-
nesday night. That as many men as they ooold
get together that would go forwards to the as-
sassination of the ministers, as many as they
thought they could assassinate, those men should
be divided into separate lots. After the men
were so lotted, he proposed then that out of
each lot there should be a man drawn for the
sole purpose of assassinating the party that they
went to do ; and whoever it fell upon to do the
assassination, that man should be bound to do
it, or be murdered himself. Whatever man
the lot fell upon to do the part of the Mtmti"
nation, if he attempted the deed, and fatted
745]
Jar Higft TreatoM.
A. D. 1820.
[746
in doing it| he swore bv all that was good, that
man shonld be run through upon the spot.
Upon this I got up myself, and said to Mr.
Brunt, ** I wish to ask you this question upon
the few words you have drawn : Do you sup-
-pose it is not possible for a man to go and
attempt to. do a thing like that, and for the
man to fail in it ? Do you mean to say that
that mai9 so fiailtng shall be run through upon
the spot himself?" He said, *' No, certamly
not ; unless the man that attempts it, if there
is the least sign of cowardice attached to it, I
say that he riiall be run through : but, if he
fails in doing it, if he is thought to be a good
nan, of course he shall not be run tJirough/'
Mr. Brunt here dropped his discourse for the
present. It was put the same as the measure
of Mr. Thistlewood, from the phair and it was
agreed to. Two minutes after this, before any
thing had occurred, in came Palin, Potter, and
Strange; they were asked to sit down by the
fire, being wet, being covered with snow.
Palin came and sat down next to me ; as to
the other two I cannot say. Thistlewood im-
mediately proposed, or at least told them that
the two plans they had drawn up between them-
selves, and whicn had been proposed by him
and Brunt, had been stated ; but as they were
not in the room at the time they were stated,
be thou^t it highly necessary those plans
should be stated to them.
Did he relate them to them ? — ^Yes, the same
as before ; Mr. Thistlewood his plan, and Mr.
Brunt his, and they agreed to them the same
as the rest had done. After this had been gone
through by Mr. Thistlewood and Brunt, Palin
gets up and says, "Mr. Chairman, I have a few
words that I wish to speak on what has been
dropped by Mr. Thistlewood and Mr. Brunt.
Agrreeing as I do with the plans that have
been proposed, and bavins been one amongst
tiie number that have held up my hand to as-
sent to it, there is one thing I want to know :
there are so many objects you have proposed to
carry all at one time, certainly it it can be
done it will be a great acquisition to what we
have in view, but this is what I want to know :
yoa talk of taking from forty to fifty men to
the west-end job ; now I should be glad to
know where you are to find those men that
will take this cannon at Gra/s-inn-lane ?
Those cannon at the Artillery-ground, where
they are to come from ? No doubt you know
better what strength you have got than I do :
as for my own part I can give no satisfactory
answer at the present what strength or what
men I can bring forward to assist me ; but I
want to know, in the next place, before my
going round to the men I intend to call upon
tills afternoon, whether I may be intrusted,
from the committee, to communicate to them
what is to be done, and then I shall better
know how to act. I want to know," says he,
** io calling npon the men^ whether I can have
the liberty to tell them in part, if not in full,
what is to be done, and when they will be
waoted V* The cbairmaoi tunung his head to
Thistlewood and to Brunt, says, ^ I suppose
Mr. Palin there is no doubt but what he knows
what kind of men he will have to depend upon,
he will know of course whether he can depend
upon the men in case he states what the plan
is, and when they will be wanted. If Mr.
Palin gets men of that description that he can
depend upon, I do not see where the harm
will be in nis communicating to them what is
to be done/'
That was the answer given to Palin ? — ^Yes,
it was agreed to by Mr. Thistlewood and Brunt
too, the chaitman, for Mr. Palin to have that
liberty. Mr. Palin, finding he had liberty to
act in that kind of way, sat himself down and
seemed satisfied. This finished the business
to the best of my recollection; there was no-
thing transacted regularly in the chair after
that, but they began to think of going home
to get their dinner, in order to go in the after-
noon round to their difierent men. On this,
Mr. Thistlewood, all on a sudden, turned him-
self round to Brunt, and said, ''Oh, Bnint,
well thought of, npw Mr. Palin is here, I would
advise you to take him to the spot close by,
and see whether it is practicable or not." That
was, to go and see the new Fumivars*inn
building in Holbom, to see whether it was
practicable to clap fire to it.
Fox-court is close by Fumival's-inn, I be-
lieve ? — Yes, it is.
In consequence of that, did they go out ?—
In consequence of that Mr. Thistlewood said,
** as it is not far, Mr. Palin and you go up to-
gether, and return here, and give a report in."
Did they go? — ^They went, and were out of
the room, I suppose, for the space of ten
minutes to the best of my recollection.
Palin and Brunt ? — Yes.
Were you there when they returned?— I
was ; when Palin and Brunt came back, Mr.
Palin gave it in that it was a very easy job,
very easily done, and it would make a damned
good fire ; on this they began to depart. I do
not recollect that Mr. Palin continued in the
room after that, but a very little while ; but
before they left the room, Mr. Thistlewood
said he thought it would be highly necessary,
eitherTuesday or Wednesday, to get what men
they could together, and to give them a treat ;
but he did not know how this was to be ac-
complished, we are all so poor. Brunt turning
himself sharp round on his heels, he was
standing by tne fire, walked across the room,
came back again—'' Damn my eyes, I have
not done little or no work for some time, but I
have got a pound note for that purpose, and I
will be damned if I do not spend it upon the
men we have got."
Upon that, did you. separate at that time T
»Not just directly : on tuis Thistlewood aaidy
^ Where can you take them to, I should sop-
pose we might have the room below stairs at
the White Hart'^ Brunt replied, <' I do not
know; I do not much like to go there after
what has been said, but never mind. I dom>t
see tiiat we have no cause, as time gets qb, to
7473
1 GfiORCE IV.
Trial qf-^iur TUiUevtood
[7#6
be afraid of the bloody traps; for if- they
come into the room they should not go out
again." On this he bethought himself that be
tould send his apprentice^ and his own soQ|
out of the way by giving them a holiday, and
that then he could have bis own room ; but
he thought he should still call and hear what
llobbs should say.
Hobbs is the landlord of the White Hart ?
— Ycsy be is. Thistlewood at the same time
said he would take them up to his room ; but
directly after, on giving it a second thought,
he said '' No, that will not do, as there is an
officer that lives so opposite to me, that if that
officer should perceive men oomiog backwards
and forwards to my place it will be a means of
givine some suspicion there is something in
it.** 1 believe, to the best of my recollection,
that finishes the Sunday morning business.
AVhen did you meet again ? — ^They met on
the Monday rooming ; but I beg leave to state
one circumstance that occurred in the interval
of that time, of the meeting breaking up on
the Sundair morning^ and my calling on the
Monday mominj^ : on the Sunday evening t
went to the White Hart —
You must not tell us what passed with
any body else. You went and had a commu-
nication with Hobbs at the White Hart? —
Yes.
That cannot affect the prisoner at the bar ;
therefore you must uot state that« — ^Then we
must drop that; but the principal part of what
took place on the Monaay morning arose in
oonsequeace of that
Tell Us what took place on the Monday
morning, and, as far as that is material, it will
come out in Ibat narrative ? — On the Monday
morning, I went into the room about ten
o*clock.
Was the prisoner at the bar, Tliistlewood,
there ? — Yes.
Who else? — Brunt, Harrison, Hall, and
Ings ; I cannot charge my memory as to the
others.
What took place ? — ^They asked me how I
did. I told them rather unwell, I seemed to
be rather down in the mouth. What passed
at the moment I cannot precisely say, but I
said to them, '' Gentlemen [ have something
to communicate to you.'^ They all turned
their eyes upon me directly, they wanted to
Icnow what 1 had to say. On this, I commu-
< nicated to them what I had oommunicated to
«ne the evening before.
You told them what had passed between
you and some other person on the Sunday
night ? — ^Yes.
Who was that other person P — Mr* Hobbs,
of the White Hart.
Tell us what you told them > — ^I told them
that Hobbs had told me that there had been a
couple of oflScers, one fromHatton-^garden and
another from Bow-street, to ask him wiiethet
tiiere was not a radical meeting held there.
I told them, as Hobbs told me, there Was in»
formation at Bow-street office, and Likewise
at Jord Sidmouth'a- o6ke, that there was f
meeting of that description held at his houseg
the White Hart.
This you told to the meeting ? — Yes.
Upon that^ what was saifl or done f — Har*
rison turned himself round to me like a bull dog^
" Adams you have acted damned wrong.'' l
said, " In what ?" Brunt turned upon die like
a lion, and said, '* You have acted wr^ng ;*' he
said, '' whatever you had heard it b your duty
to come and communicate it to me, or Mr.
Thistlewood.'' I said, ''I did not conceive
that I had any ri^t to withhold it from any
one ; that I thougtit it my dutv to communicate
it to all, as it concerned all. ' They swore at
roe again, and said I had no business to com-
municate it to any body except them two.
Mr. SolicUor i^ernl — Will your lordship
permit ray learned friend Mr. Gurney, to pro-
ceed with the examination f
Lord ChkfJutiice Abhott.-^Ctnakn}y.
Mr. Gttm^w.— What was said in answer to
that observauon of yours 1—tb.ey said I had
no business to communicate any thing I heard
out of the room. I said, '< What would you
have thought of me had I after hearing such a
communicalion ad this, such a report as this
Out of doors, that the proceedings were report*
ed out of Bow-street office and lord Sidmouth's
office, kept this to myself, and sufiered you to
go on^ Afler you were taken and all prir
soners, it would have come out that I was tho
person that knew of that, and might have pre-»
vented it.''
Did any thing particular more pass at that
meeting ? — ^There was nothing particular.
How soon did you meet again 1 — ^Tbere wer^
some other circumstances on this morning bo-
fore the meetinz broke up. After I had met
with this rebuff from them, t&ey directly began
to propose leaving, saying they had a^number
of men to call upon, and they must wait apoa
them ; and that they had a meeting of vnat
they called the Marylebone Union.
Was any thing proposed by either of them
to be done respecting the Marylebone tJnion t
— Brunt said he must wait upon the Marylor
bone club, and that there were Several of them
said they should attend there themselves ; that
they would all be there, for that they wanted
some money, tt was asked by one in the
room, whether he thought it would be of any
use calling there upon that speculation I He
told them ^es, it would.
Who said that ? — I cannot charge my recol-
lection who it was ; it was one of the party^
It was Brunt that said, '' Yes, it would." 1
cannot recollect who it was that put the que»«
tion.
Before you went, was any arrangement
made about where you were to be in the even-
infl?— Yes.
Where were you appointed to be in the
evening ?— I was appointed to be in the same
room in the evening.. <
74SG
far High Treatan.
A. D. 182D.
LIS^
. Tlifltt wa» tlie room in' Bront*s heiisc ?— Yes ;
that vff^ proposed by Thistlewood.
' Were you told what answer you were to
give to any that might eone 1^1 had no orders
to that effect.
Was there to be any meeting there that
Bight ?--*The^ was not, further than this, I
w«s ordered to attend in case any oae thoaki
come that was not there in the morning ; as
"those that were there in the morning had all
of them pretty weU agreed to be in the Mary,
lebone union that night.
You were to say there was no meeting there
that night?— Yes.
Did yon go there that evening T^-*! went to
Brunt's room.
Did any of the persons that you mentioned
come there that evening? — Potter called, i
think.
Any body else ? — No ; I had not been there
long before Potter, being wet, called, and said
he would go and have a pot of beer, and he
vent tQ the White Hart.
. And you went with him ? — ^Yes.
Did any persons come to you there ? — Yes.
Who were they ?*-*-Palin and Bradburn.
The next morning did you go again to the
room ? — ^Yes, I did.
. That was Tuesday morning, the 28nd ?«^Yes.
Who were there at that time, or in the course
el the morning P^There were Brunt, Thistle-
wood, Ings, Hall, Davidson, Hairiaon, Wilson,
Palin, Potter, and Bradburn.
While you were there, was any intelligence
bf ought you respecting any cabinet dinner ?*-^
Yes ; Mr. Edwards came in and went to Thu*
lie wood, and tells him there was a cabinet
dinner to be on the Wednesday night.
- That was the next day P^Yes ; Thistlewood
seid^ '^ I do not think that is true."
Upon that, was any thing done to ascertain
whether it was or not true ? — Yes ; Thistlewood
propeeed to send for a paper to asoertain it.
Was a newspaper sent for and brought f-^
It was.
. Upon that, whet passed ?-— Upon the paper
beings bKragfat.into the room wey were all
satisfied, from the statement that the paper
^ Was the paper read ?-^It was read by Mr.
ThullnwQod, he read it out ; that the cabinet
were to dine at earl Harrowby's, in 6rosvenor«
eqnave, on Wednesday evening.
What was said upon tins being anaonneed >
-r-Upon this Mr. Brant walked towards the
wmdBfw^ <f Now,'' saye he, « I wHI be damned,
if I do not believe there is a. God ; I hai^
ttten pnyed that tiioee thieves may be aolieci^
ed all together, in order to give us a good op^
flQininity^ to destroy tiiem, and nqw God has
iMedLmgrpvayen.'' Upon tins Thiftlewood
«m4 time then shonltf be a committee sit
Bo 7Dt|.i)niiemiMt ingneayiag anjp thing J^
I cannot charge mv memoiy at» tlM momeBt; i
Wte wns pat into the chtt»lU-I wa» put
te ehair mynli . .
Upon that, did any person make any propo-
sition ? —Mr. Thistlewood came and stood by
me, after 1 was in the ehair, and had called to
order, he came and began to speak. Now I
beg you to hear me state some things which,
if you pay attention, I will tell you, what ha»
ttanspired.
. What did Thistlewood propose ?-*>He pro-
posed to sit directly, to form a fresh plan
regarding the. assassination. He was going to
proceed, I being in the chair, I interrupted
him.
What did you interrupt him to say ?— Isaid,
^ Gentlemen, after what fell from my montfat
yesterday morning, I hope you have ali givea
it a dne consideration/'
That was yoar mention of what Hobbs had
said to you P— Yes; this same discourse hvi
passed between me, Bradbiun, and Palin, th»
night before.
Had vou mentioned to Palin what had pass*
ed the day before ?~»*Ye6.
What did the meeting say or do upon this?
-I— Upon this Harrison, wafted backwaids and
forwards in the room, they were all in a statai
of conAisioir, more Hke a set of madteea tfaflcB
men. Harrison looked at me, and said, **^ Damn
your eyes 1 the next man that dropped a word
to cool any man, and to prevent their goins
forward to do the deed they had determines
on, he would run that man through with ai
sword."
In the result, did you'iemain in the chair, or
were you put ontr— I remained for a lew
minutes.
' Were you put out then? — ^I was.
Who was put in ?-*Mr. Tidd. Thistlewood
wanted to proceed in the business, Palin sit*
ting down, said, *' No, stop; what has dropped
from Mr. Adams's moudi, respecting what was
oomuHinicated yesterday morning, I want ta
be satisfied on, before the business prooeede
further."
Without giving me all the discussioyi that
took place, did it end in Biiint making any'
motion to do any thing?-— Yes, Brunt got «p^
he proposed, in order to do away any suspicion
from what had passed , that there should be »
watch put on the earl Harrowby's house that
night.
What was that watch to do ? — ^There were
to be two men go on at a time.
- What was the object of their watching ?•--«
Hie ol^ect of their watching was, that they
riiould watch to see if any men or soldiers
went into the house of earl Harrowby, in osder
to waylay any body that might go in.
Was that motion approvecT of?-^It was.
At what hptti* that night was it ordered that
any- watch should be set ?«— At six ; vten to go.
on at sill stop tiH nine ; at nine they were* to be
nkieved bv two more, that were to stop titt
twelve; then the watcK was to oommeace
again on the Wednes^ morniag, at four
o^^loek.
That was canted j aaad the watph ordered?
Ydll 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of Arthur ThuUetoood
[752
What did Brant say after Uiiit?--^I cannot
charge my memory.
Did Hall make any motion ? — ^Not directly ;
Thistlewood then came forward, when Mr.
Tidd was in the chair, ** Now," says he, ^' after
what has fallen fiom Mr. Brunt's mouth, I
hope every one will he satisAed, if in case
there is nobody found to go into the house,
audi as officers or soldiers.''
By officers, do you mean notice officers ?—
Tes ; that he thought it would be best to enter
into a ftesh plan ; that if nobody was seen to
go into the house, they were determined to do
what they talked of to-morrow evening; the
plan altogether of the Sunday morning was
altered, so far as respected the assassination.
Mr. Thistlewood proposed that it would take
from forty to fifty men ; forty men ought to be
allowed, but more if thev could get them. ^ It
would answer our end, * says he, *' much best
their dining altogether, than to run the risk of
taking them at their own houses separately.
In doing that,'' says he, '* we could not com-
mand more than three, I dare say, at most.
In doing this," says he, ** their meeting all toge-
ther, as there has not been a meeting so long,
there is no doubt there will be fourteen, or we
will say sixteen, which will be a rare haul to
murder them all. I propose," says he, ^ going
to the door with a note to present to earl Har*
lowby ; when the door is opened for the men to
rash in directly, seize the servants what are in
the way, present a pistol to them, and directly
threateathem with death, if they offer to make
the least resistance or noise." This being done,
a party were to rash forwards to take the com-
mand of the stairs : two men were to be placed
at the stairs, leading to- the upper part of the
house ; one was to nave fire arms, to be pro-
tected by another with a hand-grenade in his
hand : a couple of men were to take the head
of the stairs leading to the lower part of the
house : those two men placed at the stairs lead-
ing to the lower part of the house, were to be
armed the same as the others at the other stairs.
If any servants attempted to make any retreat
from the lower part of the house, or from Uie
upper part of the house, these men with the
hand«ffrenades, were to clap fire to the hand-
grenades, and fling it in amongst them altoge-
mer. Two men at the same time were to be
placed at the area, one with a blunderbuss and
another with a hand-grenade : if any body at-
tempted to make their retreat from the lower
part of the house that way, they were to have
a hand-grenade thrown in amongst them there.
At the same time all these objects were to be
accomplished by the means of securing the
house; those men who were to go in for the
assaisination, were to rash in directly after.
Into what part of the house did he propose
they should go?— Where their lordships were.
And what to do?— To murder all they found
in the room, good or bad; he. said, that if
there were an^ good ones they would murder,
tiiem for ke^pmg bad company.
Was this proposition agreed to or dissanted
t
from ? — It is not finished. Ings volnoteenid
himself to enter the room first —
Did he say wliat with ? — ^That he would go
in with a brace of pistols, a cutlass, and bis
knife in his pocket, with a determination, after
the two swordsmen that were app<Hnted to
follow him had despatched them, to cut every
head off that was in the room, and the head of
lord Castlereagh and Sidmouth he would bring
away in a bag; he would provide for the par--
pose two bags. As soon as he got into the
room he said he should say, ** Well, my lord%
I have got as good men here as the Manchester
Yeomanry. £nter citizens and do your duty.**
Upon this word of command firom logs, as I
have before observed, the two swordsmen were
to enter, to be followed by the rest of the men
with pikes, pistols, cutlasses, or whatever it
might be, and to fall to work immediately in
murdering as fost as they could.
Whom did Thistlewood propose to be the
two swordsmen ?— Harrison was one that he
picked out, and I, myself, for another, beieg
the only men, as he supposed amongst them,
that were used to the use of the sword, and men
of the greatest strength and power.
Had Harrison been a soldier as well as you ?
— ^Harrison had been in the life-guards. On
Harrison being proposed to go into the room,
Thistlewood turaea his head to me and said,
** Adams will not you be one?'* I seeing no
chance of escape, knowing that if I did not
assent my life was in danger, I assented to it.
Did Thistlewood propose any thing to be
done in any other places except lord Har-
rowby's? — ^After the execution was done in
the house they were to leare the house as
quickly as possible; in doing this, Harrison
was the man that was appointed to go to King-
street horse barracks, I believe it is in King-
street, the barracks where the horses were at
any rate, and to take one of those fire-balls t<^
fliog into the straw shed to set fire to the
premises.
Whither was the party to go from Groa-
venor-square? — Hamson was to be supported
by Wilson ; after they bad left the square they
were to proceed —
Do you mean Harrison and Wilson, or the
rest of the party ? — ^The rest of the party : they
were to proceed to GrayVinn-lane to the CSty
Light-horse barracks.
For what purpose? — ^For the purpose oC
meeting a party of men that were intended to
be planted there, and in case those men fowid-
themselves not sufficiently strong to take the
two pieces of cannon at the li^t-horse ber-
racks, they were to wait their arrival and they
would assist them.
To what place were they to go-then? — Th^
were to proceed from thence to the Artillery-
ground, where Mr. Cook was to be appoiateidU
in order to lend him a hand in case he had
found himself not sufficiently strong to take
the six cannon there.
To .whs;t place were they to go then ^-<-Mr.
Cook was to wairthere fotr die aniTtl of Mr».
7531
fi/r High Trtatotr.
A. D. 1820.
(754
Tbiftlewood ? if he did not tike to proceed he
was to bring the cannon from the ground into
the street, and to load it, in order to be ready
to fire on any persons that might interrupt
them, but if he found his strength sufficient to
enable him to proceed, he was to advance from
tiiere to the Mansion-house ; if he found him-
self capable of advancing to ihe Mansion-house
he was to divide the six cannon into two divi-
sions, and take three on one side and three
on the otlier, three on that next the Royal
Change, three next Comhill ; then he was to
demand the Mansion-bouse, and, on a refusal
he was to fire at it on both sides ; it was thought,
on doing that they would soon give it up.
Did he say what use was to be made of the
Mansion-house ? — It was for the provisional
government to sit in.
After the Mansion-house was taken and
made a seat of the provisional government,
what was done next ? — ^This underwent a little
alteration the succeeding day.
Was any other place mentioned near the
'Mansion-house?— Yes, the Bank of England:
that was the next place to be attacked.
What did he say was to be done there P
— ^To plunder the Bank of all they could get,
bat not to destroy the books if they could any
way help it, for they thought by keeping pos-
session of the books that would enable them to
see further into the villainy that had, he said,
been practised in the country for some years
past; the further proceedings, as far as the re-
gulations of it altogether, were to be left till
the Wednesday, but it was mentioned particu-
larly that Palin's plan should be proceeded in
the same as had been proposed ; out as to the
time, they did not come to any decisive time,
though it was talked of between eight and
nine o*clock, but it was not settled.
Was any watch set on lord Harrowby's house
on the Tuesday night 7 — Yes.
Who were the first that were setP — ^I wish
to state something before that, if you please.
What is that? — ^After the chair was left,
being in a bnstle about the room, Harrison
proposed there should be a counteiwsign, and
the men that were to go about that day to in-
iuta men that were 4o help them the next
evening should communicate the counter-sign,
the counter-sign was hUtan, the man that came
up was to say, b, «, t, the man that was in
waiting that was to be appointed to receive him
was to sav, /, o, n, these put together were to
ptodnce Mtfton, this being done was a token
that the man that pronounced this was one of
the party ; a man was to be appointed to stand
at the end of Oxford-road, in order to commu-
nicate to any man that came up to him the
xooiD where they were to be appointed to meet ^
at the next night.
In the course of that evening, or that night,
did you so on watch at lord Harrowby's ? — ^I
did, trat tnere is something I wish to state be-
fore I come to that.
Mention any thing I have omitted ? — ^In
tbe afternoon, if you will allow 'me, after I left
VOL. XXXIII.
them I called up in the room again ; in going
up stairs I perceived a strange smell in the
house, on going, in I found Edwards, Ings, and
Hall.
What were they doing? — Edwards was
making fuses to put to the hand-grenades.
What was Ings doing ?— Ings was dipping
some rope yam, picked for the purpose, into
stuff" to make what they termed the illumina-
tion balls for Mr. Palin.
What was Hall doing ? — ^Dipping those into
an Iron pot.
He was helping Inffs then ? — Yes^ he was^
Hall was putting shreas of paper on the floor
to receive these after they came from the pot,
to prevent their sticking to the hand, they
were wrapped up in it.
While you were there did any other persons
come in ? — Not then ; I did not stop a very few
minutes, I had a little business of my own ; I
called up again the same evening.
When you called up again, what was that
for ? — ^When I called up again in the evening
I found a couple of strange men I had never
seen before.
Whom did you find them to be T — ^I found
one of them to be Harris ; I do not know the
name of the other
Were Brunt and Tidd there?— Brunt was
there, Tidd was not, Thistlewood was there ;
there was nothing particular transpired. ^
Did any body go off to keep watch ? — Yes.
Who went P — ^They did not go from there^
to the best of my recollection.
Did any body come as from the watch ?—
No ; Datidson was one that went on at six
o'clock.
You suppose Davidson was to have gone
at six?— -He was there; because I was one
that relieved him.
When did you go ? — ^About half past eight
o'clock ; Mr. Tidd came into the room, saying,
that he was disappointed in a man that was to
have met him, that he was to have brought up
there : on this Tidd and Brunt, heva^ appointed
in the mominff to go and watch at nme o'clock,
they conceivea it, within Uiemselves, time to
start ; they started, and in less than five mi«
nutes afterwards Brunt came back again ; they
had, in the interval of Brunt's leaving the
room, called at a public house in order to meet
the man, and found him there. Brunt came
back, saying, that Tidd could not go; that
Tidd had met the man that was to go, and
that he was a man likely to be of great conse-
quence ; on this, looking round the room, he
sLsked me to go. Just as I was going ou4 ia
came Edwards from the watch. I asked Ed-
wards if there had been any thing particular
seen, he said, ** Whatever was seen I shall
communicate to Mr. Thistlewood." I took
that for a slap of the face for what had been
said by me on the Monday evening.
Did yon go to Grosvenor-square ? — I did.
Who went with you ? — Brunt.
When you got to the square, whom did you
find on the watch ? — When I got to the square
3C
7651
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of Arthur TkitOmood
VlfHi
I stw Davidson; Bnmt went dp to him, I
walked forwards, there was another man^ but
to say who he was, I could not.
Did Brunt and you keep watch ?— Directly
Bmnt had relieved Davidson. I had, prior to
ffoing^up to the square, hinted to Brunt that I
felt myself rather tired.
Did you and he go to any public house ? —
Tes, we did ; we had some bread and cheese
and porter; we took some bread and cheese
with us, and got some porter there.
^ Where is this public house ? — Directly be-
hind lord Harrowby*s house, at the corner of
the mews leading up to lord Harrowby's house.
Did you do any thing there? — ^There was a
jroung man that was sitting there; there were^
in &ct, two or thrse that bad been playing at
dominos.
Did either of you play at dominos with htm ?
—This young man gave Mr. Brunt a challenge,
and he played at dominos with him.
Did you then go out and walk in the square?
^We stopped there till eleven o'clock, and
Aen we went out.
Did you walk in the square?— Yes. T
walked some time till I got ashamed of myself,
and I walked to the back of the square, and
met him on the other side of it.
Who relieved you ?— Nobody.
At twelve o'clock, did you and he go home?
—We went home.
Mr. Solicitor GeneraL-^On Wednesday, the
next day, did you go again to Fox-court? — I
went in the afternoon, not before. Mr. Ed-
wards called on me before I was up ; my wife
was not dressed ; she asked who was there.
What time did you go to Fox-court f Were
those persons assembled ? — I went there be-
tween two and three o'clock.
^ Whom did you find at Fox-court at that
time ? — I found nobody there but Mr. Brunt,
in his own room ; his wife was going in just at
the time.
That was in the front room ?— Yes.
While you were in that room, did any body
come in ?— -Strange came in.
Did Strange come in alone, or was any per-
son with him ?— He came in by himself.
Did any others come in ? — ^Two more came
in, in five minutes. 1 turned my head and
saw two pistols lying upon the arawer. In
eonsequence of these two ftesh men coming
in. Brunt proposed to go from' tliat room to
Ae room where we regularly met.
Had any thing been done with the pistols
before that? Had they been touched?— No
Aicther than handling them.
Was any thing done with the flints P— Now
I recollect : they were trying the flints ii> them.
Who was trying the flinto in them ?— Mr.
Strange, and one of the strangers who came in.
Brunt proposed going into the Wk room ?—
Yes.
In consequence of that, did they go into the
back room ?--They unlocked the door, and
Went into the bkck room directly^
Did you go with them ?— I did. On going
into the room, I saw a number of cutlassesl
I saw a blunderbuss. I saw several pistols,,
and those pistols that were in Mr. Brunt s room
as well were brought from there into the badt
room, lihey placed themselves, the twa
strangers in particular, and began to put th^
flints into the pistols. We had not been long
in the room before Mr. Thistlewood came in.
Thistlewood had not been long in the room
before Ings and Hall came in. Thistlewood,
on coming into the room, looks round* him,.
** Well, my lads, this now looks something
like as if there was something going to bS
done." He comes to me, claps his hand upon
my shoulder, and says, '* Well, Mr. Adams,,
how do you do ?" I told him I was very tm-
well, and was very low in spirits. He said^
" What is the matter ?•* « Why,'' says I, " on*
thing, I have not had any thing to drink to-
day. I feel myself very fiiint." He said,
** you shall not be very long vnthout." H^
said, '^Brunt, send out for something, Mr.
Adams is low in h)s spirits." He said, ^ By
God, you shall not be long without something,^
and he sent out for some gin and some beer. -
That was produced, I suppose ? — ^Yes, ia
the interval of this time of the beer being
fetched, Thistlewood said he wanted some
paper in order to write some bills on.
Upon that, what was done? — ^He wanted 4
kind of paper, he could not teU what to call ft
but the paper the newspapers were printed on.
I said to nim, '^Cartridge paper will answer
your purpose equally the same as the other, as
you do not know the name of the other ; diat
will answer your purpose." Thistlewood said,.
« who will fetch it ?" Brunt says, « Either
my boy or the apprentice shall fetch the paper .^
He had both a son and an apprentice?—
Yes. He put his hand into his pocket, and gave
Brunt a shilling to fetch half a dozen sheets of
cartridge paper: the paper was brought, i
table fetched out of Mr. Brunt^s room, and a
chair, in order for Mr. Thistlewood to sit dowii
and write upon the table. Thistlewood sits
down to write three bills to stick up againin
the ditferent buildings that might be set fii^
to, to acquaint the public what deeds had beeti
done. The bills, to the best of iny recolleo-
tion, I will not pretend to say that I can teE
every word that was written on them —
Was this bill afterwards read H Thistle^
wood f — It was read by Thistlewood.
Will you tell us what words he pronounciBd f
— ** Your tyrants are destroyed. The frienSt
of liberty are called upon to come forwacrd.
Hie provisional government is now sittjtt^
James Ings, secretary, 23rd February. 1^5^^
In vnriting the last bill, I perceived Mr. T%£|-
tlewood to be extremely agitated, so )nu^ 9^
that he could hardly write: he exprc^ed'Eidl^
self to be extremely fired ; he did bbt'kMow
what was the tnatter tnth him, bnat Ke tamt
not write any taore.
After thette three last papers were written,
was any thing else written ?— There were tfatee
other bills that were proposed to be written;
W73
Jhr High Trtaton.
A. D. 1980.
LT5B
ooe wa9 drawn up in part. These otber bilU
were to make an offer to the eoldiers.
You 9ay one of these was drawn np in pftft?—-
Yes.
' Was it drawn np by Thistlewood, or by any
«ther person at llustlewood's desire f'^By
^noth^er person at Thistlewood's desire.
Yon have told us that Thistlewood was Tery
much agitated^ and expressed himself extreme-
iy tired : In consequence of that, did he make
any droposal to any other person that was pre-
sent r — ^Ves ; he proposed first that Hall should
take the pen. Hall refused it : another man
that was in the room, whom I had never seen
before, was proposed to sit down and take the
pen, he objected^ but afterwards he took it.
The proposal was made by Thistlewood to
Hall who declined ; in consequence of which
« proposal was made to another person in the
room whom you do not know, but though he
objected at first, he afterwards sat down and
took the pen 7— Yes.
Did this person who took the pen write of
Ms own head, or did Mr. Thistlewood or any
.other person, dictate to him what he was to
writer— Mr. Thistlewood dictated to him what
fae was to write.
Will you tell us what was dictated, as well
ae you can recollect f I do not ask tlie pre*
twe terms, but the effect and the substance ? —
I will give you what I saw wrote-— «
Mr. Cunoood , — My Lord, I object to that.
Mr. SolicUor General. — ^Did von hear the
■Olds expressed by Thistlewood? — Yes» not
only then but several times.
These are certain rules of law by which we
most abide. TeE us the words he dictated to
that other man.
Mr. Adefyhu. — Tell me first, have yon any
memoty or it but from having seen it in
writing ? Did you see it in writing?—- Yes.
Mr. SolicUor General, — Do you recollect
what Mr. Thistlewood said at the time ? What
were the words that he uttered ? — Yes, I can
recollect so far as this.
Mr. Jdolphu.—l shall take your lordship's
opinion upon this. This professedly is re-
duced to writing. I apprehend when any
matter is put down in writing that cannot lie
nor alter^ it is not to depend upon the recol-
lection of a bystander, but having assiflned an.
embodied form, the writing is to be the evidence
of vdiat is reduced to writing.
Mf-SoUeUor General, — ^To avoid all argu-
ment, let us ask a single question. What
became of those papers ? Were they left with
Ur. Thistlewood 7
Mr. 'Jdofphus.'''^Th9ii is not the vray of put-
ting the question.
Mii SoUcUor G^nm^—What bec^une of
those p^>era 7
Mr. ^ifajnte.— 'Tlie misehielis done now by
tfae qnestioD.
Lord Chief Juttice Abbott, —I am sorry for it ;
but I am not sure that, strictly, it is ndt correct,
to ask whether they remained with him, or were
taken away.
Mr. Solicitor General, — What became of those
papers ? — ^I cannot say ; the last time I saw
them they were doubled up. I saw one in the
hands of Mr. Thistlewood, doubled np.;
another in the hands of logs, as he was equip-
fed ; I naturally supposed be* had put it into
Dgs*s hands.
- Have you seen any of them since ?— No,
never.
Mr. SoUciior General, — ^Then now we havt
given notice to all the prisoners.
Mr. Adol^hut,—! admit tlie notice, but you do
not prove the possession.
Lord Chief Justice Abbott. — The last he saw
of them was in the hands of Ings and Thistle-
wood. This is the last account we hav6 of
them : therefore you must trace them out of
your possession.
Mr. Adolphm. — ^These papers are a joint a^
written by another person.
Mr. Solicitor General, — ^What became of the
Saper you are now describing, written by the
ictation of Thistlewood? — ^I do not know
what became of that more than another. I
will tell you what I can swear was upon the
paper.
Mr. Adolphtts, — ^That is just what I am
objecting to.
Mr. Solicitor General — ^Was that paper com-
pleted ? — ^It was not completed.
What was the reason that it was not com-
pleted ? —The reason it was not completed was,
the man that was writing it and Thistlewood
together could not come to know the particular
terms respecting the wording of the bill alto*
gather, and in consequence of that the bill was
d rawn. Mr. Thistlewood^ at the same time, ex-
pressed himself very mudi dissati^ed, saying,
that he had spoken to a man to do those bilb
for him as much as a fortnight ago, that the
bills were drawn out, and he had not seen hia
since.
You say he was not satisfied as to the whole
of it. What did you hear Thistlewood tell
him to write down.
Mr. Ajdo^fhuM,-^! <Aject to that.
Mr. Solicitor General,^-'! did not ask what
was written, but what Thi&tlewood told hiiA
to write down.
Lord Chief Jvttiee Al^ott. — ^Do vou mean to
argue it further, or do you rely on the argument
you have raised ? You object to the reception
of this evidence on the ground, that what was
said by Thistlewood was taken down in writ-
ing?
Mr. ilioiji&tcf.— Yes, my lord : and all the
evidence which has sioce oeen added is, that
7«D]
1 GBORGE IV.
Trial qf Arthur ThuOemood
[700
«ll th«t he dictated was writteoy that the paper
•was left nnfinished^ and that he said he had
given instructions to another man, a fortnight
before, but that it was not done.
Lord Chief Justice Abboit—Whti became of
this paper ? — I do not know.
In whose hands did you last see it ? — The
■band that I saw the writing in last, was
the hand of the man that last wrote it.
And who he was you do not know ? — Who
be was I do not know.
Lord Chief JvOice Abbott.-^Mt. SoHeitor
jQ^neral, we entertain some doubt.
Mr. SoUciter Oeneral.^lf your lordships
entertain any doubt, we will not press tne
evidence.
Lord Chief Justice Abbott, — ^There is some
doubt entertained in some part of the court ;
you will not press it then P
Mr. Soiicitor General, — ^No, my lord. Be-
fore those bills were written, was Ings in the
jroom f — ^Yes.
Did he do any thing for the purpose of pre^
paring himself in any way? — He was prepar-
ing himself in the manner he intended to en-
ter the room where their lordships were, he
puts a black belt round his waist, m order to
contain a brace of pistols ; he puts another
black belt on to hang a cutlass to bis shoulder:
after this, there was a bag hung to each
^boulder, a large bag to each shoulder, in the
toTjaa. of a soldier's haversack. When these
bags were on, he placed a brace of pistols, one
of each side ; he hung a cutlass ; he viewed
himself and said, '' Damn my eyes 1 I am not
complete now. I have forgot my steel !"
With that he pulled out a large knife, and be-
^n to brandish it about.
Describe that knife? — I will mention it pre-
sently. He brandished his knife about as if
^e were in the act of cutting the beads of those
•he intended to cutoff; he would bring away a
Jiead in each hand; and the hand of lord Cas-
tlereagh he would cut off and procure that
•which might at a future day be thou^t a great
4eal of; and these expressions of bis have
been repeatedly used ; it would be impossible
for me to say I could stand here and recollect
4he times be had said this.
Lord Chief Justice Dallas, — ^He had expressed
liimself in tois way many times ? — Yes.
Mr. Solicitor Gener4d.^}ie described the
i^nife ?-— Yes, the knife is a large broad-bladed
knife, to the best of my recollection ; it is from
ten to twelve inches long, according to the
calculation of my eye ; the handle is bound
with wax end ; this was bound round as he
declared, in doing the thing that his hand
should not slip; and the breadth of the blade
of the knife with the best calculation I could
make with my eye, I never measured it-
While Ings was arming what were the others
4oii^?_Ajming, Mng the leathers to hold
pistols with, and placing tbeni in the belts.
Another man was bnsy in putting thecutlaisea
into sbngs, to hang by the wrists ; it wovld be
impossible to describe all the transactions.
At what hour did the first persons leave the
room, to go to these transactions ? — ^As near
as I can tell about half-past ibor, or a little
before five.
About half-past four or a little before five ?
— ^Yes, or from that to five.
Do you remember Palin*s coming in?-—
Yes.
At what lime do you suppose he came in ?
— ^AboQt half an hour befoie I left.
Tell us what passed when he came in ? —
Thistlewood and Brunt were there at the time,
but Palin had not been in at the time before;
Thistlewood and Brunt on some businesa or
other left the room, but what I do not know :
during their absence, Palin began the conoeni,
to speak to what men there were in the room.
He said, '< Gentlemen, I hope all that have
met here this afternoon are well acquainted
what you have met upon ; you are informed
what you are met here for ; in the first place,
you ought to think within yourselves, whether
you are going to do your country a service or
not : if you are in possession of what you are
going to do, you first of all ought to examine
yourselves whether you think the assassination
will be countenanced by your country : if yoa
conceive that the assassination will be counte-
nanced by your country, and that the people
of the country, after you have done it, will
turn of your side : it is necessary, I say, that
every man that is here going to turn out on
this piece of business, will come to an expla-
nation with Yourselves, that every man that
flinches from his duty, or turns out a cowaid,
should be run through by one of the party
directly on the spot.'* He said, ** unless you
come to this determination, it will be impoa-
sible to do any good.'' He was going on to
say a few woras more, but a tall man in the
room interrupted him.
Where were Thistlewood and Brunt then ? —
They were not come in.
Do yDu know who that tall man was? —
No.
Should you know him if you saw him ? —
No.
What did he say ?— He said, '^ you seem to
speak as if every man were in possession of
what we were going upon, now this is what I
should like to Imow, wnat we are actually going
about."
That man was a stranger ; had he attended
the previous meetings ?— He had not.
It was the first time you. had ever seen him ?
— It was the first time I had ever seen him.
He said to Palin, '^ I can see pretty well the
meaning of your speech, as for myself, if wm
come to any determination to turn out, with
a view to serve our country, I am a man tlmt
is not afraid of himself, and that man that is
air«id4>f himself ought not to bftve any thfaof
to do with a concern Tike this."
761]
far H^h TnatoH^.
A. D..' 189a
(709
How long wu this before Bmnt and Hii»-
4lewood cune into the room ? — I do not re-
coiiect seeing Thistlewood after that on that
day.
Do yon remember Brunt starting? — Yes.
At what time ? and who went with him ? —
Bront came after this^ and peroeiting an alter-
ation in the countenance of the. meeting, he
wished to know the cause of it : he was told
there were some in the room who wanted to
know ftirther of the plan, and what they were
to do.
Upon this being told to Brunt, what did he
say or do ? — He said, this was not the room for
them to be told what they were to do, but go
along with him to the other room in Edgeware-
road, there eveiy one should be apprised of
what they were going about. Brunt directly
began to wish to put them in movement in
OToer to go, he said he would take good care
all that went along with him should have a
drop of something to drink, to put them in
spirits. This tall man, in answer to that said,
^ I hope you are not going to drunkenness, be-
cause drunkenness in a thing like this was of no
good ; because a man drunk the only service he
is of is to run himself into the hands of his
enemies."
That was the same stranger you mentioned
before P — ^Yes.
After this did Brunt go away ? — ^He began
4o be on the movement to go away.
Who went with him? — I went out first, and
there was£trange at that time and this tall
man, and three or four others, that I do not
know, that went with. him : it was agreed they
•bould go along the street, in order to put a
•top to any suspicion from going along in a
booy, they were to walk two and two in the
street, and not to walk in a body with each
other. I starts, and going, along Holborn I
had a tap on the left side, calling me by my
name, Mr. Adams.
Who was that ? — I cannot swear to that, it
was a little man.
Was he one of the persons vrho had been at
4bis meeting ? — Yes.
Yon had now got out of the room ? — Yes.
Was there any cupboard in the room ? — ^Yes.
What was nsually kept in that cupbcMLrd,
dvEring the interval from tne time you fiist went
into the room, after yovr first liberation from
prison ? — ^That cupboard was applied to keep
the . different things that were brought to ;he
room, such as swords, the first thing I saw in
it; the next thing were some hand-grenades.
Do yon remember any flannel bags ? — Yes.
What purpose were they used for, and how
were they filled ? — For the cartridges for the
Were they filled ? — ^I saw one filled, and no
other.
You have said before, there were some poles
which appeared to have been recently cut ? —
a ee.
And some (ernles fixed on them; where was
that done 7 — In BnmCa room.
In the back room f — In the back room. >
Were all the arms kept in the room ? — No,
they were not.
Where were the rest kept?— The d^pdt was
at Tidd's.
Do you know where Tidd lived ? — ^Yes.
Where was it ? — In the next room adjoining
to myself.
That was in Hole-in-the*wall passage? —
Yes.
Near Baldwin's-gardens ?— Yes.
Was that the place where the greater part
was kept, or how ? — That was the place : I
found them after I came from prison, the day
or night afterwaids : that was the place aj^
pointed to take in things. Thistlewood was
always in a. hurry when there was any thing in
readmess to be taken there; he called it the
d^pdt.
bid he give any reason for that ? — ^Yes.
What was that ? — In case any body should
come up, such as any officers or any person,
who baa no knowledge of their intention, to
see these things, might have some suspicion
that there was something in it more than they
were aware of, that these things should be put
out of the way, in order for a blind.
Yon told us a short time ago, that you and
several persons left the place at a certain time;
what had you? had you any arms?— I had a
blunderbuss ; it was proposed I should carry it
being tall ; that I should with the sling ^t
was attaclked to it, cover my coat over it,
without its been seen, and Brunt had got a
broomstick prepared to receive a bayonet, it
was proposed I should take this, which would
serve as a walking stick.
Was there any other description of arms but
those you have mentioned, that you knew of?
— There were the hand-grenades.
You have talked of pike handles, were there
any pikes made for them ?^Yes.
What were they made from? — From old
files pointed up.
Were there any old bayonets? — ^There were
some old bayonets.
You have mentioned a kind of blunderbnas
you were directed to carry ; what kind of bar«
rel was it ? — Brass.
Did Brunt go with you all the way ? — When
this little man came to me, in Holborn, and
told me to slacken my pace, that Brunt was
gone back, that if I would slacken my pace
they would overtake me, before I got to the
top of Oxford-road ; in consequence of this,
I slackened my pace ; I then went on to the
top of Oxibrd-street, this side where Paik-lane
leads to, I crossed over to see who was be-
hind me ; seeing no one behind me that I had
no knowledge of, I turned to the wall to make
water.
You found none of your party were in sight?
— ^No.
Did vou in consequence turn back ? — I went
forwards*
Did you afterwards turn back ?<— I afterwaids
turned back to the end of Park-lane.
Did you meet Brunt ?— I did not then.
MB!
I GSORQE IV.
Trial i^ Arthur ThMenood
Did you aftennurds imel BaiBl?-~I taiet
.lun afterwirds.
Where did yoa meet Brant?— -Some eofi^
Mdemble way below Paik-lane, but I had been
walking about bo long.
Yo« had missed yonr associates, and re-
^rnad back and met Brant? — I met Brant,
and he said where are you going ? I said, I
am going home : then there was another man
with him : I said I do not no where to go. I
did not know where to go.
I^ at last came to this, that you returned
Srith him ?*-I returned with him.
Did you ^ along the Edgware-road? — I
4lid.
Did you then meet Thtstlewood ?— I did.
Did you then with Brant and Thiitlewoody
fb on U) Cato«atreet?— -Yes.
Where did you go to in Cato^treet? did
you go to a 8tiJ)le ? — ^Yei.
W^en you got to the stable whom did you
Me at the stable door, or near it 7 — ^As I got
«• the avohw^ (I walked some short way be-
litnd them) & saw Brant enter, Thistlewood
foUowad.
Did ai^ body come up while you were
staying behind, and say any Uiing to you ?<—
Harrison Came np and said^ Adams, come, go
in.
Whom did ybu see in the stable ? — ^I saw
Jon the ground-floor Davidson, sitting down,
ttftd Wilson standing, it appeared to me as if
Sher srere doing something to the pikes.
uid you go up the ladder ?— -Yes.
XKd you find Thistlewood there ?'— Yes.
Whom else?-^I found Thistlewood and
Brant, Ings, Hall, Bradbura, Strange, Cooper,
Wilson (Wilson was below), this tall man I
tiave alluded to, and several others that I did
not know by name.
How many were there above stairs, in the
first place? — ^There were above stain at the
concnision of it
When you first came ? — I cannot say.
flow many were there at the conclusion of
it ?— At the conclusion Thistlewood made— «t
the conclusion there were eighteen, and two
below.
When you went in did you see any carpen-
ta^s bench ?--Yes.
What was on it 7— ArsM of different de-
•onptions.
Lard Chirfjtatice Abbott, — There were can-
dles then ? — Yes, one.
Mr. Solieitot Chnerdl. — ^Was there any chest
«t that time ? — ^Yes, at the end of the window
where I placed myself; a kind of a trank.
When you first went in what were they
<doiftg?--*I found them all handling die diAur-
ent things, some cutlasses.
WasUiere tny refreshment of any kind ? —
Hiere was some beer standing on a table or a
bench.
Was Tidd there at that.time, or did he come
4ftalUffw«idsf"^Id2d tfot-see him for twenty
minutes before the oftcert eame in.
17U
When Tidd came in, <whal passed ?--Tidd
proposed going from the room to the squaie,
to see whether there was any noise particular,
or whether the ministers of state were getting
together to lovd Harrowby's house, and he
was gone for some time.
Who was ?— Thistlewood. On Thistlewood^
coming back, as I was standing up in the loft
I heard below stairs in the stable a deal of
talking, in consequence of that I went down.
Whom did you se^ below ?'•— I found Thistle-
wood, Brant, Davidson, Harrison, and Wilson
on going down inta the stable ; as soon as they
perceived me, before they perceived me, diqr
were talking closing together, they saw me
and said what good news they had got, and all
in a bustle ; I said, what good news ? and they
said, the carriages are getting there as fast as
they can, no less than six or seven carriage!
are already arrived — Brant turoed round, and
said, ** Damn my eyes ! what a haul we shall
have amongst them I"
Did you go up stairs after this ? — ^Yes.
What happened ? — ^The first thing was seeing
Thistlewood and Brant in this forai together,
seeing Thistlewood much agitated.
Did Tidd afterwards come in? — ^Yes.
How soon afterwards ? — A very little while.
Before Tidd came in was any thing said
about Tidd ? — Yes, that was what Thistlewood
and Brant were talking about ; on Thistlewood
tuning away, it was perceived there was some^
thing the matter. Ings tnraed round and
said, *' Do not think of dropping it now ; if you
do I shall hang n^yself, I shall go mad." 1^
turned round the room, that Tidd was not
like to come ; Thistlewood said, he would for-
feit his existence that Tidd would come ; after-
wards I saw him come in.
Without going through the detail of all that
passed up stairs, was any thing afterwards
done or said by Thistlewood, to move some of
them on one side to ascertain what should be
done ?— On Thistlewood making an observa-
tion at the end of the bench, that he hoped
thev would not give up what they had begun,
if they did, it would turaout another Despavd^
job.
Was that after Tidd came in ? — ^Yes, upon
this Thistlewood began to count the number
of men that were in the room, ** Let us tee^
there are eighteen in the room, two below
stairs, altogether there are twenty ; you s^
there are not sufficient to go ; I say Uiere mit
plen^."
After he had counted those above stairs, and
those below, and said there were plenty, what
did he propose ? — He said, fourteen would be
sufficient to go iato the room, and the other
six would be sufficient to take care of the ser-
vants, and of the house ; on this the fourteen
men were picked out on that side of the room
that the ladder led into: on the men being
called together there, Bruat starts the gin
bottle round, which I believe he produced kmm
his pocket ; ** Nbw (says iie) Iconoeive this
number of men is quite suffideq^^' ■ ■ ^
76S1
Jhr tligh Treaton.
A. D. ISSO.
17««
Brant satdf— ThistleVrood. '^Supposing
lord Harrowby should have sixteen ser?ants ;
they are not prepared, we are ; tre can go and
do what we have to do and off, in ten minutes
tine." I do not recollect any thing particu-
larly dropping from Thistlewood after that.
Did you hear any disturbance below about
that time or shortly afterwards ?"— Almost di-
rectly afterwards.
• What did you hear or see ?-^ We heard a
person down below, and all of a sudden there
was a voice at the bottom of the ladder,
" Holloa 1 shew a light/'
At the bottom of the ladder leading up to
the loft ? — ^Yes ; upon this signal being given
at the bottom or the ladder, Thistlewood
turned round to the candle at the bottom of
the bench, and turned round to see who was
coming ; and he put the candle at the bottom
of the bench quite confused. At this instant
of time the officers ascended the ladder, took
the command of the room, at the head of the
ladder in the room.
What do you mean- by the command of the
mom? got into the roomP—- Got into the
foom.
How many? — ^Two stood in the room, at
the top of the ladder, with two smaH pistols,
presenting them in this way, and said, ** Holloa,
u any body in the room ? here is a pretty nest
of you." The ofBcers said, ^' Gentlemen, we
have got a warrant to apprehend yon aR, and
as ^ch we hope yon will go peaceably ;" at
Alls instant of time one of the- officers that was
behind upon the ladder, " Make way*' (said
he^ " ana let me come forward.'' lliis was
the man that was murdered.
A man that was behind on the ladder, said,
" Let me come forward" ? — ^Yes.
The two officers at tl» head of the ladder
made wav to let him come in ; at this instant
of time there was a group that had got into a
little room ?— Yes.
A group that had got into the little room
before the officers had come there ?«— After the
officers had entered the room. '
Was it a group of persons that had been in
die room before the officers had got there, who
had got into the little room? — Yes; and
on this the man that was murdered came into
the little room ; this group in the little room
came forward, and amongst the group! saw
vi ^xm rush suddenly forward, at the same
time I saw a pistol.
When the officers came forward, you saw
coe arm advance forward, with a sword in it ?
— ^I did not perceive what weapon he had.
BfiiJL you saw an arm ? — Yes.
And another arm with a pistol ? — Both at
dne'^time ; the hand that presented the pistol
vras rather belov the arm that presentra the
dther weapon.
What was done with the other arm? — ^As
«Ddn as ever the pistol was fired, out went the
candle, that ft was impossible for me to see
'What transpired.
Did you get away Uien?-*On this, it was
given out that one of the officers Was mur-
dered.
Did you get away ? — ^Yes.
How? — ^Afterthe officers got out and called
for the soldiers to assist them, I went into th^
little room, to see who was there.
Did you get away P — I did.
How? — I went down the ladder and thronth
the stable, as unquashed as if nothing had
been the matter.
Did ycm go home? — Yes.
This was on the Wednesday night?*— Yes.
How soon after were you apprehended f —
On the Friday.
Have you been in custody ever since ?-^'
Yes, I have.
Look at the piisonert that are standing sA
the bar, and tell us their namea. Who is thai
below ?— ^Thistlewood.
Is that Thistlewood ?— Yes.
Who is that behind him, the tntta of ooloor P
— ^Davidson.
Who is on Davidson's left P — ^Wikon.
Who is that in the green coat P — Bruni.
Who is that who has moved ?«^Ing6.
The butcher ?^Yes.
Do you know the other man en the right
hand of Brant, with a coloured handkerchief P
—Cooper.
Who is that short man P do you know him T
[Sirangejy^l cannot say that I cah ftwear to
the man, I have seen him.
Now the other man, who hthat! [Bnd"
bunk] — ^I do not know his nsmoe.
Now the tall man behind? — ^Thatis Harrisotr.
Who is that standing by him ? [GUekriU.\
—I do not know him by name.
Now the other one, the stout man? — ^Tkal
is Tidd.
Mr. Solicitor General,^^Thete are two or
three that he has not spoken to, I Wish they
would stand forward. — I cannot say thmt i caJb*
swear to that man. [SirangeJ] l know his
ftiee too, but there is a difference in the dress,
or something.
Do you know that man? [Bruftiifn.] — I
have some recollection of him, but to swear to*
him I canbot.
Go down from the place where you -are.
[newUnearmoved*] Who is that? [StrmgtA
— I do not know the man by name, to iay I
can command his iiame ; but I know hon by
sight.
Did you see tiiat man at any of tbfi InMt-
ings ? — Yes, I think I have.
Robert Adam cross-examined by Mr. Cunocxxf:
You went with a ftdl intention of assassi-
nating his majesty's ministers P-*-No, I did*
not : I deny that.
What carried you there P*— My legs.
Look^t the Jury, will you. ibut leg* o^N
ried vou there ? — ^les.
What inteiMton carried you there'V-What
intention P I certainly cannot tay, but I w«nt
there under that pretension to ev^ry oQ^frltftk'!
appeaf^nces
767J
1 GEORGE IV.
Triat ^JMtwr TUuUemood
[768
Wiiti was your inward intent ? — Mj inwud
intent was entirely against them.
Against tbem ? which did yon say, against
them, or against it? — Against the plan that
was pursued.
According to -yoor own aoconnt, yon had
attended many meetings at which tins plan
was debated ? — I had.
One night yon were chairman, yon say ? —
One morning.
Then if your intention was against it, how
came you to join them again f — I joined upon
them in this way, gentlemen of the jury ;
there had been threatening language scTeral
times held out by Brant, if any man that be-
longed to the party concerned, withdrew him-
self from it, he would take care that that man
should be marked out ; what could I do then f
Then it was fear made you join them ? — It
was fear that kept me to them.
Your original friend, I think you say, was
Mr. Brunt r— Yes, my original acquaintance.
And you became acquainted with him in the
year 1816, at Cambmy, you say ? — Yes.
Were you then a soldier? — ^No.
You had quitted the army for some years
then 7— Yes.
What line of life had you been in, after you
quitted the army? — Principally in my trade,
as a shoemaker.
Were }rou ever a treasurer at a benefit fund ?
-*-Ne?er in my life.
What carried you to France at that time ? —
I went with the intention to follow my trade
there.
Had you no other motive for leaving Eng-
land?— Any other motive ?
Yes ? — Not in particular.
Did you carry much money with you? — I
carried some with me.
How much might it be? — ^Between thirty
and forty pounds.
. Was not it more than that ? — No.
Was it all your own f — I conceived it my
own.
Some persons conceived it belonged to other
people ? — What other persons conceived I do
not know; but what belongs to me I will ac-
knowledge to the truth of.
Were not you charged with cariying away
money belonging to other people ?— No.
You never were charged before a magistrate
with it ?— No.
You went to Fmnce to carry on your trade
as a shoemaker ? — ^Yes.
' That was your sole motive ?— Yes.
Having become acquainted with Brunt,
what purpose did he introduce you to Mr.
Thistlewood for P — For the purpose of assassi-
nating the ministers.
That was the purpose of the first visit ? —
Yes, this was proposed to me by Brunt before
I ever saw Thistlewood.
• And that being proposed to you, you agreed
to be introduoed to Thistlewood for that pur-
pose ? — ^Yes.
And yott joined every meeting where that
question was debated, till you were taken into
custody ? — ^Nol every meeting.
A variety of meetings ? — ^Yes.
And having joined for that purpose ? — Yes^
And having joined f^ thai purpose, and
having heard it debated, you still continned to
go to those meetings ? — ^Yes*
You told us yon were selected fyt yoor
adroitness at the swoid ?— Yes.
Were you to be the most active at the assassi-
nating plot ? — ^I told yon before, I was to be
one to be appointed as a swordsman to ga
into the room along with Harrison.
j How long is it since you have been an evi-
dence to give an account of this plot ? — The
first account I ever gave in was on the Satur-
day after.
Did you give it then under any understand-
ing that you were to become an evidence? —
I did not.
It was from pure compunctious visitings of
your own breast that you then disclosed it?
—It was, indeed.
Not out of any regard for your neck ? — ^The
motive I did it with was this : my conseience
was accused I had acted wrong, and I leant to
heart ; and I made a solemn vow, that if God
Almighty would spare me^ I would make a
disclosure of all I knew.
You did not like to be hanged ? — I do not
know who would.
And you had rather thirteen others would be
hanged than yourself ?— I only came here to
give the truth : if it is against the prisoner I
cannot help it.
Had not you rather thirteen men should be
hanged on your evidence than that you should
be hung yourself? however, I will not distress
you about that; but you had none of those
feelings before you were in custody ? — Yes, I
had some prior to that.
How long before you found yourself in cus-
tody ?— I had them before I entered the room ;
but after I entered the room, and the man was
murdered, I was worse.
Before you entered the room that day ?•—
Yes.
Were you very much shocked at it? — ^I
were.
Because just now vou told roe you went
down stairs and walked away as if nothing had
happened?
Mr. Sdidtot Geftaral.-^He did not say that.
WUnm.'-l walked down to give myself up
to the officers, but I saw none, and I did not
fiud Uie officers, and I walked off.
Mr. CWiPOorf.— You found no officers ?-«Mo.
And that is the reason you did not surrender
yourself P— Certainlv.
Did you think of surrendering yourself the
next day, before ^ou were taken f—I did not
think of surrendering myself, or of making wom
escape; I made up my mind to ran all
chances.
To wait the event ?«-Yes.
709]
far High Treatm,
A. D. 1890.
[770
YoU' hate- giten us a veiy circumst&ntiiti
aeoount ; how maoy were the most that at any
ttttie yOa* saw' assembled 7 — ^Tfae most ^at I
saw assembled together were on the 20th of
Vebmary, in the morning ; there were about
fifteen, I think; leaving the room in Cato-
Street out of the question.
Were any of them wealthy men that you
hare not nam^d?*— I know no more than I
know here.
All poor men ?— All poor men for what I
know.
You sent one day for the paper 1^ Mr. This-
tlewood did.
How did you raise money to pay for that
pa'per ?— I am not to tell how Mr. Thistlewood
came by his money.
Was it not raised by a halfpenny and penny
laised round the n>om ^— No.
. How was it raised ? — Mr. Thistlewood gate
the money out of his pocket, and sent Hide to
fttch it.
I do not mean the cartridge paper, but the
newspaper?—! mean the newspaper too.
The utmost you saw, before the meeting
in Cato-street, was 6fteen men ?— Yes.
What was the largest sum of money you
Ibund among them f — ^The largest sum was
six shillings, which I saw produced by Thistle-
wood to Brunt.
Somebody said he had a one pound note in
reserve on this great occasion ?— That was Mr.
Brunt.
It was proposed, you say, not only to assas-
tinate the ministers, but to take the two guns
id Gray's-inn-lane, and the six guns at the Artil-
lery ground, and to seize the Mansion-house ?
—Yes.
As you seem to have been deep in this,
wlifere were the forces to come from to do all
this ?^That I cannot tell : I speak no more than
what I know.
Then yon never saw any return of the men
thai could be brought into the field ? — ^Never.
Where was the d^pot ?— At Tidd's.
Was it in a comer-cupboard ?— They were
kept in a box under his window, the grenades;
ma as to the pike staves, they were put out of
right ; where I do not know.
Did yon see any cannon-ball any where ?— -No.
What were you to do with the cannon when
you got them, do you know? — Yes; in the
first place, they intended to put a cartridge
into toe cannon, and in the next place it was
pr6posed to tabs a sledge hammer along with
them, and knock off the iron railing to charge
the cannon with, as it was conceived it would
do gt«ater damage than cannon ball; this
was thp proposition of Mr. Thistlewood.
Ton luive not told ns yet where the men
were to come from? — I do not know, and
what I do not know I will not answer to.
' I think you named a person of the name of
Edwards there continually, where is he tiow ?
•— rdo not know.
Have not you seen him to-day T— I have
sot seen Edwards since the 22nd.
VOL. XXXIII.
He was a very active man there generally ? —
I have seen him as active as the rest of them.
More active than the rest ? — He seemed to
be in more close communication with Harrison,
Brunt, Thistlewood, and the rest of them.
You do not know where he is now ? — I do
not know, I never heard of him.
What pewspaper was it you received the
information of the dinner from? — The New
Times.
Have yon since learned whether Jt was true
that there was to be a dinner there or not that
day ? — I have never made any inquiry, but I
saw it in the paper myself.
You only know what the paper informed
yoo?— -No.
You have given a confused description of
what passed in the hay-loft ? — I do not know
what loft it was.
It was over a stable ?— Yes.
The unfortunate accident was to a man who
said, ^make vray, let me come forward'*?—
Yes.
And you described an arm came forward
with a sword in it ? — I did not say a sword.
Were you pretty near at that time? — I was
at the end of the room, under the bench, next
to Cato-street.
How near was that firm to your own body ^
— -I suppose it could^not be above four or five
feet off; I mean the arm that extended from
the door.
Was not your own arm within sufiicient
reach to have done that mischief yourself? —
It could not be, for I had not an instrument of
any description in my hand.
Answer the question : — was not your own
arm within sufficient reach to have done that
mischief yourself ? — I might have done it with
a pistol, but not with a sword.
Then you were not sufficiently near?— I was
not.
Do yotl recollect who put out the candle ? —
I do not know whether it was put out by the
report of the pistol, or blown out intentionally.
I ou did not put it out ?— I did not ; at the
report of the pistol the candle was out in-
stantly.
Robert Adami re-examined by Mr. SoUciiar
General,
You were at Cambray? — Yes.
Were you carrying on your trade there ?—
Yes.
Were the English soldiers there ? — Yes.
Were you carrying on your trade among the
English soldiers and officers at the time? —
Yes.
Eleanor Walker called.
Lord Chief Justice Abbott. — It is quite im-
possible that we can finish to-night. That
must be felt on all sides.
Mr. Attorney Genera/.— Our attention has
been directed to that, my lord ; but then it be-
comes proper to consider the most convenient
3D
771]
I GEORGE 17.
Trial of Arthur Tkitthwood
C77«
time^ to break off for the night, to that we
may have strength for another day.
Lord Chkf Jtatke Abbott.^—WiXL yon con-
clede now ?
Mr. Attorney Gentral* — ^This is the most de«
tailed examination.
Lord Chief Juftiee Abbott.'-^li is quite clear
we must have a third day, and therefore we
need not exhaust ourselves tine first day. Is there
any preparation to accommodate the gentle-
men of the jury ?
Mr. Sheriff JRoMioetf.— There is, my lord.
Lord Chief Jtatke ^66of^— Gentlemeo of
the jury, according to what we learn from the
attorney-general, and the counsel for the de*
fendant, it is impossible that you, or I, or any
person concerned in this trial, should have
strength to go through it without adjournment.
Probably some of you have come m>m a dis-
tance ; and as we must adjourn, probably you
may think this as convenient a time as any
•ther r proper care has been taken to provide
for you.
Adjourned to to-morrow morning nine o'clock.
Tuesday, 18th Apsil, 1820.
The Prisoner was set to the bar, the other per-
sons indicted with him being placed behind.
Thittlewood.-—^f lord, will you have the
goodness again to-day to indulge me with a
seat?
Lord Chief Justice Abbott. — Certainly.
VavidMon. — If your lordship will be pleased
to let me have a seat, I was very unwell last
night, with standing so long ?
Lord Chief Justice Abbott. — ^They may place
two or three chairs there, and you may relieve
one another.
Eleanor Walker sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gwmey*
Are you servant to Henry Rogers ? — ^Yes.
Where docs he live?— At No. 4, Fox-court.
Is that in Gray's-inn-lane ? — ^Yes.
Had you a lodger in your house of the name
of Brunt?— Yes.
What rooms did he occupy? — ^Two. One
was a large one, and one a small one.
On what floor?— The second floor.
Were they front or back rooms ? — Front.
Both front ?— Yes.
In the month of January last was there any
two-pair stairs back room to let ? — No, there
was not to let ; there was one occupied ; a
back room was occupied in January.
Did the person come in in January, or when
did he come in, to the best of your remem-
brance ?— In January.
Who introduced him to you ? — Mr. Brunt.
As well as you can recollect, how long be
i
fore Bruot vras taken up ? — ^A month or five
weeks.
Brunt you ^ay introduced him to you?—
Yes.
Did Brunt tell you what he was ?— No, he
did not tell me what he was ; he said he waa
lately come from the country, and he wanted a
lodging, and he knew we had one to let, and
he wished us to take him in.
Did you afterwards find out the name of that
person? — No, I never heard the name.
At what was the lodging taken, how mucb
a week ? — ^Three shillings*
Was it furnished or unfiirnished? — ^Un-
furnished.
Did the person tell you any thing about fur«
niture ? — He said, pei haps he might not bring
his goods in for a week or better.
Did he ever bring any furniture in? — No,
not to my knowledge.
Should you know him again? the lodger?
—-No, I do not think I should.
And you do not recollect hearing him called
by his name ? — No, I do not.
Lsrd Chief Justice Abbott.-^yfhzi room was
it that was taken ?— The two-pair back room.
Mr. Giirmw.— While this person occupied
the room, did you see any persons go up and
down stairs ? — I have never seen them. 1 have
heard people go up and down stairs, but not
seen them.
May Rogers sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gumey,
We understand you live in Fox-court? — ^Yes.
And that Brunt lodged with you ? — ^Yes.
Eleanor Walker is your niece and servant ?
—Yes.
Do you remember the circumstance of her
letting the two pair of stairs back room?—
While I was absent she did.
Did you ask any question of Brunt, your
lodger, who it was that had taken your room ?
— I did, after he had been in my bouse about
a week.
What did he say respecting him ? — I said^
" Mr. Brunt, you have brought in a lodger, I
understand ; I hope he is a good one.*^ He
says, ^* I hope be is, Mrs. Rogers ; I have no
doubt he will always pay you." I said, ^I
think it is very right I should know.'' ^ I
know nothing more of the man,'' says he, '' than
the seeing him at a public-house, and that he
was inquiring for a lodging; knowing you had
one to let, I recommended ihe lodging.''
Did he say what he was? — I asked him
what he was ; he said he was a butcher put of
work.
Did he ever sleep there ? — Not to my know-
ledge.
Did he ever bring any furniture in? — ^Never.
How many weeks did he pay you for ?—
Four or five, I could not swear which.
While he was there, did you observe any
persons going up and down stairs? — I did
once ; one evening.
7731
« •
for High Treason,
A. D. 1820.
[774
Was that when yoa were going to put your
children to bed ? — I was putting my children
te bed.
How many did you observe going up? —
Three; the middle of the three was a black
man.
Were you upon the stairs as they went up ?
—No, I had a little room up the one pair; and
as I came from my own door^ the kght from
my room shone on their faces.
You were on the landing-place ? — I was ; I
saw tbem go up.
At other times, have you observed whether
any persons were going up and down stairs ?-—
I have early in the day seen a strange man,
but taken no notice who nor what they were.
Had you, in any parts of the day, observed
persons going up and down stairs ?«-No :
Deing so seldom at home, I had no opportunity.
Joseph Hale sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gvamey*
Are you apprentice to Brunt? — ^Yes.
How long have you served of your time ? —
Two years the 3rd of last February.
Have you lived with him in Fox-court ?—
Yes.
Do you remember any person taking the back
room two pair of stairs in Fox-court in January?
— I remember a person coming up there, but I
do not know exactly what month it was.
Who was that person ?— It was a butcher.
What was his name? — Ings.
Who looked at the room with him? — Brunt.
Brunt and he looked at the room together ?
—Yes, they did.
, After they had looked at the room, or while
they were looking at it, did you hear Brunt
ssiy any thing to Ings ? — When they came out
of the room I heard Brunt say to Ings, " It
will do, go down and give them a shilling.*'
Brunt said that to Ings ? — ^Yes, he did.
After that time did Ings use to come to the
room? — Yes. ■
Who kept the key of the room?— The key
of the room was mostly left in Brunt*s room.
Then when Ings wanted to go into the room,
what did he do ? — He used to come to Brunt's
room for the key.
From that time till your master was taken
up, did there use to be any number of persons
coming to that room ? — ^Yes.
ViTas that seldom or frequent? — Every
evening.
Whom have you seen come to these meet-
ings every evening ? — ^DifTerent persons.
Can you give me an enumeration of their
names ? — Yes.
Wh^ were thqr ? — Ings, Tidd, Thistlewood,
Brad1>um, Edwards, Hall, Potter, Strange.
Do you remember a man of the name of
Adams ? — Yes.
Did he come ?-;- Yes.
Do you recollect any black man, or man
of colour ? — ^Yes.
What was his name P — Davidson.
Did be come ? — Yes.
Do you remember whether there were more
than those you have named? — I remember
more used to come, but I do not know their
names."
How long in the evening did they use ge*
nerally to stay? — Nearly about two hours in
general.
Was there any furniture in the room ?—
None that ever I saw.
What did they do for seats ?^They used to
take chairs in, out of Brunt's room, to sit on.
Did you hear them talking, occasionally, and
speaking to each other?— No.
Did you ever hear them call Thistlewood by
any name ? — ^Yes; they used to call him some-
times T. and sometimes Arthur.
Do you remember any day seeing the door
open, and observing any thing in the room? —
Yes.
What did you see ? — ^I saw some long poles.
What were they likef — ^Tbey were like
branches of trees.
Cut rough from the tree ? — ^Yes.
How many do you think ? — I suppose about
twenty.
Did you at any time hear any work going
on in the room ? — Yes.
What kind of work? — ^I have heard ham«
mering and sawing.
Your master was taken up on Thursday, the
24th of February, was he not ? — Yes, he was.
On the Sunday morning before that (that
would be the 20tn) was there any meeting in
that room ? — In the morning.
W*as that a meeting of the usual number,
or a smaller, or a larger number than usual ?-—
There were more that morning than ever I had
seen come up before.
Were the persons whom you have named
to me all there? — Yes.
After the meeting had broken up, did you
see any person in your master's room with'
him? — In my master's own room there was one*
Who was that? — Strange.
He had been at the meeting you have told
me ? — Yes, he was.
Was there any meeting on the Monday
evening? — ^Yes.
On the Tuesday evening was there any
meeting ? — Yes.
On the Wednesday, do you remember any
number of persons coming ?— There were se-
veral persons in and out in the course of the
day. 4
Did any of them come into your work-^hop ?
—Yes.
That was one of the front rooms? — ^Yes.
Did they do any thing there ? — ^Yes.
What .^'— They had got some pistols, and
were putting new flints into them.
How many pistols do you think you saw ?—
Five or six.
Did they finish flinting the pistols there ?^
No.
What stopped them ?-— One of the men said
that tibere were people overlooking them, and
Brunt told them to go into the back room.
775]
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial qf Arthur ThuUewood
Overlooking them from the opposite house ?
—Yes.
Who were the persons who were so patting
in the flints ? — Strange, and a man whom I
did not know.
Did they then go ii\to the back room ? — Yes«
In the course of that afternoon, how many
persons do you remember seeing in that back
room, or going in and out of it i^l cannot
say, but I saw several in the course of that
day.
Did you see Thistlewood there ? — ^Yes.
Lord Chief Justice Abbott, ^On the Wed-
nesday ?— Vesi
Mr. Gumey, — In the course of the after-
noon» did he ask you for any thing ?^Yes.
What did he ask you for? — A piece of
writing paper.
Did you give him a sheet of writing paper ?
—Yes, I did.
To what place did he take itT^Ibelieye
into the back room.
Lord Chief Justice Abbott. — ^Vou gave it him
in your roaster's room ? — Yes.
Mr. Gumey, — After that, did any person
come out of the back room and give you any
order to fetch any thing ? — Yes,
Who was that? — My master, Qrunt.
What did he desire you to get f — Six sheets
of cartridge paper.
What money did he give you ? — Sixpence.
Did you go and buy it ? — Yes.
To whom did you give it? — My master.
Where did he take it to ?— He took it into
the back room.
About what time, as well as you remember,
ID the afternoon was that? — Between four
and five.
At about what time did the persons who
were in that back-room go away ? — The last
that went away, about eight in the evening.
•Did any of them go away about five or six?
— I believe they did : I heard people go down
stairs.
You were in your work-shop ? — ^Yes.
Did your master go out ?— He was in and
out several times in the course of the day.
What time did he go away finally ?-»About
six.
Lord Chief Jmtice Abbott.-r^oji did not see
him after six ? — No.
«
Mr. Gvmey. — He went away, as you
thought, about six ?— -Yes.
Was he alone, or was there any person with
him ?•— ^Tbere was a man with him.
Do you know that man ? — I do not know
whether I should know that man again.
Was that one of the men you had been used
to see there ? — No.
Had any table from your mistress's room
been taken into the back-room ? — ^Yes.
On that day ?— Yes.
When your mistress was going to drink tea,
did you want that table ? — Yes.
[7T^
What did you do to get it?— «I went to the
back room for it.
Did you go in, or knock at the door ? — I
knocked at the door. .
Who opened it ? — A man by the name of
Potter.
Did you ask for the table ? and did he |pve
it you ? — Yes.
Lord Chief Justke AM)ott, — ^You did not go
in ? — No.
Mr. Gume^.-^By the opening of the door,
were you enabled to see whether there were
any persons in the room besides Potter ? — Yes.
How many do you think there were? —
About four or five.
After your master was gone, did you see
Tidd ?— Yes.
At about what time ? — ^Between seven and
eight, nearly eight.
Into which room did he come?-:— Mrs.
Brunt called him, and he came into her room.
What did she then do P — She took him to
the cupboard, and shewed him a pike head
and a sword.
This was in your master*s room ? — ^Yes.
What passed about them?-— Mrs. Brunt
asked him what she could do with them.
What did he do with themT-— ^Mrs. Brunt
gave them to him, and he took them out of
the room, I believe, into the back-room.
After that time, did you hear any persons
go down stairs? — ^Yes.
Did any person come into Mrs. Brunt's
room ? — Yes.
Did he leave any message? — ^Yes.
What was it?— He said, if any person came
up after any one, he was to be sent to the
White Hart.
Mr. Juitioe Bkhardson. — Whose dtrectioa
was that ?
Mr. Gunu^.— He does not know the peiaon,
my lord. Did any persons come shortly after,
and inquire for your master? — ^Yes.
Were they sent to the White Hart ?— Yes.
Did you go and show them the way ?— Yea^
Did any person come whose name you have
mentioned f— In the course of the evening.
Did Potter come ? — ^Yes.
Did you send him to the White Hart ? — ^Yes.
Did you go and show him tlie way ?— Ho^
he knew the way.
How many were those you had gone to sihow
to the White Hart ?-— Three.
Was Potter alone, or were there any panons
with Potter?-— There were some persona wit^
him.
Did your master come home that night f-«
Yes. »
At about what time f — ^At about nine o'eJod;.
Did you observe any difference in bis drees
from what it was when he went out ? — ^It waa
dirtier.
Did he appear composed or othATwiae? —
No.
In what state did he appear to bef— He
seemed confused.
f7T3
Jkr High T^oicm.
4-.X>. 18S0.
irm
Did you h«iff him ny jMny thiog to his wife
of what had happened 7-^1 heard him say to
his wife it was all up, or words to that effect.
What else did he say P— He said that where
he had been a great many officers had come in.
Any thing elsef— Jast as he spoke these
words a man came in.
Did he ss^ anv thing about himself before
the man oame in?— He faid he had saved his
life, and that was all.
You say, just as he had said that, anothear
man came in ?«— Yes.
Do you know the name of that man ? — ^No.
What did Brunt say lo him upon his oomin|
in?*-He shook hands with him, and asked
him, when he came in, if he' knew who had
informed.
What answer did the man give ? — He said^
*' No."
Did the man say whether any thing had
happened to him? — Yes; he said he had
a areadful blow on the side, and was knocked
down.
Did Brunt say any thing «ore?— Yes.
What did he say?— He said, *^ there is some-
thing to be done yet."
After that, what did he and tiie other man
do? — Thc^ went away together.
After they were gone, did you and Mrs.
Brunt do any thing f — Yes.
What did youdo? — ^Wewent intolngs'sroom.
Lord Chief Justice Abbott. — That was the
backroom?
Mr. Gum^w— What did you see there T--I
saw sereral mings in the cupboard.
Were the twentv poles there which you had
before seen? — Only one.
In the cupboard you saw what? — ^I saw se-
vemt roUs of brown paper with tar in thesou
Any paper twistea up? — Yes.
What paper was that ?«-A piece of cartridge
paper.
Did you see any thing with strings l-^Yes.
How were the strings ? — ^They were rolled
vonndthem.
How large were they ? — ^Abool as big as two
fisU.
Whai do you understand them to be?-^I
have heard since they are hand-grenades.
Did you see any iron pot ? — ^Yes.
Had you seen liaX before ?-^Yes.
Who had it ?— Brunt had ijU
Had he bad it loiqp, or was ii a new pur-
chase?— ^He had had it some time.
Weeks or months??— Some time before, I
canaot say Yvxm long; he used to ase it himself
m his own room.
At. about what time did your master cesne
lienm again?— On the Wednesday «YeDing
about .eleTQu o^doek.
Did )k% give you any dioBCtions before he
went to bed?— Yes.
What? — ^He told me io fet up in IIm morn-
ing as soon as I could, and to clean his boots.
In whait ooadfctioii wbbs they l^Tkeif were
ueiy dirty.
Xhe next moning did you get tip eatly ?«-
He called me about half past six.
What did he say to you ? — He asked me if i
knew the Borough, I told him, yes.
Did he ask you as to any panicuUr nart ttf
the Borough ? — ^He asked me if X knew &o w's-
fields, X told him no.
After this, did he and you go into the bMk
room ?— Yes.
What direotioBs did he give you ?— He told
me to bring a basket in out of his room and
put in the things out of the oupboatd*
Did you and he put any things into the
basket?— Yes.
Was there one basket or two?^Two baskets.
Were the things out of the cupboard pot
into those baskets ? — Yes, they were.
Did he tell you who lived ai Sbesr's4liDlds
that they were going to?<— Yes.
Who)— Potter.
After the things were put into the baskets,
were ether of the baskets put iuto any thing
else? — One of them was.
What was that ?*-Oae of thwi was tied in a
blue apron.
They were mdi boskets ?-~Yea.
Whose blue spron was that ?— Mm. Brant's.
What use haa been made of that blue apsoii
before ? — It had been put np as a curtain in
Xngs's room.
Was the other basket tied in any thing ?«^
No.
I>id spy thing happen directly afWr this ?
—Yes.
What ?— We w«nt into Brunt's ittom to look
for something to tie the other basket in, and
two officers cane up.
Did they take your master into euatody ?*-
Yes.
Did tihey seareh the coom and take the bas-
kets ?— Yes.
Amonff the persons you have spoken of,
where did Tidd live?— In the Hole-in4he-
WBlUpassage, Biook's-market.
Where did Adams live ?— Next door to
Tidd.
You have been at the lodgings of both?-*-
Yes,
Jot^ Baie cross-examined by
Mr. Adolphus.
Brunt was your master ?^->-Yes.
Was be a master shoo maker or « journey-
man E«— A joum^man.
In very poor circumstances ? — ^No.
Had be any journeymen with him or under
him ? — No.
Yon and he did afl the vodc he had to do?
-.-Yes.
What wos Tidd ?-^A shoe-asaker.
living very near you ? — ^Yes.
How 'many cbilmm bad your master?—
One.
Had Tidd a wife and children?— Ho bad a
wife ; I believe he had children.
Was he a ppormaa?-^! do not know.
What w«s Ms. Adams ?-«^ tiio^^mtkv^
7TO1
1 GEORGE IV.
TrM tfArihur TkitOmood
[780
He was a shoe-maker too ? — ^Yes, he was.
You have mentioDed those meetings that
took place from night to night; how many
nights do- you think they came there ? — I can-
not say how many Dights.
I do not mean that you should be upon
your oath to the number, but how many, as
nearly as you can state confidently f — He had
oome nearly five weeks.
Ings had the lodgings neatly five weeks f —
Yes.
Do you mean that there were meetings
every night during that time ? — I believe there
were.
What numbttr were there T — ^I cannot say,
but the most I ever knew of were the Sunday
morning.
Ibat was not the time you went in ? — ^No.
How many were there then ? — I cannot say
bow many exactly, I think there were about
twenty.
You think there were as many as that?—
Yes.
Did you see them as they went up or to-
gether P — I saw them as they went up.
Did you know any of the other persons you
kave named, who, uid in what situations they
were ?— «Yes, I knew some of them.
Who were they t — Strange.
What was he ? — ^He was in a bootpmaker*s
•bop.
Making or selling?-* Selling in the shop.
What were the others ? — I do not know any
of Aierest*
You have talked of one Mr. Edwards, vras
lie there pretty often ? — ^Yes, he was very often.
What was he ? — I believe, an artist*
MThat do you mean by an artist ? — Makes
figures.
What, in the Crown's description is called a
modeller ? — ^Yes.
Do you know any thing more of him ?^-No.
He was there pretty constantly ? — ^Yes.
Was he or Adams there the oftenest?— -Ed*
wards was there the oftenest.
How often do you think Adams was there,
lo your knowledge, in the whole ? — I cannot
say how often ; he used very often to come
upon business.
But to that room of Ings'sP — ^I cannot say
how often.
- Edwards was there daily almost, I suppose ?
•*He used to come almost every day.
What was Hall^ do you know f^-A tailor. I
believe.
Where did he live ? — I do not know.
A journeyman 7—1 believe he was.
All persons of like rank in life ? — Yes.
How many persons do you think were there
at any one time on the Wednesday F-^I can*
not say.
You spoke of nine being there, do you know
of more being there at one time i — Not that I
know of.
Were the rush baskets tou have spoken of
common rush baskets, such as people take to
buy little things in and bring them back ?— Yes.
And the whole materiills you found there
were packed into those rush baskets ? — ^Yes. '
Did they fill them, or did . they lap over f -^
They filled them.
Lord Chief Justice Abbott.^They intend to
produce them I understand.
Mr. Adoffkus, — ^Yes, so I understand, my
lord. However these two rush baskets con-
tained them all, and one of them was covered
with a lady's apron ? — Yes.
You spoke of twenty branches of trees, are
you sure you saw as many as twenty? We
say currently twenty, might not there be only
ten, or a dozen, or fifteen ?~-There were as
nearly as I can guess about twenty.
You say they were branches of trees in a
green raw state 7 — Yes.
You do not know how they came there; you
did not see them brought in r-^No.
There was only one left on the morning of
the Wednesday? — No.
Did they keep a fire in the room? — I believe
they did.
We know what a winter we have had ; you
went one evening to get out the table, was
there a fire there then ?— Yes.
There was a pot which had been used there^
—Yes.
Whether those poles were used to light the
fire or not, you cannot tell; but there was one
left ?— Yes, there was.
Thomu Smart sworn.
Mr. AdoMtui, — That is your only name, is
it P— Yes.
Mr. Adolphtt, — He was called first by the
name of John by my learned firiend.
Lord Chief Jtuiiee Abbotti-^Yout question is
very natural after that certainly.
Thomtu Smart examined by Mr. LUtledale.
You are watchman in the parish of Saint
George, Hanover-^uare ? — ^Yes.
Do you recollect being on the watch on the
22nd of February last ? — Yes.
Where do you watch 7 — On the south side dT
Grosvenor-square ; my box nearly faces lord
Harrowby's.
At what time in the evening did you go on
your watch? — ^We go on at eight o'clock at
that time of the year*
Do you recollect, soon after you went on
the watch, any thing particular attracting your
attention? — ^I saw four very suspicious men
walking about the square ; I thought they were
after no good; two tall and two short, one
was a btadc man or almost black.
Wltat time was that ? — Half past eight';
after I had calM half-past- eight ; I thought
they were very suspicious characters^ and I
looked at them.
Should you kuow them i^n ? — ^I think I
should not
. Did you watch them ?— I did take particu*
Ur notice of them ; &ey walked very upright.
7811
Jitr High TrtttsoH.
At O. 1890i
[783
■wad carried a stick ; tbey vrere looking down
the areas, and taking. notice of the areas.
. Was Charles Bissix a watchman on the
watch? — Bissix is a watchman at the other
comer ; we join every half hour at the comer
of South Audley-street.
Thomas Smart cross-examined by
Mr. Ctertvood.
It is no uncommon thing for you, as a watch-
man, to see people whom you think suspi-
cious ? — Very common.
Henry Gillan sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Bolland.
Where do you live? — ^At 15, Mount-street,
Orosvenor-square.
What are you? — Servant to Mr. Whittle,
apothecary.
Do Tou ever use tlie Rising Sun public-
bouse, m Charles-street? — ^Yes.
Where is Charles-street F — It rans into
Grosvenor-square, and into Mount*street.
Is it in the street, or at the corner of the
street? — ^At the comer of the Mews. -
Do you remember being U»ere on Tuesday
night?— Yes.
What night was that ?— The 23nd of Feb-
ruary.
Did you see either of the prisoners there ?
— ^Yes, that short man with a orown coat on.
Mr. Bo2/aiu2.-- That is Brant, my lord. Was
he alone, or in company with any other per-
son ? — lliere was a tall man along with him.
. Did they take any refreshment f— Yes, some
bread and cheese, and some porter.
Did you play with them at any game ?—
Yes, the dominos lay on the table, and that
man challenged me to play a game at dominos
with him.
Did you plav with him ? — ^Yes, two games
I played with him.
Did you leave the house first or they ? — I
did.
What time did you go away ? — ^A little be-
fore ten.
Leaving them there f — ^Yes.
John Htctcr MorUon sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Attorney General,
I believe you are a journeyman cutler to Mr.
Underwood, in Drury-lane i
Lord Chkf Jtatke Abbott. — Is it in Dmry-
lane, or in some court there ? — In Drury-
lane.
Mr. Attorney General, — Do vou remember
at an^ time about Christmas last, any man
bringing you a sword ? — Yes, on Christmas*
eve.
He brought that to your master's shop ?—
Yes, he did ; I was in the shop.
What was^ the man's appeanmce? — ^Hewas
babited like a butcher.
For what purpose did he bring this sword
into your masters shop ?— He inquired of me
I
if I sround swords; I said yes ; he produced
one from undemeatlli hiy tmock fiKX^, wilhoal
a scabbard.
Having produced it, did he leave.it with
ou for the purpose of being ground? — ^Yes,
e left it for the purpose of being ground and
set, particularly at the point.
Did you ask him, or did he give yon hk
name, at that time? — It is customary for us to
ask the name of the person who leaves an ar-
ticle, and he said, put the name of Eames, as I
understood, but I am rather hard of hearing,
and it might be the name of Ings.
Did you grind it ? — Yes.
Did he call for it again ? — ^Yes, in about three
days.
Did you see that person again?— He called
about a fortnight after, with another sword.
What sort of a sword was that? — A veiy
long one, much longer than the other, a sort of
cavalry sword.
What did he brinj; that for ?— He said, he
wanted that ground in the same manner as the
last. I did not inquire his name at that time,
knowing him again.
Was that ground for him? — ^Yes.
Should you know that man again ? — ^Yes.
Look and see whether he is there ? — ^Yet,
he is the person at the bar behind the first one,
at the left hand side [pomimg out Ingt],
Do vou think you should know the swords
again r— -Yes ; there is only one I ^ve seen^
that is the same.
Mr. Attorn^ Oenerak — By and by, my lord,
we will shew it to the witness ; we will not in-
tenrupt the case now. Was that shewn you by
one of the Bow-street officers ? — ^Yea ; that was
the one left at Christmas.
Edward Stmpton sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Attorney General,
Are you corporal major of the second regi-
ment of Life-guards ?-»Yes.
Do you know a person of the name of
Harrison ? — ^YeSi
Was he in that reffiment?-— Yes, he was.
Is Harrison at the bar ?— Yes, John Harrison
\jpointing km on/].
When was he discharged from the Iiib«
guards? — In 1815, 1 believe.
Was it in 1815, or Uter?— In 1814, I be-
live.
That is six years ago ? — ^Yes.
At that time he was in the regiment, was he
in the King-street-barracks with you ?— Yei^ he
was.
By being there, had he the opportunity of
knowing the barracks ? — ^Yes.
I believe one side of the barracks looks
into Gloucester-mews, or did? — ^There w^re '
windows on that side.
Was there a window next Gloucester-mews *
from any lofl of the barracks P— Yes, there were
five windows.
In thoee lofts what waa kept?— Hay and
straw.
' i
Tas]
1 GEORGB IV.
Trialrtf Arthur ThMemood
C794
Ltrd Chitf Juthce JMoii.'^Ww att time
fi»i wind<ww in ibe loft, or only om of tiienif
— >FiTO windovvB in tbe loft.
Wt, Attarmy Ckntnd, — ^At the time Har^
moo was in the barracks^ hare you over seen
him in those lofts ? — ^Yes, frequently.
Yon say the windows are now stopped np ;
when were they stopped upF — ^It was some
days after the affair happened at Cato-street.
At the time of the affair in Cato-ttreet those
windows were in the loft ? — ^Yes.
EAoori Simpmn crom-esamined by
Mr.OupiRiotf.
How many men are there in the barracks in
King-street ? — It is not a barrack for men, it
is for horses only.
How many men are there in the barracks at
Kensington ? — I really cannot say the number.
I thought yon might* know as a soldier? —
Nearly 300 I should suppose.
How many foot guaras are there n/roally in
town f — That I do not know*
Are there a thousand ? — ^upon my word I
cannot say.
You may know pretty nearly the number ?«-
To say that exactly I cannot.
Do you know any thing of a man of the
name of Adams ? — '^o^ I do noL
There are usually 300 men in the Knights-
bridge barracks, you say ?— Yes, I shonki viasok
afiout tl^it.
/omeiilZibiit sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. Attorn^ GeneraL
Yon are a pawnbroker in Berwick-street ?—
Yes.
Do 3rou know the prisoner Davidson, the
black man ?— Yes.
Do yon know Mm from his having pledged
things at your Bbop?-^Yes«
Do you remember, on the 23Td of February
last, fau coming to vour shop to take any thing
ont of pledge ?•— I ao.
What was it that he wanted then ont of
pled|^e ? — ^A blunderbuss.
Dtd'he bave it ont ? — Yes» he did.
'Was that in the forenoon t— In the mom-
ing.
'What Idnd of ablnndeibnss was iti— Brass-
bmelled.
Was it a large blundeibuss or a small one t
-*About this length (eighteen or twenty inches).
Iftomos Wden sworn ^—*£xttnuied by.
Mr» Gimey.
Are yon a cow keeper ? — ^I am not now.
' W w^iyon a ODW keeper f — ^I have been.
Mr. Adolphm. — Howdo you spell yourname ?
M^i,dfe,n.
What were you in February last P — I sold
milk. I kept a cow at that time.
Mn Gftsni«)ik-*-Wer»yeti formerly a member
of a shoe-maker's club? — I was.
Atttlmi'.cluby.faave'yDa mm a mmi'-of tbe
name of Wilson ?— I bave^
Mr. GtrwMv.— Let Wilson stand forward
(WUmnetoodfitwntd.) A few days before the
3M of Febvnair last* did you see WUson?^
Yes» I did.
Do yon mean Wilson tike man at the bar t^»
I do.
Did he make any proposition to yon P — ^He
did.
What was that proposition ? — ^He met me in
the stieet as I was walking, and asked me if I
would be one of a party to come forward to
destroy his majesty's ministers.
Did he say where they were to be destroy-
ed P — He did not : he said at a cabinet dinner; ^
that they were waiting for a cabinet dinner,
and all things were ready.
Did he say what sort of things they had got
ready P— He said, they had some such things as
I never saw, which he called by the name of
hand-grenades.
What more did he say? — ^He said they de-
pended upon me to be made one.
Did he mention the name of any of his asso-
ciates ? — He said Mr. Thistlewood would be
glad to see me, if I would midLe one.
Did he say what use was to be made of the
hand-grenades? — He told me they were obliged
to be lit with fuses, and to be put in under the
Uble.
Wliat thenP—- And all that escaped the ex-
plosion was to die by tbe edge of the sword, or
some other weapon.
Did b« say any things about fires ?— He said
tbey meant to light up some fires, and by so
doing it would keep the town in a state oi
oonfiision for some days, and it would become
a general thing.
&d he explain what he meant by Ushtihe
fltes P What was to be *fired ?~-He nommatM
some booses.
What places do you remember that he men-
tioned P — ^I remember lord Harrowb/s to be
one ; lord Castlereagh's another ; the duke of
Wellington^
Mr. Cunoood. — Do yon mean bouses or
persons ?— -I mean houses.
Mr. Gtrney. — ^Were there any other build-
inn mentioned ?— Lord Sidmonth's, and Uie
bisnop of London's, and some other that I do
not remember. I heard those mentioned.
Do yon remember any other boildings that
he mentioned ? — I do not;
Did yon acquiesce, or what did yovdo-?<*-I
told him I should make one.
How many days, to the best of your recollee*
tion, was this before the discoveir at Cato-
stient f^I- believe four or flv« days before.
B<6fore-that, did yon go to lord Hanowby^ ?
-^res, I did.
On what day did yon go ? — ^I am not <|nite
certain.
Was that before the day on 'wbicb the dia-*
odfv^iT'was made at Cato-street ?— It was.
Did yon folloif his lordship to tho paik?-^-
didi
Didyon give Mm any inforinatioti of vrtmt'
785]
Jhr High Tieoion,
A. D. 182a.
[786
had beon communicated to you?-*I gave him
a note vith infonnatioii.
On Wednesday the 23rd did yon see Wilson
again } — I did.
At about what time of the day ?^I believe
it was between four and five o'clock in the
afternoon.
Where did you meet with him ? — In Man-
chester-street, as I was going home.
By Manchester-square ? — Yes.
You were going with some milk ? — No, I
. was going home with one of my little girls in
my hand.
What did he say?— He called me by the
name of Hiden, and said I was the very man
he wanted to see. I asked him what there
was going to be, and he said there was going
to be a cabinet dinner that night at lord
Harrowby's, in Grosvenor-square.
Did he tell you where you were to come to ?
^— I asked him where 1 was to meet them, and
he told roe I was to go up to Cato-street, to
the public-house by the sign of the Horse and
Groom, and there I was to go in ; it is the
comer of Cato-street; or otherwise I was to
stop at the comer, till I was shored into a
stable close by.
Did you make any inquiries of him^ as to
their numbers?— I uked him what time I
should meet them, and he said by a quarter
before six, or six, I was to be there.
Did you ask him as to how many there were
in it ? — I asked him how many there were to
be there, and he said about twenty or thirty.
Did he tell you whether there were to be
any others in other places? — I asked him
whether there were going to be any others
in other places, and he said there was to
be another party in the Borough, another in
Gray's-inn-lane, one in Gee*s-court, or other-
wise in the city^ I cannot be certain which.
Did he %ay any thing about GeeVcourt,
particularly ?~He said that all Gee's-court
were in it, but they would not act unless the
English were in it.
What did he say about Gee's-coort ?»He
said they were all in it, but would not act
unless the Enelish began it, for they had been
deceived so often.
Did he inform you what people live in Gee's-
eourt? — ^I understood they were Irish.
Lord CMef Juttice Abbott, — ^Do you know
where Gee's-court is? — Yes, it goes out of
Oxford-street, one end of it goes into Oxford-
street and another end of it into Edward-
street, or some street there : I know the part
perfectly well.
. Mr. Gtcmey.— »Is it near the market ? — Op-'
posite St. George's market, the other side.
What did he say? — He told me not to be
long ; he said to me the first time, there was
a gentleman's servant who had been supports
ing some of the party with some quantity of
aoner, and if they would act upon the sub-
ject, he would |;i?6 them a good aeal more.
Did he mention any Uiing about any arms,
VOL. xjrxm.
any fire anns ? — He said they had some
arms ; Jie asked me whether I had got a gun ;
I said yes, I had, but it was a mbbishing one.
Did he say any thing more about it ? — I told
him the lock of my gun was at the gunmakers
to repair ; he said they would provide me with
a gtin and something to work it with. '
Did he tell you any thing about cannon ?— *
He said there were two pieces of disumon in
Gray's-inn-lane, that they could get at very
easily, by breaking in some small doors.
Did he mention any place in the city, at
which they were to meet in the course of the
night? — He said there were four pieces of
cannon at some artillery ground, which thej
could easily get by killing a centinel.
After getting them, did he say where they
should go to ? — He said, that after doing the
grand thing in Grosvenor-square, they were to
retreat and meet somewhere in the neighbour-
hood of the Mansion-house.
Did you and he then part ? — He told me, I
was to be sure to come to my time, or else if
I was late, the grand thing would be done
before I came.
Did you go to John-street that evening ?—
I did.
At what time ? — I think nearly seven o'clock,
I believe the entrance to Cato-street firom
John-street is under a little gateway at the
comer of the Horse and Groom? — It is; the'
Horse and Groom is the comer house that
joins Cato-street and John-street.
When you got to this gateway whom did
you see ? — I saw Wilson and Davidson.
By Davidson do you mean tlie black man 1
—The man of colour. ^
Is that the man at the bar? — It is.
You had seen him before, I believe f'^-'Re-
peatedly.
Did Davidson speak to you ? — ^He did.
What did he do .' — He said, I was behind
my time ; I said yes, we served a family with
milk, and I was obligated to go there first.
Did he ask you to do any thmg P — He asked
me if I would go in ; I said I could not go in,
for I was going for some cream ; he said if I
would go in Mr. Thistlewood was there.
You say you had known him before ? — Yes,
I had.
Had he ever mentioned Thistlewood's name
to you before ? — ^He had, several times, as he
had called upon me, and I had seen him with
two or three more friends.
You say Davidson asked you to go in, ai^d
you said you had something else to d6 j did he
mention any thing about time ? — I told him I
must go and get the cream, and he told me I
must take care to come to my time, if I could.
I asked him what time they should leave there; .
he said about eight o'clock.
Did he tell yon what to do if you should
come after your time ? — He told roe if I was
not there at Uie time they left Cato«street, t
was to follow them down to Grosvenor«square^
and the fourth house from the corner of Uros-
venoiusqoare .there I should find them.
3 £
7S71
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial' vf-Aifhir t%iUkw>od
Vt9S
Did he mention on which side of the sqtiat^f
— ^The bottom part of the square, the faxther
side of the square, the bottom side next Charles-
street.
Thomas Itiden cross-examined by Mr. Ado^kus.
How many days before the 23rd of February
was it tiiat you first saw Wilson ? — I saw him
a 'long time before; seven or eight months.
How long before that had you this first con-
versation with him f — Four or five days.
VVas t6at before the Sunday preceding that
Wednesday on whicii this happened? — I am
not certain of that.
Was that on the Snnday ?— >I cannot say ; I
am not certain ; it was fonr or five dajrs before-
Nothing depends upon it more man ybur
endeavouring to ^ the time ; do you think it
was before or after that? — I am notable to
think ; I am not certain.
You saw nothing furrier of him before the
l&nday ? You never conversed With him again
till the 23rd? -No.
You never went by his invitation, nor saw
any other person ? — No, I did not.
Yon went yety properly, very commendably,
and gave information, such as you had, at lord
Hkrrowby's house ? — ^I did.
You did not see his lordship there, but fol*
lowed his lordship, and communicated it to
him? — ^Yes.
What day was that?— I am not able to say.
The 23rd was Wednesday ; was it the Satur-
day> Sunday, or Monday, or Tuesday ?^I do
not know what day it was; I cannot state that
exactly.
How long before you saw Wilson again in
Manchester-street, MandhesteNsquare,had you
been at lord Harrowby's ? — I had been at his
lordship's house after the time that I saw him
and haa the conversation ; between the time I
saw him first, and the day I saw him in Man-
chester-street.
How many days before ?— A day or two.
It might be as early as the Monday? — It
might be a day or two before, but I Catmot
apeak precisely to that.
All his communication was made to you, as
you stood in the street? — ^Tbe last communica-
tion was, as we walked up and down Manches-
ter-etreet, and towards the barracks in King-
street.
Uow long might you be occnoied in that
conversation ? — Probably from half an hour to
duree quarters of an hour.
Between four and five o'clock were you cot
with your milk .'—No, I was not
Afterwtirds, when yon got to Cato>«tfeet,
you told them you must go and get cream,
find it where yon could ; and they let 700 Jgo 7
—Yes.
AuQ you wentP — Yes.
Mr. Ottrncy.— Will your Kirdship permit me
tb ask a t^tiestion ? Is that the letter you gave
tolord Harrowby? T$hewmgit to the wUnetsJ]
— Yed,itis.
It is addresised to lofd Castlere^ghP— Yes.
Mr. ilibi^Afltf.-^HbW eiime yw toi!irect'ybti#
attention to lord Harrowby ?^1 colild net tM
lord Castlereagb.
You had called ?~-I had not MM, bMMI
walked before the hbuse.
And not seeing him^ you Webt to h»rd iiai*^
rowby's ? — ^Yes.
Forenum of the Jwry. — ^Is that your own
hand-writing ? — ^Yes, it is.
Mr. uido/nAifr.— You have used ^e )>hmse
his mt^esty^s ministers : Was that the phiaM
that was used by Wilson and'you in convena-
tion T— It Wa^, VCs de&troy his majesty's milaia-
ters.
That was the teiy W6rd that %aii iMd ?-^
Yes.
The 'Earl of BJarrowby sworn. — Examined bj
Mr. Attorney General,
1 beiieve your lordship resides inGvesverior-
square ? — ^Yes.
On the South side near Charles-street ^— A
few doors from Gharles-st^et, next door to the
Archbishop of York.
I believe you are a privy conncilloi^ and one
of his majesty's ministers? — ^I am.
Your l<Mship is President of the Ce«neil,
iukd one of the cabinet ? — I am.
Do you remember in the month of Febraaijr
last intending to give a cabinet dinner ? — ^Yes.
On what day was that dinner intended to
have been given ? — ^I think it was on Wed-
nesday, the 23rd of February.
By a cid>inet diniier, it is meant that the
cabinet minister^ alone mefct at dinner f — 'At
the cabinet dinners no persons but those wh»
compose what is called the cabinet are invited^
consisting of the principal officers.
Does yoor lordship recollect how many dayk
before the 23nl of Febniary, the cards of in^
vitation were issued to the different minislerst
— My servant may be able to sti^ to that
more correctly than I can. I believe the ha-
vitations went out the latter end of the pre^
ceding week.
Will your lordship be good enough to ema*
merate the names of those noblemen and |re»-
tiemen who composed the cabinet, aind whl»
were invited upon that occasion?— My lord
chancellor, the earl of Liverpool fiitt lord oC
the Treasury, Mr. Vansittart diancellor of the
Exchequer, the ^rl Bathurst, lord Sidffl6Qthy
lord CasUereagh.
Loftl Chief Justice Abbott.-^'Wht office docb
earl Bathurst hold ?— Secretaiy of State to tlie
Colonial Department ; lord Castlereagh secr^
tanr of state for the Foreign pepartmeht, ]^nr^
STdmouth^cretaiy of state for^hb H<An^ *!>«-.
partment, the earl of WeisttnoreTattdldid M^
Seal, lord Melville iRi^t'totti of «he Adlfiftid^,
the duke of Wiellihgtbn mai^ter iettiM of wfe
Qrdhance, Mr. Canning first'commi^ibher xiC
the India Board, Mr. Robinisdn ptesidliifat0f tt^
Board of TnLde, Mr. 6athufst chanceHor ^offM
duchy of Lancaster, Mr. WetlesteyPote^'IpaSttht
of the Mint, and the earl x)f Mul^iAiVe; ,
rs#]
f^ Hvk TrfMon.
Mr. A^t^^fV^ QeairaL-rrl WoM ^ ypur
lordBhip whetheE al} thos^ i^obUmei) anrf gen«
llenen you haro euumerat^d ^r^ priyjr coun-
cillors ?-rTbey are.
Ace ibey employ^ by bis iRsjf^fl^iji tb?
employed in ihe different o$c^ I have ppur
meratedy and also from wh^i i# caUpd tbe
fiHwifit, ooupcil.
Are they calleA )iU ipfjesty's minis^prs )-7r
Id ooBBiD)on pftflai^pe they ^r.e*
Do you remember^ my lord, any day pf^
^Hdii^g that dinner, yoyr lordship ri^Wg to>f ^s
thepark ? — On the Tuesday.
The 4inDei^ being intended for the Wednes-
day?— Yes; on tbe T^^esday preceding that, (
vas riding in tbe par|^ widiout a servant ; \
think it might be beforie two o'clock ; I wap
afterwards going ^ a council tp be bfld at
CftfUoD-palace.
Relate what occurr.ed?-~ Af I pame ^ear
pFosrenor-jg^atey a person came up to me, ^nd
a^ed me ifl was lord Harrowby ; 1 said I w^ ;
be then told me that he wished much that f^
latter should be communicated to lord Castle-
reagliy which was of considerable importance
bo,£ to his lordship and to myself; that he
himself afraid d appearing——
Mr. Adolpha, — I beg your lordship's pardon,
I apprehend thi^ is not evidence.
Mr. Attorney Oeneral. — Did he give your
lofdsbip ^ letter upon that occasion ? — ^He did.
Is that the letter ? [hantUng it to his lordship,]
•— 'Thj^ is the letter he delivered to me, I havp
fiffflcmb^Afit.
Pid you aftpnjrards giye thfit letter to my
ted C^tlereagby or send it to him P — When
} jGUm^ to CarUop-palace, I found lord CastLer
m^ W9$ opt iberey and I {nrwarded it to him.
^S»fi mao left you ^— After some further con-
ynifUlijttn I asked the man^ who bad expr^sed
fais wish to have some further conyersatioi^
with roe, wbet^er be had put his name and ad-
^Uiess ^ that letter ; he told me he had not j I
Itoof^d,
Did he in fact giv<e you a card with his adr
4niBs?— Hedid. •
fjord Chief Jugticfi Abbott, — Do you produce
(he card ?~^I had the card ; I am not certain
Uuit I bav/e it now ; yes^ this is it^ fprodudng it.']
Mr. Attonuy Generfd, — ^Your Jp^dship sa^
Ibe J||#t witness before he r»Mrfid l-r-^^j that
was the .man, bis pame wj^s fliden.
jm iwur lordship ^tenwaids see that man
m^^r-Yesi I did.
W\u»AiAyw ^«^hMn«gain?— Isaipfcm
•gain, by appointment, on^edjoesdaymonu^g,
WiQiBig tbB ymng jdap4^ops* i^ tbe liAg in
Hyde-park.
I jBwst not ask your lorddiip wba^ .con-
^TAimMMy? took place between yoii .^nd him
upon thuJ^iQcicasion, tot I woold 9^ wb^tW
the dinner really topic j^ace iaty our lordship's
houn^Ui^rfj^^sm^J^Tkt dioAer.oid
not take pbMei
4. a 1820. j:?©^
Thai is, tN po]>lemen aod gentlem^ di4
not come to your house to dinner ; but wer^
the preparations postpone^, or did they go on
ih^ same a^ if the dinner wa^ to take place ?--?
All the preparations went on as if the dinner
iprajk t9 take plac^y until I wrote a note froii^
the earl pf J^iyerpoors to my bead servant, tQ
say that they would not dine there.
At what hour was that?~I thin)c between
seven and eight ; but my servant can speak 19
that better than I can.
Then the preparations went on till- that
time ?~-Yes, I should imagine till nearly eight
o'clock ; tiH that note was received.
At about what hour would the party have
assembled if the dinner had taken place ?— ^
Between seven and half past seven.
The Earl of Harrowby Cross-examined by
Air. Curwood*
Will your lordship permit me. to ask wh»
Iher yo^ had any knowledge of the matter pre-
vious to that communicated by that witness I
-rA previous general knowledge.
I believe there was a man of the name of
Edvirards had given infoxmation; does your
lordship know a man of the name of Edwards?
— ^No, I do not.
Yopir lordship had never sepn him ?— No,
never.
How long previous to that had your lord-
ship known of this? — I cannot say precisely.
A fortnight or a month ?-— I hardly know to
what the question points; if you refer to f,
Seneral knowledge of some plan being inten-
ed, we had had for some tipi.e ^ason to susr
pect such an intention, the precise period I
cannot fix.
I do not ask to precise period, but as nearly
as your lordship can fix it ; a fortnight, or tbref
weeks or a month ? — I should say lopger,
Two months?— I capnot say whether two
monjths, but for some time we had had reasoq
to suspect tb^ some intention of a similar
nature existed.
John BtJcer sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Attorney General,
I believe you are butler to lord Harrowby ? —
I am.
Do yoi| remember a cabinet dinner being
intended to be had at his house in the mont^
xif February last ?— Yes.
On the 23rd I believe ?— It was.
Po you know whether, in consequence pf the
Jate king's djcatb^ those dinners liad been
.suspended lor some time ? — ^Ves, they had.
Dp you jrecoU^pt bo^ long before tbe 2dr4
ft February curds bad been issued fox th^
;;ninisters ?— -Cither the lath or the 19tb, J. am
jaot quite CQClain >vhich ; I, think iSatarday
the 19th.
On the Wednesday when t^e dinner was t^
4)e had, were the prepajcation^ m^de {or thj^
jdijun^ jss usual ? — ^Yes*
At ivbat time did yoii first receive intimar
tion tbAt bis m^esty's fojinis^rs would ^st
7»l]
1 GEORGE IV.
Tfud of Arthur ThidUwood
f7©a
dine there that day 7^ About eight, or it might
be ten minutes after eight.
Who lives next to lord Harrowby? does
the Archbishop of York? — The Archbishop of
York on one side.
Do you know whether his grace had a
dinner that day ? did you observe carriages
there ?— I observed carriages there.
About what hour? — ^About six or seyen
o'clock.
John Monument sworn.— Examined by
Mr. Solicitor General.
What are yoa by trade ?— A shoe-maker.
Where have you lately lired ? — In Garden*
court, Baldwin's-gardens.
Is that near Brook Vmarket ? — ^It is.
You are now, I believe, a prisoner in the
Tower ?— Yes.
Do you know the prisoner at the bar, This-
tlewood ? — Yes.
Do you remember meeting him at a person's
of the same of Ford ? — Yes.
How long is that ago ? — It was a few days
before the meeting in Finsbury-market.
Tell roe, as nearly as you can tell, how far
back? — From this time?
How long back before the 23jpd of February ?
Mr. Adolphm, — I have no objection to your
giving the date of the Finsbury-meeting.
Mr. Solicitor General. — I do not know it.
Witness, — It mi^ht be about two months
before the 23rd of February.
Did you see him again after that? — ^Yes, he
called in about a fortnight or three weeks after
that meeting.
Did he call alone, or was any person along
with him ? — ^The prisoner Brunt was along with
iiim.
Tell us what Thistlewood said to you,
when he called at your lodgings? — He said
directly he came in (he had not been there
above a minute or two) that he wished to speak
to me privately, and I went outside the door
with him ; I am not certain that he used the
word privately, but he wished to speak to me.
Was any other person in the room ? — My
t)rother and my mother.
Did you, in consequence of that intimation
from Thisdewood, go out of the room with
bim ? — Yes.
Did Brunt go with you or stay behind ?—
He staid behind.
Tell us what Thistlewood told you when you
were out of the room. — Yes, as nearly as I can
^recollect. I think the first words he made use
of were, ** Great events are at hand, the people
are every where anxious for a change.'' He
aaid, he ' had been promised support by a
great many men who had deceived him, but
now he had got men who would stand by him;
lie then ask^ roe whether I had any arms; I
taid no, I had not ; he said every one ought to
be armed now ; .he sai i all of them had got
everyone something; some had ^t a sabre,
tome had got a pike, and some a pistol.
Who were all of them ? — ^I understood those
men that belonged to him.
Those men to whom he had before alluded
as standing by him ? — Yes ; he said I might
buy a pistol for four or five shillings ; I told
him I had no money to buy pistols ; I was too
poor to do any thing of the kind ; he then said
he would see what could be done.
Was that all that passed with him at that
interview ?— Yes, all that I recollect.
Did Brunt call upon you again after that ?— >
Yes.
How soon afterwards? — I suppose two or
three days.
Did any thing material pass in conversation
between you and Brunt at the time he so called
the second time ? — I do not recollect that there
was ; he said he was rather in a hurry ; he had
got several more people in our trade to call
upon, and he had got two or three men vrait^
ittg for him down stairs.
Do you remember Brunt calling upon yon
on Tuesday, the 22nd of February ? — ^Yes, I
do.
Was that the first time he had called after
the last interview with him, to which you have
just spoken ? — Yes, I am pretty sure it was.
You do not recollect any previous call .^-—
No, it was a long while between the two.
Was he alone, or accompanied by any per*
son?~He was accompanied by the prisoner
Tidd.
What conversation passed between you and
Brunt at that meeting ? Was any thing said
why he had not called? — Yes, that was the
first thing — I said I thought I had lost biro^
and asked him the reason that he staid away
so long ; and he said, the reason was, Uiat tM
king's death had made an alteration in th«r
plans necessary : then I asked him what plans
they were ; he said tliat I should know at the
meeting that was to be the night after, better
than he could tell roe.
This was on the Tuesday ? — ^Yes.
Did he say any thing as to where that
meeting was to be ? — ^Yes ; I asked him where,
he said Tyburn-turnpike.
Did he tell yon any thing about what was
to be said or done at Tyburn-turnpike ? — ^No;
I asked him how I was to know, by seeing the
people about, who they were ; and he turned
round to Tidd, and asked him whether he
should tell me the word.
What answer did Tidd make?*- Yes, he
said he supposed there was no danger.
Upon that what did Brunt say ?-»He said if
I saw any people about, I was to go to theon
and say, byU,t, and if they were finends they
would answer tyOfn,
Did you agree to go? — He did not ask me
positively whether I would go.
Was any thing more said at that meeting ?
— No ; he said he should call on the ft^omig
inoming, and tell me more particulars.
Did they then leave yon .^— Yes.
The next day did Brunt call 9gun %•
That was the Wednesday ?— Yet .
703] Jw High Treoion.
At what time? — Between four and fire
•o'clock in the afternoon.
Was he alone ?-— Yes.
Tell us what he s^id to yon when he called
on you alone } — He called me down stairs, and
asked me whether I was ready to go with
him; I said no, I had got some work to
finish, that must be done before I could go.
When he called you down stairs, was
any body in the room out of which he called
you ?— Yes, my brother.
When you said you were not ready, what
did he say ? — He said I ought to go with him ;
I told him that I could not go till the work
Was done ; he asked me how long that would
-be ; I told him not before six o'clock.
Upon your telling him that, what did he
desire you to do ? — He told me he could not
wait for me, but I most go to the person whom
lie brought with him the day before, whose
name he said was Tidd, he told me where he
lived in the Hole-in-the-wall passage, Brook's
Maiket.
Did he at that time teU you any thing more
as to the plan ? — No, nothing.
Did he go away upon having told you this ?
—Yes; after telling me not to be a minute after
six o'clock when I went to Tidd's, for that
Tidd had got some more men that he was to
take with him to the meeting.
In consequence of this did you go toTidd's
liouse in the course of that afternoon? — In
tiie course of the erening, about half-past six
o'clock.
Did you find Tidd at home ? — Yes.
What did he say to you ? — He said, that
several men that had promised, to come had
tiot been so good as their word, and that he
riiould not wait longer than seven o'clock.
Did you wait till seven o'clock ?— Yes.
Did any other persons arrive?— No.
When seven o'clock came, what did Tidd
do ? -^ He went to a comer of the room
where there was a trunk, and took out a large
pistol.
What did he do with it ?— Put it into a belt
that he had got round his body, he then took
•bout six or eight pikes, about a foot long.
Iron pikes, or pike shafts ? — Iron pikes.
Six or seven did you say ? — I suppose there
might be about as many as that.
What did he do with them ?— They were
wrapped in brown paper ; and he took a staff
about four feet long, with a hole at one end
of it.
Was ttiat hole calculated to receive the ends
of the pikes f — Yes.
Did he take the pike heads with him ?— Yes,
he did.
Yon mentioned that a pistol was in a belt
ronnd his waist ? — ^Yes
Was that underneath his coat or over it? —
Underneath his great coat.
So that on his coat being buttoned you
eonld not perceive it ? — ^No.
Tou went down stairs with him ? — ^Yes.
Which way did yoa go ?-rIhrottgh Brook-
street into Siolbom.
A. D. 1820.
[794
>^nd from Holbom where ? — Straight on
to the top of Holbom up Oxford-street.
Did you at that time know, or had you
previous information as to the place you were
going to? — ^No; I believe it was while Ifwas .
in the room, I asked him where we were going
to, and he said to a mews in 'John-street,
Edg ware-road.
In going along, did he tell you what von
were to do, or had he told you before /—No.
When we got into Holbom be gave me the
pike staff; says he, ^ You take this."
Tell us what else he said as to what was to
be done? — I asked him, as we were goinsr
along, where it was we were going to ? He said
I should know more about it when we got
there; I still pressed him, I asked him
whether we were going to the House of
Commons.
What did he say ? — He said no, there were
too many soldiers about there : I then asked
him where it was we were going to, and at
last he said, '' Grosvenor-square." I then
asked him whether any body particular lived
at Grosvenor-square, by their going there par«
ticularly; and he said there was a cabinet
dinner there that evening.
Did he say at'whose house it was to be ?-«-
No, he did not.
Did you ask him, or did he tell you, what
was to be done there ? — No, I did not ask him
any more. Upon his saying that, I was ftilly
convinced what was intended.
From Oxford-street,where did you go to ? —
We wetat to the top of Oxford»street, and
turned to the £dgwaie-road.
Do you know Cato-street ? — ^I did not know
it before, I know it now.
Did you go there P — ^Yes.
When you got to Cato^street, where did
you go.
When we got there, underneath the arch*
wav that leads to it, I saw two men whom
Tidd seemed to know. He was a step or two
before me, and spoke to them ; we went, after
stopping a few moments with them in the
street, into a stable.
Did you go up the steps in the stable P—
Yes.
About how many persons did you find in
the stable and in the loft altogether P — I
should suppose about four or five and twenty ;
but I had not been there above two or three
minutes when some person asked how many
there were, and proposed to count them ; but
Mr. Thistlewood said there was no occa^
sion to count, for there were ^vt and
twenty.
When you got into the loft, and while you
were there, was any thing said as to the plan
they were going about? — ^There was a man
that was sitting on one side of the bench (a
carpenter's bench) a tallish thinish man with a
brown great coat, with two belts on, and I think
a sword by his side, and he was speaking of
the impropriety of going with so stnall a num-
ber as five and twenty men to lord Harrowby 's.
7W
1 GSOBOE IV.
Trial ^A*^^ T^H^pBood
C790
UpM bw making tbat obi^rvation wliat was
said or doae by the other partknf ? — ^Mr« ThiyiUo
wood said the m^oib^r wa^ quite enough, for
be only wanted fourteen mep to go iptp the
cOQm ; and supposing lord Harrowby bad six-
Uen men servants, still that number was quite
sufficient. Tbe man in % brown great coat
saidy *' After the business is done, and we
cowo oiU, most likely there will be a crowd
round the door, how are we to make oof
es€f pe/' Upon which Mr. Thistlewood said,
^ You know the largest body is already gone
firpm beva, \his is the smallest part/'
« llie largest body is gon^ from here ?"— I
4o not know whether he said ^ from here,"
bttt ** the largest body is gone." Upon which*
tba prieoner Davidson spoke to this man^ and
wd it wap not right in him to throw cold water
upon their proceedings ; if he was afraid of his
Um^ he might go, aiMl they would do without
iMm. .
Did any thinff furtber pass in the way pf
QOnversation ?••-*- xes^ the prisoner Brnnt ifnme?
dialfly said that sooner thap they should give
up ilU business they were going upon, he
would go into the hops^ by hin^self and blow
them sdl up, if he perished along with them,
and ha saia ^ for you know we h^ve got that
which can do it/' I am not certain that those
w«ra the exaot words, but that was the paefin-
ipg of it. Upon which the man said, \h%l
(bough be did not think it altogether right to
go himself, still as they were all ifor it, he
woul4 opt b9 agaio^t it;
Loud Ckkf Jtatke AbbotU—f^zX was ^he
man in the brown great coat ? — ^Y es ; upon
which he proposed that all the persons,
Mr. Attorney Gfneivd» — ^Wh9 proposed? —
The man in the brown great coat ; tbs^ all ihe
persons in the room should put theppelves
vader the orders of Mr. Thistlewood; upon
which Mr. Thistlewoofl said that eveiy /one
engaged in that business would have the same
honour as himself, pud be proposed tbat the
fi>tirtp^n men to go ipio the room should yolunr
ieer from among the persons then in th^ rpopfi.
UpoD his prop<>Bing that f^urte^o persons
should volunteer to go into the room, wh%t
did be say then 1— lie spid tbaX those foprj^en
libat volunteered should range themselves on
the other. side of the room» towards that part
wheie the £ring ^terwprds d^mp frQpi, when
(be ofiioers oame.
Therp was a sipall room on tbat side 7— Yes,
(hare was.
Did they do so?--oYes. I do not know
whether the whole fourteen, but I believe
(wplva or tbjxtep* opt of tbat pimbor did so
ip the cpune of a £ew p^ujt^.
Wa^ any thing paid ps to wba^ the rest wece
tfi 4o 7-*No. I hspid npibipg bpt the pcisoper
Tid4 was ooming ffai; he wps qpp Cjf tbe
ifiwtefu ; be was pomiqg out tp jaie to Apy,
^ yon, may choose yoprsitimtipn," yvben Mr,
Tbistl4^pp4 p^ bj» b^ki ^ ^9 *'^iWi mU
What tQp)( plpop vp9n tbBA?-*rI do nqt re-
member whether any thing particalar did ; bu^
afterwards Mr. Thistlewpod was gone ior a
few psomfpts* ^fkd he pame up stpira apd said
they had received inteljigpapf that thp duke of
Wejlipgtop and iprd Sidpiqutb wpre piniTed pi
lord Harrowby 's. I ^ not rpooUaot a^y thisf
else passing (iU (be officers canve pp.
Yoi) were taken into pustody in the momf I
belipve?— ITea^ I ^as»
John Monument cross-examined by
JVf f • A4olpbut,
You say yop had known Tbistlepropd : bow
long bad yott known him ? — ^I never spoke to
him befoipi till the timp I f»m bim at ^s,
Ford*s at {^mbeth.
That was whep ? bpw long before ^ pi^fetr
ing 7 dp you recollept whep |tboyt tbe p^etii^g
in Fipsbury-markel-pl^ce was?~rNo, I do not.
Was that before or since Cbnstn^t— |
th^nk it was before Chris^na^.
Did you attend there ? — Yes, I did ; because
Mr. Tbistlewopd a^ked roe whether I fJvquld
be there, when I was at Mr. Ford's.
Was |dr. Thistlewood pt tiie Finpbuiy-
market qnee^g? — I was (oo ^r off to ;iep the
persons that wpre. J, ca^qot say vbethpr hfi
was or not.
What was the mpfttipg there pbout 7 — w:^ i^
about the transacUpos at Manchester, pr not ?
— I thiuk it was. I was tberp abouf pn bopr
pud a half. ) wis noi near e^opgh to heaf
what passed.
Was tbe business of tbe meeting to consider
something about the ir^psactions at Mancbes-
ter 7-I-I really cannot say.
You wpnt to the Fin^ury-iyiark^t meetlp|^
but did not ^kp n<Hice pf wliat pps^d? — Vo^
I did pot take m,ucb notice. The jl^y yi^ v/bry
dirty, and I did pojt /^top lopg.
7)ierp wps no very particular ppqu^^c^p^nce
at that time between TbisjLlpwopd aw} yAuT-r-r
No.
How long had you known Brunt ? — I ppr#r
knew him t^l) Mr. Tbiatle^ood brought bw
to my hppse.
£)id you kupv^ a geptlenian of tbp lE^^V^e of
Edwards at all ? — No.
^ long iimp passed betwe^ your ^^i^K
Brunt at one time, pod bis calling agaip oplj^
2(2nd of Fpbruary ?:— Ypsy ^ goo^ prhile.
Ai^ all ypur foryppr co^yersp|ip^ b^
ppfl^ed for pqthipg? in that timp yo^ 4u)U|^
no more of themP — I thought, not seeing. Qp^
f <tf 9' M) fi^low their plpns, they bM 1^ 19^-
So you said when they .qadled pgl^Pi ^ |[
thopght I bad lopt you?"— Yes.
On the 22nd, however, you were to be tiua^
pd witb tbp JejLtera h^ M» t, a^ 99m 9»^n,
was to give you <, o, n ?T-Yca*
4lpd tbat wps all tbpt yr^l/t /60pfi4l#jtip]}y re-
posed in you ? — Ye^. r
Yop.b»d m oQpppiopio i^ i\if»e }ciVP!cp> I
think ? — ^No ; becaitfve I rao^ ¥^ TvMl-
Wbep yqu wi^ut .to ilba ; qp^ in jC^^orptveet
^iSMfiJV^m iWlSBty^e t^e.ir7rYp9^
T97]
fw High TnktdH,,
A. D, 18S0.
179S
YottiAttsllm^ be«n drcftdiWIf crowdffd in
tbit room ?— 'There were Mte er four in tk*
room below.
Evto then yott must bare been dreadfully
crowded ? — ^No^ th^ were aloroit all standings
How bigtt was tbe room ? you are a short
mail r^"^ X eSk
Do you think the oeiling wm as bnb above
your headf ss that board over yev ?-^Ye8.
lliere was a carpenter's bench in ttie room^
was uot there ? — ^Yes.
That cook up a good deal of space ?-^Yes.
A mean could not stand upon that ? — ^No.
Was not the room entirely fitted with you
twenty, if there ^rere twenty f—-N«t untitely
filled.
Do y'oa know the man in the brawn ooat,
who Im was ?-^N6y I do not.
Have you since learnt that his name was
Jkdams^NOy I know it was not him.
■Some man in a brown ooat, wbdm you do
not know ? — No.
What part was Adams playing there ?^-I
do not remember faim.
You do not remember his being there at afl f
You knew Adams ? — ^No.
Did the man in the bfown «oal sqitint^ or
nod he any thiq^ pkrticular idwut his eyes T —
No ; but I hare s^en tiie prfsooer Adatas at
Hicks's ball, and again here^ and I know ^lat
it 4s not bim.
Do not you recollect Adams being therh,
and saying or doing any thing, for he is a very
remaikabl6 person f ---Wo.
Did you g6 aboeft >(he tocym, and M« yAtt
were there ? — No ; I stood by the side of the
bench.
Were there any men particularly tall? — I
do not know.
Were there any men at all of Adams's «ze
and height t — I cannot tell that.
Were you sitting or standing? — Standing
generally ; the roan in the brown great coat
was sitting on a little bench on the other side.
They were a good many of them, eating
bread and cheese^ were not they 7 — Yes ; some
of them were.
There was some bread and cheese produced,
and they fiew at it like famished men ?-^I did
not see that.
They were ealing bread and dieese^ how*
ever? — ^Yes.
And they had some porter too F — ^Yes.
-Cannot you recollect Adams being ^ere P —
Ko, I cannot.
Are you sure be ivas not there t^-4 «m sure
I cannot l&k<e^pon mjf«elf to aav that.
^iave yovany consciousnesswhateverrof ever
lMivfli{ 9t^n hfm, until you stfw him at Hicks^
Mil ^--N6'; %tft ^e Umie observation may bb
nftd^ of dteny oAers.
YV^ ob9^iMrtiii6ti'is ing6nioas%nd jm. ; you
any 'have iecta many persons BkA not have
tCf^dfttiisea ib^m a|^in'?-^Jiuft bo.
fi^ is a man of retilaAa'ble ttp^eaAirfce, iMk
llfci*ye«ridWlu-Yeste*. . .
Do yen know any of the other ptisoiMb?
— I know the prisoner Davidson.
He is a man of colourt^-^Yes.
Do you kadw any Other P —^ Thistlewood^
Tidd, Brunt.
Those you kno# out of doom f-^Yes.
And Davidson vrhom you know by his ov^
lour?— Yes.
The others made no impression upoft yen f
— ^No; but I recollect seeing the prisoneiv
Stnnge» in the room.
Why do you recollect him particulariy f «^
Only that he was a short man, Uie same as
myself, and standing by the side of me.
Have you told us all that passed there, ac-
cording to your hearing and obserration of itf
— Yes, I have.
You can tell me nothing about Adams 1-^
No.
Did you heat any j>erson make any observa*
tion except the man m the brown edit T'^No. '
If any observajdon had been addr^sed Kka
that by the man in the brown coat, shoiiki yov^
have heard it ?-^I suppose I mi|^t.
You must ? — ^Yes -, perhaps I might.
How targe fs the room ?-^I cannot say.
It was a very small room ; the twenty neailj
fffled it ?*-Not t*y small ; I shoaM 8«iy, there
wonM not have been roMn Ibr twenty mott.
Would there have been room for ten more ?
— I think there mrg^t.
Was it as long as that box those gentlemMi
are silling in?-^Longer than that.
As long as that and the next^-^I canned
say.
If anv person had spoken wiih an andiM^
toiee aodressmg the whole, do you think you
should have hes^ it ? — I think i should.
You had totally lost sight of those peopile
from Ae day of the !Finsbury'4neeting, to the
22nd of February? — ^Yes; I had, exceptmg
when Mr. Brunt esdled upon me«
W^ the convetsation you had spoken df
between the brown coated man and Mr. Hu^
tie wood, and the others, so loud, that every
person might have heard h?— I cannot say; bift
I was standing as near to that person with the
brown coat as I am to you.
Was it so loud that eveiy person within fMt
distance must have heard it? — Yes ; I suppoffS
it was.
You come here in very bonouralile costodyv
I see, with greater attendants ftss yon «fi0r
expected to have t>^Yes.
W«re you taken upon the spoit or "how t'—
Yes, I was taken in the room;
You surrendered, I suppose, wbeu'the^oAtr
eers oame up ?-^When the soldiers cMie 19.
You made no resistance t-^o.
Had you any armsf-^Ne; I 'had BOihing
about me ; I was seaidhad directly.
JbAii Motamufti re-exammed Vy
Were vou'tfnfe'dfHhetast that came into the
f9om?>«-4 aanttcft stfy^htftr ttmiy^iiKe>ih«fter
me.
709J 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial tf Arthur 7%Mtf«iMM(l
rsoo
Waa the room nearly fall nvben yoa came ?
—Yes.
How long had you been there before the
officers came ? — ^About a quarter of an hour
before the officers came.
Did you know any of the persons in the
room before you came there except Tldd,
Brunt, and Tnistlewood? — No; except the
prisoner, Davidson, whom I had seen at one
or two of the meetings.
The persons of all the rest in the room you
were unacquaibted with f— Yes.
Was it candle light? — Yes ; there was a
candle in the room.
Juryman. — Only one?— I am not certain
about thai ; I know there was one ; I cannot
speak to others.
Mr. Solicitor Oeneral, — What was there upon
the carpenter's bench? — ^There was a great
quantity of swords and pistols^ and two or
uuree blunderbusses.
You spoke about Strange, that Stranse stood
by you; was Strange apprehended at ihe same
time with you ? — ^les.
You were both taken into custody together?
—Yes.
How many were there in the room when
the soldiers came in and took you into custody?
— ^Four.
The soldiers took you all into custody P— >
Yes.
A gentleman -has asked you about Edwards ;
do you remember when you were brought up
at Whitehall, being Imndcuffed with Mr.
Tbistlewood f — I was.
Did Mr. Tbistlewood say any thing to you
about Edwards ?-^Yes ; he said, when I was
examined before the priyy council, if I was
asked who brought me to the meetings I should
state Mr. Edwards.
What did you reply to that ?— I asked him
how I could tell tbem such a falsehood, when
he knew I had never seen the man.
What did he say in answer ? — He laughed,
and said that was of no consequence, for if I
was asked what sort of a person he was, I was
to say he was a man not much taller than I
was, of a sallow complexion, and dressed in a
brown great coaL
A Juryman (Mr, OoodchUd). — My lord, I
ibould be glad to ask that witness one question :
whether, since his apprehension, he has had
any conversation whatever with a man of the
name of Adams? — No, I have not, except
speaking a word or two to him, but none con-
cerning this business.
Mr. Soiieitor Genera/.— Have you been kept
separately confined ? — ^Yes.
Did you ever see him, except when you were
taken up as a witness to Hicks s-hall, and when
you were brought here to-day?— Never.
Tkomoi MommaU sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. SoUdior GeneraL
I believe you are brother to the last witiiesi
John MonomentP— Yes, I aa.
Do you remember your brother meeting Mr.
Tbistlewood at the bouse of a person of the
name of Ford ? — ^Yes, I heard him speak of it.
You were not there yourself, but heard him
speak of it ? — I was not there.
Do you remember Tbistlewood, after you
had had that conversation with your brothei^
calling upon your brother ? — ^Yes, be did.
Do you know Brunt ? — ^Yes, Tbistlewood
brought Brunt with him.
After they had come into the room, did thev
stay there for any considerable time ? — ^No, I
suppose not above five, or it might be ten
minutes ; I cannot say exactly to the time.
What did they do?— They did nothing;
there was some conversation passed.
Did they go out of the room f — ^Yes, Thistle-
wood asked my brother if he might be per-
mitted to speak with him.
Upon . Tbistlewood *s saying that to your
brother, did they go out of the room together ?
— ^Yes, they did.
How long did they remain out ? — ^Tbey re-
mained out, I suppose, about two or threes
minutes.
Did they then return into the room ? — Yes.
Did Tbistlewood and Brunt go away to-
gether?— ^Yes, they did.
Do you remember, on the Tuesday before
the Cato-street business. Brunt calling upoa
your brother ?— Yes.
Did he call alone ?— No, he brou^^ a man
of the name of Tidd with him.
Lord Chief Justice AbhoU.^J>id he mentioa
his name at the time, or did yojjt know him
before ?— No.
Mr. Solicitor Genera/.— Was his name men-
tioned at the time? — Brunt mentioned his
name.
Tell us what passed ?— As nearly as I can
recollect, when they came into the room my
brother said to Brunt, " I thought I bad lost
you ;** because we had not seen him for some
time.
What did Brunt say upon that ^— He said
that the king's death had made some little al-
teration in their plans. My brother asked what
those plans were ? Brunt said they had di&
ferent objects in view.
Lord Chirf JuMtice JMfoti.-^Yaa heard this,
did you ? — ^i es, I did.
Mr. Soiieitor Genera/.— What further
said ?— Brunt asked my brother to meet him «p
at Tyburn-turnpike on the next evening, and he
agreed to meet him ; and Brunt said to Tidd
<< suppose we give them an outline of the plan.**
But i do not think Tidd made any answer to
it. Brunt then told us we were to meet up at
Tybum-tumpike at six o'clock on the Wednes-
day evening. They gave us the pass word, whi^
consisted of the letters &,«, t. He said if aayr
one of their party was Uiere, they would aiw
swer f, 0, m They then went away after ^lat.
Did you promise to go ?--Not exactly; thsy
toll
JiiY High Treason,
A. D. 18^
rsoft
did not Indeed preei me i they tpdlce to mf
brother chiefly through all the biMioeM«
Did yon ill Ihet go yottivdf ? — No, I did ivot.
Wliat time did your brother go out the ficoR
^emooD, &e Wednesday P — ^It was near seven
o'clock when be left home; Brunt called aboUt
ite or nearly five for him to go with htm,
bet we wefe busy finishing some work and
he could not go with him at that time, and
he then told him to call upon Tidd, who UVed
in HoIe-4n-the-waH passage.
About seven o'clock you say yonv hrollier
went ?— Yes, within every trifle of seven.
You did not see him afterwards 2 — I nevet
taw hiin afterwards.
Thtmuu Monument cross-examined by
Mr. Curwood,
All this conversation was directed to your
bvotier Jolin ?— Yes ; I was in the room when
k passed ; when he came first, he spoke to my
brother.
Had ' yon been long acquainted with Brant
before ? — No ; I never saw farm fiH Thistle wood
brou^t him that evening.
Which of the po^ea had you knowivbefoie t
—None.
Did yon make any further queries of what
^#88 io be dene? — No, I did not.
Yon did not snspect any thing wrong ? — No,
I did not.
What did yon think they were going about i
— ^That I cannot tell.
What did you snspeet ? — ^I conld not tell ; I
supposed it was a meeting for some purpose,
bat for what purpose I could not tell.
' Yon had not the curiosity to inquire ? — No.
A club dinner^perhaps ? — ^No, I did not think
that.
A supper ?'- — ^I did not know.
And you were determined not to ask? —
I did not ask further than he mentioned.
,nomai Dwyet sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gtamey,
•
" Where do you live ?— No. 15, Gee*s-conrt,
Olford-4treet.
Some time before the 23rd of February had
jrm become acquainted with Davidson, the
man of colour ? — ^Yes.
Had yon met Irim at difl^r^nt times? — I had
seen him twice before the 23rd.
' Upon either of these occasions did he intro-
dnce yon to any body 7— Yes-.
To whom ?-~To Mr, Thistlewood.
Did Thistlewood and he and you go to-
f;:ether to any house ^— ^Tes.
' Whit house? — A public-house at the end
of Molineaux-street.
That is very near Cato-street, is it not ? —
TSbie end of Cato«street
How long was that before the 23rd, to the
tipcsl of yonr recoUectien ? — It was about the
9th, 10th, of llthy either Wednesday, Thurs-
^fanvorFsidev. "
Did Thisifwood have any oohwnation^
•vrfth vou ? — No, very tiifling.
VOL. xxxin«
TeH ns what it was he said .^— He said
seeing to me at that present tinie at all ; he
said he was in five or six different revolutions^
that was all.
What else did he say?— >No^ng more at
that present time.
Any thing about Ireland^ — ^He said Ireland
was in a disturbed state at fhat time.
Ave you an Irishman '^-^Yes.
Did he say any thing about yonr eountry-
men who were in London ? — He said he had
a good many of my countrymen.
Did you see Davidson the day before the
people were taken up in Cato-street ?--In the
afternoon of the 22nd«
Did he make any appointment with yoa
kft the next morning?— No, not then, not for
the 33rd^
The next morning, however, did yon go
any where? — No, I stopped at' my own
place.
After stopping, did any person caU upon
you ? — ^Yes,
To ^bat place did you go with tliat per*
son?^-]^ox-coort, Gray s-inn4ane.
At what time of the day ? — About a qnar^
tef or half-past nine, when I left my own
place in the morning.
Who cfldled upon yon P— A man of the
name of Harrison.
Did Davidson tell you the night before any
thing he was going to do t — He tohl me he
was going on sentry next morning.
A person caHed upon you and took you to
Fax-court ? — Yes.
Had that person any thing with him ? — ^A
bundle wrapped up in some paper.
Who was the person that took you to
Fox-court? — A tall man of the* name of
Harrison.
When you got to Fox-court, to what
part of the house did you go .^— A two-pair
back room.
How did yon get into tike room ? — I turned
round a short passage into a door.
Was the room door locked or open?— I
think it was locked.
How did you get the key? — ^I think he
knocked at the door of the two-pair front, and
a woman gave him the key.
When you got into the room, did you
find any thing there ?— Nothieg but an old
chair.
Was there any cupboard in the reoni'? —
Yes.
Did you see any thin^^ in that cupboard, or
anything taken put? — No, I sat on the chair.
Was there any thing afterwards taken out ?
—Yes.
What was it?— A ball n^rapped up ^ith
rope yarn.
Did Harrison tefl yon what it ww?— A
grenade.
Did he teU yon what use was to be made of
it i^ — ^No, he did iK)t tben%
iMd he afterwards vhile you were there ?—
No.
3F
8oaj
1 GBORGB IV.
Trial of Arthur ThitHmood
C804
Did any oilier penons come in ?-— Yee.
Wbocamein ?*-TbJstlewood, DaTidson^ and
a few more.
What had DaTidson irith him ?— He had a
blanderiniss and a pair of pistols^ and a bay-
onet in his side pocket.
Did any other persona come in? — Yes,
there were one or two afterwards came in.
Do you remember the names of any more ?
"i-No, I do not know that I can name any
others.
Will you look at the bar, and see whether
you can name any other persons that were
there ?— Yes.
Which did you see there f — ^This gentleman
next me [Btiot/.]
After Davidson had shewn those pistols,,
what did vou hear him say ? — ^I do not know
that he said any thing particular at that time :
be said he bad given twelve shillings for a
pair of pistols.
Brunt said this?«-.Np> not Brunt, but
Davidson.
After Davidson had spoken of his pistols,
and shewn them, and said he had given
twelve shillings, did you hear Brunt say any
thing ? — ^He said he would go out and buy a
pair.
^Did any thing pass from any of them about
the use to be made of that hand-grenade ? —
Yefc
Who was it, do you remember? — Mr.
Thistlewood.
What did Thistlewood say?— H^ spoke to
them all at large, and said sqme of them mtfe
to be thrown into the hone*barracks.
Some of those hand-^nades ? — Yes, and
some were to be thrown mto lord Uarrowby's,
to set fire to it, to blow it up. .
Did Thistlewood ask you any question ? —
xes.
What did he ask jrou?— He asked me
how many of my countrymen I could muster.
Did he say when he should wantlliiMn?
—Half-past eiffht the evening of the 23rd.
. Did you tell him how many you could
muster ?-^Yes.
How many did you tell him ? — About six
or seven and twenty, or five or six and
twenty.
Did he tell you where to go to ?— Yes.
Where K— He told me they were to assem-
ble at the Horse and Groom, but I was to be
fU six o'clock at the Pomfret-castle, at the end
of Barrat's-court.
Where is that?^It leads ^nto Wigmore-
street. Cavendish-square.
Is that a house ffeoyented by Irishmen ? —
¥e9, it is on Saturday nights : they go in
to have a pint of porter or any thing of that
kind.
Did he tell^ou to what place yon were to go
to do any thing ? — ^Yes.
Where to ?-— He told me I was tb take a
few, the best of them, to go to the Foundlings
hospital, knock at the. porter's lodge, put a
pistol to his breast, turn rotmd the right hand.
and there were five or six and twenty stand of
arms at the next lodge.
. What was to be done with them ? — ^I was to
seise them.
Did he tell you what was to be done at any
other place ?-«At the same time another party
would seize twa pieces of cannon that were at
the City Volunteers' riding-school in Gcay's-
inn-lane.
Did be say what was to be done at any other
places ? — ^He said there were more that would
make a breach in Finsbury.
MThat more did he say ? — Nothing particulav
more.
Did he mention any dinner that day ? whe*
iher there was to be any dinner? — ^Yes, at lord
Harrowby's.
A dinner of whom ? — ^A cabinet dinner, or a
cabinet council.
Did he say whether any thing was to be done
there ? — ^Yes, he said they were to attack at lord
Harrowby*s.
After this, did you see any bundle taken out
of the cupboard ? — Yes.
What was done with it ? — It was planted on
the floor, and a pint pot produced ; that bundle
contained powder.
Gunpowder ?— Yea.
What was done with it ?— There was a tia
measure produced, and it was measured into
some woollen bags.
' How many bags do you think were filled!—
I cannot say.
Were there few or several? — ^There were
several of them.
Who did that ? — ^Harrison.
After that did you hear lliistlewood talk to
the short man in front ? [^BnaU.^ — No, he spoke
generally to them all.
Did you hear any thing about any things
being to be sent to soy different places?—
Yes.
What did he say ? — ^He said there were m,
dozen pike handles to be taken to Mary^e*
bone.
Any to any other place? — The remainder
were to go, some to Finsbury, and some elee«%
where.
Were you asked to take any any where ?*—
Yes.
Did you agree to do it or refuse?**! re-
fused.
Was any pes»on who was there sent out ^pvith
any of the tilings ?^-Thev were not in the
I had not seen them, only what they nid
cerning them.
Did you see any bag?— *Yes.
Did you see any thing put in it?— Tea, tins
powder that was measured and the grenades. •
Did you hear any direction given to any
person to take those things to any plape?*— TJi^
pike handles.
Did you see any pike handles 7-o»No, I d^
not see them.
Were any directions given to any person
carry any thing to any place ? — ^Yes.
To what place was that person told to go
8051
Jbir High TreatoH.
A. D. 1820.
t806
■ 1
To the Hone and Groom at tbe end of Cato-
street.
' Who gave him directions ?— -Harrison.
. Did Harrison go away too ?-~:He went with
the ba^ with those things.
. Having before sent another person with some
things ? — He went out with an intention to get
those handles, but where he went I do not
know.
V^hat did Harrison take with him ?— This
powder in the flannel.
Did he take the grenades away as well as
the powder ? — ^Yes, I think he did.
What were they put into ? — ^InU> a sack.
• At about what time did you leave the room,
to the best of your recollection ?*-I got hom^
to my own place at twelve o'clock exactly.
Did you on that day go and give information
of what you bad seen and heard ? — I told a
gentleman.
Who was that gentleman? — ^Major James.
In consequence of what he said to you, did
you go to the Secretary of State's? — ^Yes, I
did. • *
At about what time were you at the Secre-
tary of State's that day ? — ^About one or half past.
JTiomas Dwyer cross-examined by
Mr. Cunvood,
What has been your situation in life ? — A
bricklayer by trade.
How long have you been acquainted with
.Davidson ?---Since the 4th of February; that
was the first time I ever saw him.
You say it vras he who introduced you to
Thistlewood ?— Yes.
What day did he. introduce you to Thistle-
wood ? — ^About the 9thy I think in the foUovring
week, the 9th or ioth.
Had you known any of the party before? —
Never in my life.
They never having known you before^ nor
you them, they imm^iately opened these plans
to you ?-*No ; they did not speak any thing
respecting them ; I never knew anything of
them. till that present morning the 23rd.
On that morning, the 23rdy they let you into
their secrets ?— Yes.
• None of them having known you before ?— •
No, except Davidson ; I saw him on the 4th of
February. .
And that was an accidental meeting T — It
was indeed.
Can you possibly imi^ne what it was in
your character that should have induced, them
to trust you so suddenly i — ^I cannot, say, in-
deed ; I do not know' what their meaning was
lot it I was well known in that neighbpur-
Iftood, being in the habit of being amongst a
^eal of my countrymen, i
And you were always knovrn as a very honest,
\ap^ mto 9-^1 should think so ; I have .been
^men years io'tbat parish.
' With a good character? — ^Yes, I believe so.
' And 'yet;- all on. a sudden, a band of traitors
tjusted you with^heir traitorous designs ?-»oYes,
they did, so far as I have stated,. .
That did not Tery much astonish you P — ^In
fact I did not know the* rights of it ; I had
partly an idea of it.
You were asked how many men you could
muster ? — ^Yes.
Give us an idea what you were to do with
them ?-*It would be Tery serious for me to
inveigle the minds of a parcel />f innocent nfien
in such a concern ; and it would be more than
perhaps I could do.
But, however, you agreed to do it? — ^I agreed
on that morning.
What were you to do ? — I agreed to hare
five or six and twenty men there ; they asked
me how many I could muster : I was rather
friffhtened, and I said so many.
You were frightened? — ^Yes, I was rather
frightened while I was in the room.
You were to be at the Foundling hospital?—
Yes.
And there you were to get some arms ?— >
Yes.
What did you expect to do with them P —
I do not know indeed.
Yon would rob any body you were set to
rob? — I should suppose so, if I should take
such advice.
You did agree to do it?^ — ^Yes,>at that prelent
time, but I had no intention; only speaking the
word, 1 wanted to get out of the place. I had
no intention of being an accomplice at all in
their designs, only I wanted to get out of the
place.
Do you happen to know a man of the name
of Httckleston P — No.
Were you erer examined in a court before ?
— I was here once on the trial of a woman^hat
robbed a man of 7/. -
Was that the only occasion ?— Yes.
You are quite sure you do not knojv a man'
of the name of Huckleston ? — No, not to my
knowledge. I am sure I do not of that nime.
Where were you at the time of the rebellion
in Ireland P in England or Ireland P— In Ire-
land. I was quite a boy at the time.
What sized boy ?'-Qoite a youth.
How old were you ?— I cannot say, indeed.
I can just remember it.
George Coylock sworn. — Examitaed by
^T. IJttledak.
Where do you lire? — ^At No.- 2, Cato-street.
Do you remember on the afternoon of the
23rd of Febcpary last seeipg any body in Cato-
street that attracted your attention 7 — Yes.
Whom did you fee? — Mr. Harrison.
Look round, and see "whether you see him ?
— ^Yes, that is the man \pointmg him out].
Had you known him before ? — Yes, I had.
Where did you see hinS ? — ^I saw him stand-
ing near the stable door in Cato-street with a
candlestick in his hand, with a wooden bottom
and an iron stick.
'Did you speak to him ?— Yes, I did.
What did you say to him P — Only aisked him
how he did, as I knew the man oefiTre. He
said he was v^ry well. He said he had taken
S071
i GEOKGB IV.
Trial qf Arthur TkiUlmood
C808
two chambers there, «nd wee going to do tkem
up, la clean than up.
What time in the aflernoos was thie? —
About fife o'clock.
In the course of that evening did yon see
any other people going in and out of the
stable P — ^Yes, a great many.
How many altogether? — I suppose from
twenty to five and twenty- that I saw go in and
out.
Between what times in the evefning? — Be-
tween five and seven.
Bkhard Mundty sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Uttkdak.
Where do yon live?— No. 3, Gato-««reet.
Do 'you recollect on the afterDaon of the
^rd of February laet seeing any people in
Cato-streetf— Yes.
At what time was it ?— Abovt hal&fasi four
in the afternoon I came from work, or about
twenty minutes past four, hardly the half hour,
I saw Davidson walking under the archway ;
I knew him by seeing hhn along with Mr.
Firth. I had seep him along with Mr. Firth
two or three times before, being in die habit
of going to Mr. Firth to doctor his cows.
Did you see any thing further? — ^I saw
Harrison about sis o dock open the eow*house
door, and he shut it again ; but in coming from
ny work I passed Davidson in the archway,
and went and got my tea, and came back again,
that might be I suppose near the half hour
after five, it was not quite the half hour, but
about twenty-five minutes, I went out to the
chandler's shop to get some coffee, and what
I wanted ; and in coming back I went in and
got my pint of beer at the publio-house, and I
saw Ua^idson go out ana get a light from a
woman at the publio-house, and he had an-
other candle in his hand, and opened the door
to go ih ; in the way of his going in there was
a kind of a bundle there, I supposed it to be a
quartern loaf, but I eannot say whether it was
or not ; he had, as he stooped, two belts with
two pistols in them, and a sword, which stuck
out in this way (behind), under his great coat;
I went in and mentioned it to my wife imme-
diately, « In the name of God*'
Do not tell us what you said to your wife.
Besides these two pefsods Davidson and Har*
risen, did you see any other persons ? — There
were severed people two and three going out
and in at different times; but there was a
number in the place, I dare say I saw seven or
eight when the door was half opened in the
place at a time.
What sort of n place was it I — ^It is- a atable
belonging to the general| and Firth was his
servant.
General whom t —» General Walton; one
part of it is a chaise-house, and the other part
a stable, where the hones used to stand;
but Mr. Firth turned it into a oow-house, and
kept five cows there.
Is thnre any loftf^Yea; a loft with two
rooms ont of it; one a room with n fire-plaee
in it, and the other a dark bed-room.
This place bad been vacant ibr some time
before? — Yes ; Firth had taken his cows oat,
I suppose as much as six or seven weeks ; he:
had purchased a place in Iron-foundery-lane,
and put his cows there.
Had you observed, in the course of that n^
temoon, whether any thing -was fastened up.
against the window?— There was a kind of
hop-sacking vras fastened a^nst the fffoot
window, going by, and likewise over the par-
tition of the stable door, where the raiUng wne,:
a kind of a ooarse matting.
Did you see that matting put up ?-<-Fart of it
was up, I saw at watering-time^ three o'clock^
when I came home to water.
Lord Chif Justice Abbott. -^Witett was the
matting^— On the inside, sacking or aoatting V
call it the same ; it was very coarse etuff.
Mizabeth Wegton swom.<*-£xamined by
UuUukd4de,
Where do you live ? — At No. 1, Cato-etreet,
£d«rware-road.
Do you recollect, in the afternoon of the
23rd of February last, seeing any people in
Cato-street P — About three in the afternoon I
was standing at the door looking at my little
boys that were playing in the street, and I saw
a man come from underneath a gateway with a
bag on his left shoulder, and a key •• his
right hand, and he nnkieked tiie gates and
went in at the stable doer.
Did yon observe some time afterwarda any
body ? — About six o'clock ia the evening I had
oecasion to go an errand ; I took my litde boy
in my hand, and as I passed I saw a man <^
colour; I was frightened, knowing the atablo
to have been unoocopied for some time. I
said, ** Oh dear," and passed on. I have been
very ill ever since that todc place.
How soon did you return from your enand ?-
— ^Abont ten minutes. I was going to the
corner of Molineaux-street, in John-atveet.
After you returned from your errand, did>
any body knock at your door ? — I saw David-
son standing by my door when I came hmk^
standing in the same place where he wan when
I went.
Should you know him again ? — -Yee, I cei^
tainly shonkl.
Look round and see whether you knowi hia
again V—Yes, that is the very nuNt ; after 1 had
been in doors, and got my lights and by then I
had set my tea-things, a knock came loudly al
tiie door, I went to the door saying to my hfelle
boy, ** Your fathet ia oeniingf" bat when I
opened the door^ this man came and asked ase
to give him a light if I pleased ; I said ** YeSf
to be sure;" he had two candles in hia right
hand, and he gave me one of them, and I gafn
him a light, and he took his hat off his head
and pot over it, and I leant ont of my door
and saw him go into llin stable door ; it wm a
Uttle way open and he went in; thai ianll t
know about it.
80»]
Jvt Higk TmaoK,
A.D. ISSO.
iBie
GtOtgjS xwffUtt JOHph ^MntltH iWOfk.—
Examined by Mr. BdiantL
You are a coastable of the pubUe-efltee,
Bow<fltraet ?«*->! am»
Did you» in cooieqaMice of dwections you
bad receivedi go ea the 2drd of Febffiaiy ibI^
Cato-streety EdgwareHPood ?— I did*
AUnm or acoompapied ?-^ Aoooipaoied*.
By wham?— By John Wright; thefa weft
tbrae I kaew that wookd meet me tberec
When you get tberey how large was yoiit
party T-*-At laat it aEmottOted» I belieTe^ to
about twieWe; somewhere about that number.
Where did you ^? — I went into the liable,
and saw a man with a blunderboai or a gun
•n hif ihooideTy and a sword or cutlass by his
side.
At what time was tikat?— About half past
eight.
Was any other penon in the stable that you
observed f — ^I saw onOy and I ha^re some faint
recollection, but I am not sure, that there
might be another*
Did the whole party follow ywi into the
stable t— I believe so.
What did you do on getting into the stable ?
— ^When I saw the man with a gun on his
shoulder, I said to some of the paKy that were
following me toseeore him*
yfhm did you yourself do?— I wont up a
ladder which I foaud there.
Was any thing said by either of your men
m the stable^ or any of the panics ?^-Not that
I an aware of; fori think it eeuld not be a
second before I was up stairs.
Wheiudid thai ladder lead you tor--To a
loft.
What did you ehnctve on getting into the
loft?— I obsenred several men, and hesord (hc
clattering of arms, fwordh and pvrtol^ thai I
Had any of your party got up with yeu h^
I had cidouialed about three or teiur.
Who were they ?-«£llis and SisitheM^ I am
aufsofk
How many persons might there be ? You
faw a toamborf««-i an not ^uiu snre; bnt I
thought, fiom the transito^p view I had» nboul
ipur or five and twenty.
What is the sise <^ that loft?— Fifteen fisil
five one way, and leu feet ten the other.
li thore a^ o4hor room a^ioining to at? —
Tliere are two.
Comimaaiaalitog tr dQOril-*Y«a^
When you hadgmaed the loft whaftdid yeli
«iQr?— ^ We arooffieeft, seifee their a^isr
That ydtt said ^*«I mid that dQTself.
** We are ofieers," aad tfma tuninl^ t%y«ur
^^ aeito Hmtt anusr^Yes^ jnsa «>i.
* jwi aee nagppMioA iaihoVaomiwhaB
yoBi knew ?i-*l dad«
Who yras that ?*-Thistlewood,
How long hayfe jou been acqukhitedf with
the penon of TMtftfeweod?^ I should think
fwt or ftua jwm; i hMMr lim*ftf« ibvtitae
ef the trials befoiuw
Whtou wal he?— ^e was eUading eft tSm
right-hand side of the table^ as we entered
near to the door of a littWt room. .
Did he keep that position or move ?-r«Imdie»
diately on my saying that, he looked no, and
seized a sword that vras on the table, and drew
back iato the little room.
Was the sword drawn ?— It was.
What description of sword was it?-^It ap*
peered to be a Tcry long one, and rather bright.
With that ho retired into the little room ?-(^
Yes, he did.
• What lodt pUee ?-«He stood fencing to pre-
vent any body coming to him.
- Did any body ^^roach hknT-^Sinilhers
didk
Upon Snuth^rs.approaohing hias, what hap*
panel ? — He thrust his arm forward aid staib*
Dedhim.
Did Smithem fett?— He did.
Did you hear any thing said in the left upon
tbatF— Smithen, when he fell, said ''Oh my
God, I am done 1'' or, '< Oh my God I"
What passed after that?— The lights were
put out almeet imrnediately, in a minute o^
two. Somebody said, from the corner of tho
room where Thistlewood stood, ''Kill the
b— *rs, throw them down stairs V
How many lights were burning when yoQ
went in ? — I think there might be eight*.
And they were put out P^They were.
You were thenaUinthedarkf — Quite in
the dark.
What did yon do ?— -I heard a rush at the
Maifs, and I joined in the rush spring '' Ah kill
them," and got down. I heard it, for I oonl4
not see it
You joined in their cry and mshed down f
*^Idid.
Udou getting down what did you observe ?
—I did not obsenre any thing^ till I got into
John^treet, and there I met with the soldiers,
and returned with them. There were a great
many shots fired before I got down.
Where were those shots fired from ?— Tlia^
I cannot tell; it appeared to me that they
were fired in the diiection towaids tho staim* -
FW>m what nait of tho room ?<«^Fiom liM
further part or the room.
How miay^shotaK^I think iA tha whole
there might bo betweon twenty and thirty:
but some el llwee shots I think were Mi
from the tnsidoto tho atreeft, not aU in that
direction.
That is from tho wittdOwff.>^Yea; from the
windows into the street.
Yott lat you met the soidiemandaetafued ?
— 1 did.
What did ysli obstrveo^ yomrrotnm?— I
observed a man going from the door. I catted
out to seize him, imd aa I ctf ed ^ut^ ha BAed
u^hiforditofiiuw
Whioh mm ham you aaceataatted. tlwtio
bo ?^tlidd; that k tb» man fflsMfy Mm
m4. I ealohod hold of his righltatm^ «ilad
wafeid^ mai feH witk hiia on • dringMpit
Did you soceeed in disarming htei-i*^
811]
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial ofAiihur ThiOkwood
[813
toldien came up iDStaotly, tndhis pistol went
off, he was secured.
Did you search him on his being secured ?
—1 did.
What did you find upon him P — Round his
waist I found a leathern belt.
Of what colour? — A sort of buff colour,
such as they use for ladies shoes. In his
pocket I found, two ball cartridges.
Where was this that you searched him ? —
In the publio-hous» called ** the Horse and
Groom.
Did you find any thing else upon him ?— -
I do not recollect any thing else.
While you were in the public-house, was
any other prisoner brought m ?— Yes ; a man
of the name of Bradbum. The man who
ttaftds last there.
Did you search him ? — ^Yes.
What did you find? — Round his waist a
string four or five or six times round.
* So as to answer for a belt i — It would
do so.
Did you find any thing else upon him ? —
Yes, be hs\4 six ball . cutridges, and three
loose balls.
I/yrd Cki^ Justice Abbqtt-^Were those ball
cartridges tor pistols or rousquets?-^! am
not well versed enough to speak to that, my
lord.
Mr. BoUtmd.'^yfete any others brou^t in ?
—There were.
Who were they? — Davidson and Wilson.
Did you search Davidson and Wikon ? — I
did not.
Did you see whether they were accoutred at
lll?--ldidnot.
Did you remain there, or return to the loft?
Lord ChkfJmUceAhhoU.—Vf^A he secured }
—I do not know whether it is material, but
when Davidson was brought in, he damned
and swore against any man who would not
die in liberty's cause, that he gloried in it.
Mr. BotfgiMJL—Did he do any thing else ? —
He sung a song, ^ Scots wha* ha' wi' Wallace
bled," part of it, he was restrained from sing«
ing the rest.
Did you then go back to the loft F— I did.
- Who was in possession of it?-* Some sol-
diers, and some of the people of the office.
Did you find ,any persons there who were
afterwajrds taken into custody? — ^I did.
Who were they ?-— There vras Shaw, Strange,
I think his name is. •
Were there any others there F -r There was
Cooper there.
Was Monument there ? — Monument was
there.
GUchrist?— Yes, and Gilchrist.
Upon getting into the room, did you ob^
•erve anv thing more (Mrtioularly, of anjr arms,
or any thing of that kind?~I saw aims in the
loom, and I told' them to search the room,
and wliateiver cadi iiMud to keep in his own
possessiottf'
Did you find any thing ?— Yes, two twor^ ;
a bag which I suterwards found to contain
ten hand-grenades, I thitik it held them.
Were they all of- thfe same size ? — All those,
in the bag were of the same size, and there
were two parcels wrapped up in brown paper,
nothing but tow as it appeared to me, and tar
or something of that kina.
In the shape of balls, or what sh^e?-*
They were wrapped up close together. '
What wis done with the other arms'; did
those persons so keep them, or deliver them
up to you ?— They kept them at the time ; there
was one much larger than the rest I have
described.
One ball f — One grenade.
Had they fuses in them ?— They had all
those ; one was as big as my hat nearly.
Who took that ? — ^Nixon found it, and gave
it to me at the time.
What vras afterwards done with ' those
things; were they taken to Bow-^treetf—they
were.
And deposited there? — ^They were taken
away again from Bow-street, but since de-
posited in the possession of an ofiicer of Bow-
street.
They are all here to day f — ^They are.
Before you went to the suble were yon at
the Horse and Groom ? — I was.
Did uinr thing take place while yon were
there? — ^Inere were three or four men came
in, four I believe at last mustered.
Do you know any of those men ? — ^I' did
not know them at the time, but I reoogoised
them afterwards.
Was Cooper one of those men ?— Yes, he
was, Gilchrist, behind, was another.
Did they bring any tlung with them ?—
They brought a stick.
Which of them ?-^ooper.
What sort of a stick? — ^A broom-stick or
mop^tick.
What did he do vnth it?— It was left in th«
room when they went out.
Did he or any of the narty return for' that
stick ? — Gilchrist retumeo.
Did he succeed in getting it?-— He didF not,
it had been removed.
By whom ? — By the boy of the house, who
observing that one end of it was cut-
Did you obeerve that ? — I did.
' Did yon take possession of that stick f — I
did, I have it now.
How was the stick *cut?-^Cut at the end
about this depth down, as if to receive a socket
of any thing. I likewise had a tuck 8ti<^
brought me the next mohiing, and a doaen
pieces of stick a sort of pike shaft.
Who brought those7--X1iey were brongbt by
a person called Flannagan, and another person.
I nave had them in my possesnoh ever aibce. .
• ' * .
George Thonua Jotah BMo^ cross-,
examined by Mr. Adolpfim,
You aay you faaveknanvn Thistlavpnod ever
since the former trial?— Yes»
8131
Jhir High Trtuon-
A. D. 18«0.
r814
Do you mean that in I8I79 when doctor
Watson was tried f — Yes, I do.
When had you seen him last before this
transaction on the 23rd of Februaiy f Stop a
moqient before you look to yourbook, had he
been out of sight for some time? — ^No, not a
fortnight certainly.
Had be lately been imprisoned to your
knowledge P — No, not that I know of.
I mean at Horsham ? — I have heard of that.
Do you know how long he had been come
back from Horsham ? — No, I do not.
Had you seen him sevend times before the
3drd of February ? — I had seen hite more than
fiYe or six times within two or three weeks.
Perhaps you had soine particular modve
for looking after him at this time ?— I had. .
A motive connected with this event that
took place afterwards?— Not that I am aware of.
* I mean watcbin|^ some proceedings, the
end of which was this meeting in Cato-street?
—Not that I am aware of, I was watching him
for another purpose, as I believe.
Do you know a man of the name of Ed-
wards ? — I do not.
Is there an officer in your office that has a
relation of that name ? — We have I believe
four, or five EdiMfards's; but I am notaWare
what relations they have. .
You have four or five Edwards's in your
office, do I underst^ you rightly? — ^I think
there are four.
I am not pinning you down to the number ;
but there are about that number, there are three
or four ? — I remember three perfectly, and I
think there are four or five.
You were employed for some time before
that to look after Thistlewood ?— Yes.
Upon whose suffgestion that was, except
those who employed you at the office^ perh^>s
you do not kpow ? — I do not.
You have seen this] person to whom I al-
Ipde, named Edwards, since the 22nd of Feb-
ruaiy P — I do not knoifr the person to whom
you am»de. *
James EUit sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Attomty General,
I helieve you are conductor of the patrole
at the iE\iblio«office, Bow-street P — ^I am a con*
4aetor.
Did you, on the 23rd of Februarr last, so
with the other officers to Cato-street r — I did.
. About what time did you get to the stable t
—I think about hdf past eight, as nearly as I
can judge.
Did yon go in after Ruthven ?-*Immediately
after, as soon after as I could walk in.
Upon your jgoing into the stable, did you
observe any man in the stable ?— I did ; I ob«
served two men.
Did yon observe whether either of them had
any belts ?— The first man nearest to mo had
twaidMte belts, that aptparently went aofoss
his shoulders. .
The one hanging over one shoulder and the
other over the other ?-^Yes, cross belts.
Old you bbeenre whether he bad any- thin^^
in' his hand? — Either in his band, or by his
right side> he had a carbine or short soldier's
piece, something of that kind ; and in his left
nand, or by his left side, I cannot. say exactly
which, a long sword. • .
Did you observe his person? — I did on
coming close to him; we were all crowded
close at the time; I took hold of his collar and
turned him round, and I observed he was a
man of colour.
^ Where was the other person whom you saw?
— ^The other person was between Uie foot of
the ladder and the manger in the fiirthest stall ;
there were three stalls, and this was the stall
nearest the ladder.
Did you follow Ruthven up the ladder ?— I
did, as close as I could venture.
As yon were going up tlie ladder, did you
hear any person say any thing from the stable ?
— I think it was before I got to the step of the
ladder, I heard him say something giving
notice ; the last word was ** men," but what
the other words were I cannot say, bu( it was
a notice to those above.
When you got into the room above, what did
vou find there ? — Upon gaining the top of the
ladder, I observed a number of men faUing
back behind a carpenter's bench that stood
across the room close to the wall.
Did you hear any noise as you went into the
room ? — ^As I entered the room, I heard a noise
similar to the rattling of swoids, like two peo-
ple fencing almost. .
How many men appeared to yon to be in
the ^ room ? — From what [ could judffe, there
appeared to be from twenty to five and twenty,
I cannot speak with more certainty.
' DM you observe Sroilhers ? — On gaining the
top of the ladder, there were four orfiveof ue
men, evidently, endeavouring to back into the
little room at a distance of four or five ft%X
from the ladder..
There were two rooms opening into the loft f
^-Yes, this was the further one. •
Consequently the one looking into the street?
•^Yes it was. At the moment I gained the
top of the ladder, Ruthven who was before me-
cned out loud, ^ we are officers, seise their
arms," or '' surrender your arms," I cannot be
positive which.
This man backing as you say into the room»
did you observe Smithers do any thing 7 — ^Not
just at that moment: previous to that. Thistle-
wood—
You know Thistlewood? — I knew liim the
moment I saw him again. I did not know
him before, but I am perfectly satisfied that is
the man. He held his sword in his hand, and
his hand shook at me : he stood in this man-
ner : I held out my staff in my left hand, in this
manner [deacriking ii^ : I might be then about
fiv^ or six feet from him, fkv^ feet perhaps.
Upon your holding out your, staff m thai
way, what did Thistlewood do ? — He still me*
naeed me with his sword; I instantly held < up
my pistol. with my right hand, and desired him
to desist| or I would instantly fire*
•1«]
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial tfArikut TkuOewood
What happened upon that ?— At that mo-
l^aDt Sttitbeya had raided the top ef the
ladder, aAd he rushed forward to the little
loom. Thistlewood, aad the other bmb that
irere with him at that tiaae, got bai^ iato the
little room some feet, and upon Softithen just
Citing to the side of the door, as I may be
re^ Thistlewood nuhed forward, aad straek
him with his sword near to the right breast.
Did Smithers U\\ upon that ?— Upon that I
saw Smithers' hands go up in thiswa/yfis-
•cn^Mg U\t and his h^ went back, and he
said,** Oh, my God,'' and he fell.
I^ fell into your anas ? — ^No, he staneied
against me : upon seeinff that, I immediately
fired my pistol, but wiuout effect ; Smithers
•taggered agamst me at the moment I had
fired, and fell back past me, more to my left.
' He fell dead ? — ^I oelieve he fell dead : whe^
Iher he staggered against RathTeft or not I do
Bot know: the last light I saw was the
fash of my own pistol; the candles were put
•at at that moment.
Ton were forced down the ladder, I believe?
•^Yes, we were. I went into the do<^-way,
and stood in the door^way for a second or
The door way, in Cato^treet ?"— Yea.
Were any shots fired during that time^ —
Yes, many shots were fired ; two of thiee e#
whieh passed ne In ^e door-way.
Were any shots fifred from any ether part aff
tiiat time ? — ^I saw one shot fired by a tall mas,
he stood under the ladder, and fired ap las
wwds the manger.
Were any aSota fired ftom the window of
> the little room f — Yes ; while I was standkif
at the door there were.
Goald von Judge in i^at direction they
wwe fired N-'They were apparently fired io^
wardS' llie door.
Towards the door of the stable 7 — ^Yea.
Upon that did you pursue any body down-
CatflNStreet, towards Queen-street ? — I heard a
ciy, and saw a man running with his belt on.
9a the direction of Queen-street ?— Yea.
' Mii»-street it on the left of Cato-street, and
^een-street on the right 7— Yes, I pursued'
and' took him about sereqty or «!gh^ yards'
ftoBB the stable door.
Who was that man you so pursued md
took T— -DuTidson, the man of cofeur.
When you secured him had he arma?-*-0e'
had a ea^ne, or a short piece of that kind,
either slung to him,^ or in his hand, and in hit
Ifeft hand a long sword.
Do you belieye that i» the man whom you-
first s^rw when you went into the stable ?-*^
^ believe that is the man, but I am not
positive ; I have very little doubt in my own
mind that it is the same.
I believe you afterwards asiisted in securing
some* of the persons in the stable ?— -^fter de-
li^pering'him to th^ custody of enothet person,
t aaijfted in- secuHog (bur of tem in the- loll.
' Do yottknow who the four person were h^
I am not peiMta ap to tflait penqsw; I neol^
(816
lect MoaaMMUt to beeoe, hot I an not posi-
tive to the other <haee«
l^mim Wk cross-eiamined by Mr. Cmnnoodm
What silaation do yeu hold f— I am a eo»*
doctor and a constables
You had the conduct I aoppose?—* I had
the conduct of a part, Mr. Rnthven was the
principal officer.
Who had the warrant?— I had the wamat.
WtUiam Watcotit sworn. — Ezaauned by
Mr. OHraey.
Yoa, J believe, are one of the eondnotoia of
the patrole of Bow-etreet T— -I am.
Did you go with the other oAoera to Cato-
street, Sdgware-raad, on thetSvdof Fehniary!
--Idid.
Zofid Chief Jusiiu Abbo^.'^^Yon are a con-
stable also f—l am.
Mr. Garnev. — ^I believe at Bow-sireet yov
are all constables t — Yes.
ft
Lord Chief Justice Attott.'-'You are all
sworn in as such?— The biggest part of us
arC'
Mr. eBnisy.-*AreBathven, Sinthefs, Elfisv
and yourself? — ^Yes.
And Niaon ?— Yes.
Did Ruftwen, and Ettbs, and Smithers, go
up the ladder into the loft?— They did.
' D4d ymx hear' any diaUirhaiMe going on in
the loft ; any filing ^— Yes.
Did yoo remain in the stable ?— I did.
While tlie others were going up, or whe»
they wei« up^ did yo« observe aay persobin
the suble ?— I did.
Who was that?— Inga;. that is the man
What did you do f— I took him by tiie
collar.
You aad he had a contest I believe f — Yes^
we had against the wall.
Whilst you and he were in the contest, did
you find ihe other officers coming down the
ladder?— There waa a terrible oonfusion. in
the loft ; he went to put his hand to the right
side, as I thought, to get something, and I hit
hiaa a blow on the side of his head ; as I waa
getting out my handcufik, they came down a
mmber of ilbem flom the loftv
fowhat manner ^— Some of tiiein tambUng'
cbwii^ and otheia oame down afterwttds
gently-
Did you observe any one of those whaee foea
yo» hffew*^>*I did.
Who waa that?— Thhtlewood.
Lord a^ Jmiioc AJfhaU.-^ViM there any
light in the stable at that time? — ^tberewas.
Mr. (TunM^:— Had yon ofilcevs* taken a
light ^— Nb^ not at that time.
Wheu'Thistlewood came down the laMer,
what did he do? — ^He turned round and pit^
seated a pistol to'ttf head ; I pst up s^lia^d
in this kind of way trdefend'myfslr.
tin
Jor High Tr$aion»
A. D. 182a
tsis
tVhat did he do ?-^He fired at me.
How near to your head was it the pistol was
(red ? — Very near; there were three holes
inade in my bat fMoiomf ihem\, I went ta
inake a rush^ and receired a blow on the right
side of my head, and I fell with it.
What was that blow from ; was it given you
by a weapon or a fist ? — ^I do not know ; but
it beat the hat in.
When you were down, did you observe
Thistlewood do any thing ? — Yes, he made a
cat at me with something like a sword| and
went out at the stable door.
Lord Chief Juttke Abbott, — ^Leaving you iii
the stable ? — ^Yes.
. Mr. Gumev, — ^Did you attempt to follow
him? — ^Yes ; but he was out of sight before I
could get at him.
Were you wounded at all ? — ^Yes, in the hand
with a ball, when I put up mv hand to shield
myself, the ball touched my hand and grazed
it in this way.
jAdx Nixon sworn. — Examined by
Mr. mtkdaU.
Are you one of the Bow-street ofiicers } —
Yes.
Did you go to Cato-street, on the 23rd of
Pebniary last f — ^Yes.
When you first got into the stable, what did
jou see ?— There was a ladder just by entering
the front of the door, and I saw Ruthven, Ellis,
and the deceased, and Gibbs ; they went up
and I followed them ; against I got to the top
the lights were all out, and I remained about
lialf a minute or scarcely so much. Just as I
|pDt up, I saw Ellis fire a pistol, but I thought
It was they had fired at him ; it Iras into the
little room he fired it.
As soon as the fire was returned, when Ellis
fired the pistol, were you knocked down ?—
Another pistol or two were fired from this little
room, but I could not see ; I was only just at
the head of the stairs, then there was a rush
and I fell backwards, hit my leg against some*
thing, cut it about three inches, and my head
^ent against the wall, and cut my hat. I fell
down stairs, and then there came a rush of
people down, and I think I saw one about two
steps from the bottofai. I saw him present a
pistol towards Westcoatt.
'Who presented that pistol ? — ^I really believe
It was Thistlewood : I really believe it was
that man that sits down there, he presented it
Mgainst Westcoatt ; but his side face I could
Hot distinctlv see.
At that time had Westcoatt apprehended
any body 7 — ^He had got Ings in custody when
I went up stairs.
' Did Ings get away from him ?— He got away
from him after thev shot at him.
Did you pursue Ings?— Westcoatt said ^'Stop
Ihat fellow,** and I pursued Ings.
Was he brought back again f— -Yes ; he was
taS^en blr Wright and Chapman^ I believe ;
ihey had got him in custody.
VOL. XXXIII.
Soiba time afterwards, did you find any
thing in the stable ?— I went into the stable
afterwards, and found a sword.
Any thing else? — Then I went up stairs
again into the loft, and I found a bayonet ; and
then I saw Ruthven hunting about, and I fol-
lowed him, and he found a bag and opened it,
and I saw some balls about this size [jpni-
ducing one], there were a quantity of them^ I
cannot tell how many.
Did you find any thing besides those ?-—
Afterwards, when I was going down stairs with
those combustibles, there was another piece of
stuS'in a kind of a tin can wrapped round with
paper ; I shook it ; I look upon it, it was seven
or eight pounds or more than that
You delivered it to Ruthven ? — I did.
John Wright swonid— Examined by
lAt.BoUtmd.
You are a patrole at Bow-street f— Yes.
Were you one of the party of officers that
went to Cata4tieet on the 23rd of February ?
— I was.
Where did you muster? — ^I went to the
Horse and Groom, in company with Mr.
Ruthven.
While you were in the Horse and Groom,
did you see any of the prisoners come in ?^
Cooper and another came in, and had a pint
of porter.
Had Cooper any thing, or did he leave any
thing ?— He brought in a stick, and left it b^
hind him on the seat.
What sort of a sdck was it?— A broomstidc
or mop handle.
Do you know whether Ruthven has it in his
custody T — I saw it in his possession after*
wards.
Did you accompany the party to the stable
after that ? — ^Yes,
What happened when you got into the
stable ? — After I had got about three or four
stairs we were knocked back again ; we were
driven back again. I turned round, and ob-
served a man m the further stall.
What soFt of a man was he in person ? — ^He
had a great coat on ; but I should not be able
to swear to him.
What sort of a person was he ?— A stoutish
person.
Did yoQ observe any thing on that man ?— »
I observed he had something shining under hr»
coat ; I took it from him and found it to be a
sword on one side, and a knife from the other
side, a butcher's knife.
Where is that knife ? — It is up stairs..
What sort of a handle had it r— A butcher^
handle tied round ^tb wax end.
•
Lord Chief Justice JMeM.— -Do you. mean to
produce the knife ?
Mr. "BoUand, — ^Yes, my tord* Did you take
that man into custody, or did he escape ? —
At that moment I was knocked down and re*
ceived Ik stab in my-right side, and the «»aa
escaped.
3G
9}9V 1 GfiOftGS ly. Trial,iif4r(hwr TkuU^Mod l^i^
Did that d^abl0 you froijd ^oio|; any niQre, | When yop came up to hi«i yfAi^ did higs
or did you recover from it ? — ^I sot up and weut ; a^ ?i— I said^ *' You ^asc^ Why didjou ^ at
~ shortly after toe soldiers ' me^ a man you peyer ^a^r before ? he s^ifoif
^ .1^ -„ ^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^ meant to kill me, and he
unshed he )kad done it, as be knew he should
be hong.
out of the door, aod
came down. On their coming down they
^topped me ; I told them I was an 'o6Scer.
Captain FiUclarence went into the stable, and
there were two persons brought out.
Who were they? — ^Wibon was Q(ie. and
^radbom, who stands on l)is rijght-hano side;
another.
Did yoo searoh the person of Wijion?— I
searched Wilson, and round some ball cart-
ridges in his pocket, an4 t found a haversack
on nis side, suspended across his shoulders,
which hung on the right-hand side of him.
Did you find any thing in that haversack ?
— Then was a ball cartridge there, and a pair
of scissors.
How maay ball cartridges ?—IlMn might
be about two' doxen.
Did yotv fipd any tlung else ?— A ^^ ^^t
or two.
WUiiam Charlu Brodh swom. — ^Examined
by Mr. Soikitor Qenend,
I believe you are pne of the Bow-street
patrole? — ^Yes.
Where were you sutiosed on tl^e 23rd of
February, in the evening ? — t just turned into
John-street, and was asking a coachman whe*
ther he had seen any men ;
Never mind that, what passed at that ino-
ment ? — ^Mr. Bimie came up tp. me and sai^
^ Run Brooks,'* and pointed over the way.
What did you see over the way ?— I saw the
prisoner logs and a man before him with a
Gutl|»s drawn, but it wa4. so dark I could not
distin^ish whether the other was ope of our
people or not ; I learnt that afterwards.
In coQseqi^encf of this what did yo^i do F—
I saw Inn with a pistol in his hana| present-
ing it to th^ other man ; I said '' vdu scoundrel,''
be turned sharp round, and s<ud, '< I will shoot
you,*' presenting the pbtol; I 'made a snatch
at it, and he fired the pistol.
What is that you have ii^ your bandf — A
fwat coat ; the shot pfuised through the collar
of it, through this coai I have on now, and
this waistcoat ; bruised my dioulder, and went
Oft at the back of mv neck ; ther^ is a mark of
it here [an the hack rfhii necU\,
After he had fired the pistol^ what did he
d9 f — I staggered into the road a little way,
and he came into the road a little woy, I sup-
pose, in fear of my partner, and then ^ent off
towards the Edgware-road ; he was not above
ten yards; I pur^yed V°^» an^ just as he
turned the corner, a very little way fro^ the
comer, two or three yards^ he Hung the pistol
from hjm« I w^as never further frohi nim than
I am from thatgentlua^ ; I c^ed out to stop
him, because I thought I was going to fall.
Was he stopped ?T-Yes, he was, ^y Moay
fyp. — Prav wpf lord, am I permitted to ask
no questions r
Xord ChUtfJ^u^ wlMd(/.— You ^xt not ippos
your trial ^t present*
Mr- Soikitor GenmJ^^An yoa sate those
you have repeated, are the ezpressioos he mad^
11^ of ?— Yes, I am quite sure.
hgf. — ^It is false.
Mr. SoikUor 6bier«l.— Alter he was taken^
was he searched ia y owr presence T — ^We took
him down to Marybone watch-house* I said^
** U you offer to put your haiid into one of your
pockets, I will knock you down," or ^ knock
your brains out;" I £d not know but that
there might be something in his pocket ; ho
said ^ You may as well as at another tifie."
Lord Chief Jmiiee JMott.— This does not
refer to the general matter ; any thing ^l^ut
him' is evidence in confirmation of that.
Mr. SoUcUor GeneraL — ^Did you search him^
—Yes, he had two haversacks, one slun^ over
his shoulder, and another over his arm.
Had he a great coat over them ? — Yes, 90 aa
to hide them.
What ebe did ^ou find ?— I found a belt
buttoned round him, appar^^itly to hold two
pistols on each side.
Two brace t — To hold two pistols on eadi
side ; I put my hand into his rignt-hand pocket
and pulled out a tin case nearly full of powder,
and a letter belonging to some society : I thoi^t
it vras the Free-masons' society.
Did you find anything else? — ^No^ I sair
my partner take three slu^ out qf his other
pocket.
Who is your partner?— Ohafjup^oo; ai^ m
knife case about that long.
Aboot a foot long?— Nearly that; I took
nothing else but a knife aqd a comb firoqa
him ; he was confined, and I went back to ^A
stable. * '
OUa FraMm Moay MwtiaL — examined iMr,
Ut.SokatqrGeMraL
I believe yo|i are a ^tchman l-^Yt^
Whs^ was your beat on Wednesday;
the 23rd of February ? — In V^^ t^gwart. ,, ^
kfti) for High Tteason.
%\A6tA«f c^6 tni caUM otit ^top Met: I iook
ore h>ia sdu tilet faitn.
Did ;oii stop him ? — ^Yes ; I struck at Uiii,
^M lie banght iny stick in his h&tid, and then
we had a tussle ; then I kept him till Brooks
Acam^ down, and #e fotm ^dtne ^Idgs, sii or
iseVedy ana ^omejpowd^r in a tin box, at^d a
knife, sheath, andTa bel^ oii dach side td bold
apisto}.
jfdti^ c%sMpibn swdm.— £xatxlined by
]!ljfr. Oahiey,
You are o^e of the Bow-street officers f —
Yes.
Did foil iecdrnikmy (B^m to Crit6-s(ree^; on
the night of the 23rf! of Febmaiy ?— I did.
I will not take yoit over the whol4 story;
imt did ion see any person yoir knew get
through the stable and getaway ?-*No^ except
Ingi-
^ L^ Chirf JuMtkt AhbUt.-^lM you know
bim before ? — No.
Mr. Gf«nury.-^Upoi^ th^ dtber officers going
^ the ladder, did yon hear Ings say any thing ?
•^Yes.
What did he ittf ?— He said ^ look ont above
dkere," as a sfgnUi to I thongfkt : he was stand-
ing with his back against the wall, just facing
ibe ladder. Itf^se are the thiffg^ I took out
df tm jacket i^cief ; this is ue case of a
knife, four pistol balls, and a key and a pistol.
Where dra yot^ tafie those frdm him r-— In
Maiybone watch-house.
Au€r Hk^ officers w&rfe' dtfven down ifhe
l^defi ditf you ^ee aliy person escaping? —
I did not see any p^rsotat in the stable ; Siere
was a person got aown into the rack.
, Did yott see liny persotit m^ hlw efcape } —
I saw no other pets<m but lliiltlewoody that
Was jn Cato-street. /
. Ited he any ti^ng in his hand ?— A sword,
which he waved once or twice opposite his
person, though there was no person opposite
to him.
Lieutenant Frederick FUxekaretiee swoiVb-^
Bxaaued by Mr. Atfnrt^ General.
, I believe vou are a lieutenant in the Cold-
stream guards T-^Yes.
Do yon recollect, on the 23rd of February,
gbfnjg wHba pitquet to John-Street! ?'^t do.
Yon had been desired to attend by iSr.
Bimie, the police magistnfte?—! had.
About what hour was it when you got' to
Jbfan-strsfet^ do yotr iweolfed f — I shotild think
near eight, between eight and a qnarCer past.
Softie thbe afltfr yon had been in' John*
eiVelet, did yon hear any thing that attracted
yoW atteri<fori tbwkrds Cat6-slreet ?— -Oirectly
after I was in John-street, I heard a pistol shot,
wfkidi appealed* to coA^'from Cato-street.
Did 3^u upon that gel the picquet to ad-
vdlkrce tbwftrdfs Catd-street? — I then brought
tl)e i^qnet forward double quick towams
Oito-streei
We ufldisntaiid* t&ere ii an arch ovtr &e
A. D. ihm. {sii
entrance inio (l^dtb-stfe^t out of Jotiii-sti^et ? —
Yei.
On entering that, a^hway, what occurred?
-^I m^t an officet- who halloed out, " soldiers,
soldiers, the door way ! the stable.'* I ran
towards the stable, and I was met on ny right
hand by one man, aiid on my left by another :
the man at the stable door cut at me with a
ifword, and the ode on my left presented some-
thing at me ; the one in the door-way seeing
a body df troop^ coining on (the picqnet) ran
into the stable.
Lord Chief Jmtke Ahbott.^Wta that the
man that cut at you ? — ^Yes, my lord, we ex-
changed several cuts before he went in.
Mr, AUonie$ GenehoXr-^WhAt did tfie oQier
man do upon that 7 — ^I oould not see after he
had done this, but the moment he presented
a pistol, the other man cut at me; there was a
scuffle at my right hand : I ran into the stable
door.
There was a scuffle between Legg and the
men ? — ^I believe there was. I folkrwed the
prisoners in ; I ran in, and came against some-
body inside the stable : he gave himself up.
saying, <^ do not hurt me, do not kill me, and
I will ten you aU.*'
Do you know who thkt Was? — I do not
know, it was in the dark.
Was it one of the men that was secured ? —
Yes, it was ; I gave him to some of my men,
and ran into the stable.
I believe then you went to the up-stairs
room ?— No. I then ran up into one of the
stalls, and secured another man : the soldiers
took him away. I then called to a file of
grenadiers, to follow me lip the ladder: tfpon
my ffoing up Stadrs, there was a light appeared
f'aaually coming up from the bottom : when
got up,* I sec\ired fttnf three ro Ave.
You do not know the number ? — No \ 1 do
not knoW whether it was three, four, or five :
I rather think it was four.
It was^foby, Mt ii is not material F-^T went
down imme'diat^Ty after having secured them ;
directly after I got up, I fell agkinst the body
of poor Smi&M.
He was lying dead f — ^Yes, dose to the top
of ^he ladder.
I believe, abo, you saw ami in the loft
above P—Several;
Mr. Attomof Qeneral. — ISily lord, I will not
call any of the other soldiers ; I do not feel
it necessary to tronble your loraship with their
evidenOe.
Samad Btrauki TmnUien 8woni.-^£iamiaed
by Mr. SoUciior Qmeral.
I belieVeybn are alfbw-street officer?— Yes,
lam.
Did you, on the morning of the 24th, go to
Brunt's lodgings with a warrant ?— Yes, I did.
When you went up stairs, did you first go
into the ftoift room, or into the back room? —
Into the front room two pair of stairs.
893]
1 GEOBGB IV.
Trial of ArAurThiilkmood
19H
Did ^ou Much tboM looms f— I did.
I beliere yoa found nothing material there ?
—-No, nothing material.
After Ton had searched those rooms, did you
go into the back room ? — Yes*
What did you find there f — I found two rush
baskets, one tied up in an apron, aqd the other
pot tied up*
Where was Brunt? had j<m any conversa-
tion with him? — He was in the front room
while I searched the back room; it was an
empty room.
lyid you ask him about those baskets ? —
Yes, be said he knew nothing of them ; he did
not belong to that room ; it was not his apart-
ment.
Lord Chief Jutke AbboU.^Did he say he
knew nothing of them ?— That the room did
not belong to him.
Mr. Solicitor GrneroL — Did you ask him as
to the baskets? — ^Yes, I brought them in; he
laid he knew nothing of them«
And he ajso add^ that the room did not
belong to him ? — Yes, he did : there was a
pike shaft found in the room, and an iron
pot ; that was all besides the baskets.
Were there any marks of pitch or tar 09 the
iron pot 7— Tar, I beUeve, there was at the
bottom of it.
Did any convjersadon take place in his pre-
sence, as to whoi9 the room belonged .to f did
the landlady come up?— W)ien I found h.e
denied the apartments^ I sent for the land-
lady.
Mrs. Rdgers f— Yes.
Did she come ?— She did. I asked her who
those apartments belonged to.
In Brunt's presence ?— Yes ; she said that
bsr niece Eleanor Parker had let them to a
man she did xyoi know who, but in the presence
of Brunt.
Wbaterer she saidt she said in the presence
of Brunt f — Yes.
What did Brunt say as to his knowing
any thing of the man who had taken those
apartmenuf— I asked Brunt who this map
was f He said he had met him in a public-
house.
Lord Chief Jutiice JMoM.— When yon asked
Mrs; Rogen to mtom the teck room belonged,
what answer did she make ? — She said she did
not know the man; her niece had let it tp a
man when Brunt was in his company.
Mr. Solicitor GeaeroL-^yfW did Brunt say
<o that? — He did not say any more than I
have repeated : that it was a man at a public-
house, but he did not know his name, for I
asked him his name.
What did he say about a man at a public-
house ? — ^That it was a man at a public-house
who was along with him, when the lodgings
were taken,
Wa3 that the answer he gaTe when the
?ueatio9 waff put^ who bad takea the room ?—
es.
After Ton had searched tfus place did joa
go to Tldd's ?— -Yes; I did immediatdy aftev-
waids.
Where was that P — In Hole-in-the-wall pas«
Base, No. 5, near GrayVinn-lane.
When you went to Tidd's, what did you find
at Tidd's ?— I found a rery large box, a box
full of ball cartridges.
Lord Chief Juttiet Ahbott. — ^Do you mean to
say a box, or a very large box ? — ^About two-
feet long, and a foot and a half wide. I
counted the cartridges, and they amounted to
965.
Mr. SoUdtor Genera/.— Did you find any
thing else at Tidd's ?— Yes,
. What?— ^me grenades.
How many ? — ^Ten ; and a great quantity of
powder.
Of gunpowder? — Yes.
Did you, besides the ball cartridges that you
found in the box, find any other baU cartridges
there 7 — Yes, in a haversack.
How many ? — ^A great many.
Can you tell us about how many ?'-4d4 balls
in the haversack; 171 ball cartridges ; 69 ball
cartridges ' without powder, that is a ball in
each cartridge; and about three pounds o£
gunpowder in a paper.
Tnere was a coarse canvas cloth. Did you.
find any thine in thatP—Ten grenades and
eleven bags of powder.
Are those the same grenades you have just
spoken of P — ^Yes.
What fretfi the ten grenades in P — ^In a
brown wrapper whijch was tied up ; ten gre-
nades and eleven bags of powder, one pound
each.
I^irtf CilUef/wftceiMoir.---What tort of bags
were those r — ^Flannel bags.
Were there any of the same description of
bags that were etiapty P— -There ware ten flan-
nel bags empty.
Mr. Solicitor Genera/,— Were there any
balls ?— There was a small bag with a powder
flask and 66 balls.
Musket balls T— Yes $ 4 flints, and 37 pike
handles.
Are all those things here?— They are ali
here.
You told us you took the two baskets yoo
found at Brunt's ?— Yes.
You afterwards, I presume, seardied the
baskets ? — Yes.
TeU us what were the contents of those
baskets ?<»Nine papery, I believe I mentioned
before, with rope yam and tar, and some steel
filings. In another basket there were four
grenades, three papers with rope yam and tar»
two bags of powder of one pound each.
The same description of bags as those yon
have just spoken of? — Yes, flannel bags, and
five flannel bags empty, one paper with some
powder in, one leather bag with 63 balls in it;
that is all that was in the basket ; there wera
also one iron pot and one jtike bandit^
«Ml
Xof Hi^^ TmucDu
A. D. 1890.
[S96
Thofe yott tMk into your custody, lad &ey
are here ?•— Hiey are*
Samuel Hartules TamUon cross-examined
by Mr. Adolpkut,
When was it you found all those things ? —
Hie 34th of February.
Was Brunt present when you Urand those
Ithings ? — ^Yes, be was.
As to those found at Hdd's, Tidd had been
away from the day before? — ^Yes*
Samud HeraiUt Taunton re-examined
by Mr. SoUeUor GeneraL
What time was it when you went to Tidd's ?
»— I went to his lodgings after I had been to
Brunt's, I beliere it was about half after eight
o'clock.
.Daniel Bishop swom^ — Examined by
Mr. Gtamey,
You are an officer at Bow-street ?-"I am.
On the morning of Thursday, the 34th of
February, did you, with other officers, go to
apprehend Thtstlewood? — I did, to No. 8^
White-street, Little-Moorfields.
About what time ? — Between ten and eleven
in the morning.
What was the name of the person who lived
in the house? — Harris.
After searching different rooms in the house,
did you get a key and open the door of a room
on the ground-floor? — ^l reoeived a key from
Mrs. Harris.
You had searched the up-stairs rooms first?
r-Yes.
Did you at last receive a key from Mrs.
Harris, and open the door? — ^I opened the
door fiuung Mis. Haiiis*s room on the ground-
floor.
Upon opening the door, whom did you see
ia the room ? — I saw ThisUewood put his head
from under the clothes, he was in bed, the
shutters were shut, but Uiere were some small
holes which admitted light enough for me to
see who it was.
What did you do? — I had a pistol in one
handy and a staff in another ; I told him my
name was Bishop, of Bow*street, I had a
warrant against him, and I threw myself on the
bed.
What did he say?— Thistlewood jaid, ^I
shall make no resistance.'^
Did you afterwards search any of his clothes ?
— With the assistance of my brother officer,
we secured him ; he had then his breeches and
stockings on in bed.
Were his coat and waistcoat lyinjg by the
bed side f — They were.
Did yon seardi the waistcoat pocket ? — ^Yes,
I did.
What did you find in It?— I found three
leaden imlb, two flints, one ball cartridge,'
and one blank cartridge, likewise a small silk
sash.
Did you find any thing in his coat pocket ?
'—I saw Lavender take vjiOm his coat pocket a
black cloth belt, with a plac^ to put pistols and
a sword in, in conv^ng the prisoner in the
coach,
Mr, Owmejf. — We need not go into that.
Daniel Bi$hop cross-examined by
Mr. CuniwoA
Did Edwards go with you? — ^I do not think
either of them did; we have several of that
name at Bow-streeL
I do not mean one of your officers, but
another man of the name of Edwards ? — I do
not know any other.
You went in consequence of information ?—
Yes, which I received not ten minutes before;^
I did not know of it ten minutes before.
Did your informant go with you?— No^ he
did not; or I should not have gone to the
other rooms fint
Stqphen- Lanender sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gumey.
Produce the belt you found in Thistle-
wood's pocket? [T£> wUneu ptoAiced the
same.']
There are places for two pistdt?^-Ye8^
there are. [^George Thomoi Jbteph BtUhnenf
produced varunu amckt^l
Mr. SoHdtor Oenerali — ^First produce those
found at Cato-street? — ^Thisisthe mop-stick,
that was left at the public-house Iproduang itl,
that is the belt taken off of Tidd jjtroducing t/J,
these are two of the swords lYound in tlie
room.
In what room?— The loft in Cato-ctreet;
this is the large grenade found in Cato-stieet,
which was given to me by Nixon..
Mr. Solicitor G«fisni2.— The arms till within
the last twentr-four houri were loaded, the
greater part of them f-— They were unl<Nided
yesterday.
Were they loaded with ball ?— They were»
and this is one of the hand-grenades; there
were ten of them, one has b^n since taken
away by order of colonel Congreve.
AJmymm fMr. OamfeiU^|.— It will be ne-
cessaly, perhaps, my lord, to have one of those
opened, as it is stated they contain powder ?
Mr. SoUciior GeneraL — One of them has been
opened^ gentlemen, and you will have evi-
dence before you of what it contained.
"Rnthven^ — This is the string Bradbum had
tied round him ; . these are two candlesticks ;
these are the six ball cartridges Btadbum had in
his pocket.
Lord Chief Jtatiee Abbotts — If you could
keep by themselves the things found in Cato-
street, it would be convenient. [Hiewitneu
handed in eeoeral pultolSf ewordi, and a ib^.]
Mr. Solicitor QeneraL'^Ttonk whom was that
knife taken ?
ITrilgAf .— I took it from the stout man in tho
stable.
mni
1 <SfeOR6£1V.
Tritl«i
f^aUemod
t«fif%
in the loft in Cato-street.
JiwiMMi^llilM M «i Mpe t«M» dial Vas
found in ike loft.
Mr. SoUeUor 6kWf(d^ Were there any more
Ihitigi in Gafo.«trtet ?-^Kel lltal 1 Uk hWiire
•f I the abldien had iome.
Have you those which tfa* teMWh had ?•««
4-»The aoMieft had them themsatfes^ tiey
walked ihmm, Ifeid tiill pMd«<Sft Hmm, then^
aelrea.
Ilr. StXckfff' Odm^.^h is Ikrt n^dei^
lot us to etaittine tb<! ^dl^ff ; itf teamed
friends dd il6t de^e (htt ; take OkttA frcM did
WUmft.'^Tbu it the pistol iM st nijonit
Legg-
Lord Ckkf JtolMs Jttod^^Then that is not
found Ml the loftN-No, ngr lord.
Ut4 MMtor CMIMliii^Was any tlfti|Mff
found in the loft ? — ^Yea ; these pikes itaid *
WbM 10m ifis MMd^rlMW Mid ? WA m
loft.
Wheie were thoee Dikes found ?-i-In the Mt
ttare you Counted tiew many tliere are of
t&em t-^l have not in thai pareef ^ theia are
sk in one pattett
Mtfi Adiiilr diNllMif .-u<fcM 0f tffMti «f(«
bayonets, and some are sharpened files ; aMrC
<«MMhlfd ttrtf flitoi Mid t&e MI»Cfeinky6nah;
tto tajf" Wii MiUVAe^tMMW f»iottl«<li^
handles; theii#l9tf sMiT appMiftf/ nftid^ txt
senw into poles! ,
HM^.-^Tfiliir is th^ 6aff Kli<( M#deV lik€ti
<mt of the AfAs r tAii Wflr thir(lb ifi thV loft
{handing m anmdcet]^ these were tak'ctt tt the
Tolef/bibh^ m a bi^Sm, mMse^pikMid, talfa
daieft nuttpkihiA^ tunffMdU dM HMHUA
Was flitt swotrf tak^t) itf th(t loft?'— iTetf, ii
'wasy and here h a fueft fbrih^ for tHe'biMose ;
tha^smallr pistol WM Ibwfd «ider»lMMu(^in
4haiialile*
Was tha*oirbine found » the bft^-^I «n
aiot quite sure as to that.
JUrd dijf Juirjtf JMoH^^n ik^ nol ¥c«ry
inatmial Im thcT pnodubtfon df fhem^ whefhef
<they were found in the left er taken from die
persons of the pfisoners, in the loft^
l^iiMfc'^Thay MM^ eU MAmt \tt Cato^
street.
Mr. SdiuUft' GeMNA^Y^ ha^ gh^ lie
iwhai were found in thu loft > wW you grvie am
^ thu dungs' thtfl wever founds im Cato^wtiHwc^
whether i« the Wft w e v lh» puisoHs* of* die^
prisoners ? — ^Ihose pike staves- were found>in
theloftov^rthe stalile; &iitl^annagancanspei&
to them. [One of the pka wu terewedwio a
hmMe^y I)m {> «IhmMim9< 1M fovnd^ in
the suhe.
PrMnee ttBy^vunl we^ fouin Xm. Ike p^fsona
of the prisoners ? — ^A smdl hNdiaiES&iitftf ihd 4
sword were found on J>i?id*Hi.
And any thing more } — ^l^t upon him ; these
were found ana brtraght to the -ofiice. having
been takei ft ihe t)f^fx!iie3 df a p^j^tf of the
name of George, who was appi%netad§d fAimd-
M^ At « MIM» Ml l^lb* d^;
We hare nothing to do wftk t&otr; takd
This is thd due diit Addddia^ fxkH ftoA
Wilmv that he fired at him as l^e went in.
(Three ar/jmr mote piU<^ handed m.]
Will the soidiersy each, recogniie those titer
FMfh Whoii WM^ tBdM b^lis ^HMt hi^ tKkiU f
'"^^HU^fMnbd i iboM^ td^6 duS' i^ert' tn#n froin
logs, and that belt and the case coniahnng
some powder. ' j * ^■
Now give us the kiiifo r [It xoai prodtieedJ]
The handle of tnat is covered over with wax'«
endr— Iti^ TUsMl|f[M«iiKl^«}#ii^ taken
ftom WilMA/ IM «liU s#0A fiP5di Wfliotf. I
Mf ptflMtf, the kni^ ind the' iwdOl #<<r«
tftefi ttfM attHln that gdt «Wiy thalflft (aiMoC
identify, the baf #il tidt«n tiotA W!bdli.
Y<MI iM^tf noV tiMhiccfd all tMt «ri» tiAen
in Cato-street f — Yes, I have.
llu# tfr(MHMf frtlat* WflV tAdi/ df Biudt's
lodgingsf [The witne» phtdkced M» tadteM
tfid &nihih^c9fidMth&t witf oftKt^ Out i^&kt of
HiehddtM.] ThiM ]l9Me¥ IAl^ cotftaids bidls.
T^at 10 otd of th# imkB t^' filled #ia^
powder? — ^Yes.
Thef di^ ai about l^ MEM^ ihii^f—l^^
are much about ; there is another one Mttf,'
aftd thU^ eikptf.
Show sottie^of (he firi ballvT'^'hiis ii ^Sfy
nwM^ Ov foi^ dipped in tar fpra&ncutf wk
Show one the grenades T— This is one [ 9^
TMy aM the iM^m tlitf grtoid^ Med tt
Galo-sMet f--Yes> Heref i9 another basfctt
notdOHto-dp hi' d htddkerdier, t^lch seems tor
contaid di^ sitM" Mnf of dkSdge ; die^ we an of
a sort [producing thernl,
FireballtfMreA.
That is diO'^iroiir pot-df^prtiich you*madenete»
tibnT^Yes.
Is thertf any amMai^libef of pitdi and ta^
having been boilea in it ? — ^Yes, there is.
Now produ<!e dioM diat- were tiiken atHdd's
lodgings ?
TaMon [ptdiAdiig (9(dM].— Here ire 965
bun cftiftridges.
The bot IS q\iitd^foAK-It is;* there are fife
in each of these parcels.
Hhtf tttr doie^ up id little parcels f— Yes ;
all in nves, with a bsll iu ^Hrf one.
What irib that Big f
Jlidftuen.-— Those are the gRoades.
Mlr< Micibr' Ommral' (To Tauakm.y^Yent
enunideddiafr^^Yei^; het»ai»tlte bagSyCon«»
taining eadi a pound of gunpowder.
jf J^m% (id¥. €hadcmL)^Yfm have
URBlglieu tlMflri^^X MITe.
Mr. Stiwfyt a^iiepvi^.--That iai all, I be-
U^veT^Theice are tw9i ^o^n moirft of t)k^
^That ^wro Ukeo ^ H^^'^ ?— Yes.
Are th^ of ^e sai^e tjogrt ^ tho^ «poo ^.
table ?«^£xactly tfie f^Q^*
Yes.
Mfi Actor JMmwii caHed agcan^— Bxamined
1>y Mr. J^omey 6<iMndL
{fi|Q ?— I esy the u|9t oae.
Are ypu quite sure 0(f tkat? — ^Ye^; th|»e if
^ ms^V on tn^ blade bj; iv]4(^ I k^oi^ it
Seijaaii Ekoard Smton swont-TrBxamtnedby
Mr* Garn^.
' Are jou^^iqei^in.theBoiral AIt^ler]^7-rr
Have Yoi^ ea^quned one of tbose gieoadef
produced to you ^t Boiy-^reet ? — ^I baye>
How }8 it composed ^-rTbe bottpQC^ of it if
^ tin qase about thjree in^:!^ long, i^id then,
projecting about a quarter c^ an incl^ there is
a tin tube brazed in. You see the outsi4a ot
What is the priming in the tube.?-TTlt is a
composition saltp^e, as &r asl caiqi, a^cer^aifi^
powder and brimstone.
Orer the tin what is thf|^ I-r^t is patched
just at the end of the tin.
"What is wrapped over itTT—Jtoi^yani e%
ticely round it.
Is there any thing (l^tiened in the rope-yam I
— 7Nezt to the tin there iis a body of oakum
about an inch thick, and it is cemented then
i^ith tar and rosin mixed up together to make
it fast It is very fast, and iifill not peel otf.
Do you then find any pieces of iron?*-
Tbere were twelve pieces of iron planted round
one that I op(ened| lii difierept directipus regu-
I^tlyround. '
WiBX tjyme W9uhi it t^e frpm the. Ughtine
^ the j^sfltbffof^ t^e grenade wofoild axplodel
-7^ Gfhi^t eiifcOy sfiy; I suppoae alKfut twenty
ot tbilty. seconds ; the, tube Fas something
If one.of tftflj^^ip^ to WW^ i^, ^. ipom
^55 ^ep9 ^.^.9 ^ aumber tf PWm T**'
w;ouId Be Jje copij^^p^ 1-^U w>m i% %
great deal of damage ; it would be ▼eiy4^?^1)fh
Y«[l
' 'Jukfi so.ma^y buUeto T-rrYw-
"^H^v "^to.yvpi ha^^ : ioef iJLijpp€aato
yi^u to be n^xprnc to tj)e one y^u opeufidT—.
Yef, the yei^r . mo^eL
Take your kni|e,' and open tl^at-^^t ^^1
t^l^e a long whil^ to opei^ if . '
4 Jippien (Mr. 4Aio^)»-^7V Jm^ «i|fc
(p hay^ li opieaed.
Mr. Attomm/ deneraZ-rr-B^r all means, gea-
demen. TOne wof taken te pieces in ike m'etence
aftheJ^.J
lift. Qcvr9iaf.-v»What i|xe thosv j^ tu^v«
qoxne to n^wf-trTife trails, ^t naiisp
A Jwymm (Nh.Aiie^t^. )^li is what ihstena
OB ^e Ufe ii^ the can wheels r some appear to
be old and some new.
Wiffm'-^^nap ^ W» old VUt* st09VPg«
Mr. Gmm^.r^Al\ that tightness lendem i^
the m^re eflbotuall — Ye^ here is another
Stpckingj and then we come to the iam, tk%
caicais i^fAe vftnsts opened Ma im ctesl. Hera
is the powder in it, and it is very good too.
A Jufymqf^ (B^r. Al4engy.)^'!p^ you eonsider
that food gunpowder b^ \U, |^r;ipi^siUP<^ tm
Yes, il i^^ yery poo4.
Ms. Gumcvr-rTak^ into your, hand one of
thoaawa eall fiina-baUSr bave you ewaininaA
them also 'J^— Yea, i have. >
What appean to bathe camposition o^them ?
-^la is oakunu lac, ^ui atoaa^bfiBiatpna
ponnded; may W there is rosia.
A ^wi/immi^ 4i^ffiify).-rTherj '^ m
kilUcrankie ^^4 r^fiis^ gf th« Ko^w* if .^bfi^ f-m
Yes, there i^
Mr. Gtamiy. — Ji oaa of thaaa wm lighlad|^
and t|)rowB into a baoa^k •» m buiMKngif
would it set it on fire ^»Yes, it would be sur*
to set it on ia% i nothing oouU pot il out a*
long as there was ai^ ol if left*
How long wuiild it biK|if-*7hree> orlaor
minntaa.
It would ae^ wood €niae^-4)byes^; ifia-
feu on woo^ it weadd aet it on iae.
And if it fell ou strata, it wouM sat thai em-
fire more easily f r-OerlaiBly*
Mr. AWmn^ Q^wroi— Tha^ipy Iprd, y^ t)kt
case Qn tha pa;^ of tl^ Cn>^*
nsvMica.
Ha4 It l)^ peri^itted to ijoie^oonifist^fi^y witfi
my 01^ a«f^ pf m^ ap^ prpfes^iona^ ^g^
tp b^y^ dj^din^$)^e ardnonsUf^ i4i(Ak»i«.|ipw
upoin tl^ pr^M^t moni^Qtpn^ oocaaimf Bulk
pismai^.ijt ufqneplthe brigfxtfift aUnbulief oC
our pfofession, anq. w)iicb yre tl^e men^)>eca o(
tl^i^t, prpfession t^ipk redonni}^ to our greatestr
csedit, th^t we §^fjf not atliber^ to retuse our
a^jsiat^ce to p^x^i^ in the siUu^tion of tha
u^iiGirtuna,^ man a^ the bar. Ko man cai^ feal$
mpre dfl^'x impjpw^ ^^ ^^ T»itb,«^ <5*nw»>
of t)ie,v^iy gr/eaf weight of thi) aiyiuo«ia> ta^ki I
hf^y^ to pei^rm. I feel ths^ the uufprtunata^
Pftfon^x h^ a right to demand from me to do,
my duty, boldlyapd fearlessly, unawe4 byanx«
consideiatio^ of the power of government, irhffi
are his pro^ecu^^fi an^ uiv^^M^ by t^%
Sdl] 1 GEbftG£ IV".
Triat^ Arthur TkittUtnod
m^
ifiurement of hope in oonciliatiDg Adr favour*
I feel also that I hare a sacred duty to dis-
charge to my country, which is^ to render my
best assistance to the prisoner in the adminis-
tration of the law, as relating to his case,
and not — ^if I had even power or ingenuity
enough to effect it — to attempt to penrert that
law, or to defeat the purposes or justice. I
also feel that I owe this to my own fair fame,
which was my only inheritance, and is my best
possession.
With those feelings pressing me down so as
almost to unnerre me, I hope I may eay that I
look for assistance with humble confidence to
that Power, which^ however men may disre*
gaid in the times of prosperity or of levity,
yet, in distress and in difficulty, and in the
moments of trial, we all look to for consola-
tion and support.
It is fit that upon an occasion of this sort,
you should know something of the man who
addresses you. And although I readily admit
that for a man to speak pubticly of himself is
«saally an arrogant vanity, yet, as I am anxious
that those arguments w4idi I may address to
yoU| ahould at least have all the weight that
diey may intrinsically deserve, I am desirous
you should know that I have no bias on mv
mind to impel me aside from the even path
6f my duty. For it is not to be denied, that
Ais unfbrtunate transaction arises out of a state
of things in our country, wludi we must all
lament and deplore; and it is equally true,
that men vrill have prejudices on certain points
connected with tins prosecution, it having re*
lation to certain political transactions, upon
which various and opposing feelings are wide*
If difibsed. For myself, though I cannot deny
as an Englishman that I have feelings on
eertain points of government, yet I never en-
rolled myself with any political party. I never
aUended public politiMl meetings in my life,
so that I stand unwarped by party spirit. I
am equally as free horn bias on the other hand,
ioT, with respect to government, I never re-
ceived either in or out of my profession the
slightest favour, and none have I reason to
hope for or eipect, so Uiat, looking into my
own breast, I nave no motive thereto influence
aie but that of doins my duty, and that I will
endeavour faiily and honestly to perform.
* The weight of this duty both to my learned
ftiend and myself is not a little increased by
the lateness of Uie moment at which we were
called upon to execute it. Not until Thursday
nij^ht was it that I received instructions in
this case, or knew that I was to be called upon
to defend the prisoner. In that short interval,
I have had to prepare myself to meet the first
talents at the bar, long and sedulously employ-
ed in considering and maturely adjusting
every debateable point, aided with all the
support that the wealth, the power, and the
influence of government can give them: while,
on the contrary, I have had scarcely a day's
notice to argue before you whatever might
arise out of this vefy important case«
With the attentive ear which (as it was my
duty to do^ I gave to Mr. Attomey«general in
opening this case, I could not fail to observe^
with some degree of surprise, that he did not
state to you precisely what were the points
you were called upon to decide. He indeeif
stated to you that this was a prosecution for
high treason ; but he gave you no precise states
ment of the exact issues you were to try. He
dwelt much on th^ which I must and do admit,
constituted great moral guilt on the part c!t
the prisoner at the bar ; but he did not state
to you precisely what vras the guilt he iin«
puted to him by the present indictment. Now,
there is unfortunately mixed up with thit
transaction a great dead which must necessa*
rily make a deep impression on your minds r
— there is a great di»l of guilt, but take this.
with you at the same time, that there are other
indictments upon which that guilt will pro-
bacy be tried; and whatever your opinioa
may be of the moral guilt of tiie prisoner at
the bar, if you, upon a review of the evidence,
shall not be of opinion that he has committed
the jineciM q^ence charged in this indictment,
whatever your feeling of his moral guilt may
be, it vriU be your bounden duty upon this
indictment to pronounce a verdict of acquittalJ
It therefore has become my duty to state tor
you the precise issues which you have to try.
it is not merely a question of high treason,
but it is a question of a particular species
of treason. And although the indictment
was very long, and contained a statement of s»
great many facts, which in the language of the
law are called overt acts, you are to understand^
they are only set forth as evidences to prove
that simple fiict in which the treason consists.
They are given to you, to induce you to be
satisfied of that short statement of guilt of
which the substantive treason consists. The
treason charged in this indictment, or rather
the substantive treasons, are four. The first
and third are upon a statute of the 36th year
of the late king, for conspiring to depose his
majesty from his imperial style and dignity.
I do not know whetner I use the precise Ian-
linage of the act of parliament, but in substance
It is conspiring to depose his majesty. Se*
cond, for compassing and imagining the death
of the king. Third, conspiring to levy loor^
Fourth, actual levying war. Two of theae^
— compassing the death of the king, and
the actual . levying war, are • treasons by
the statute of £d. III. The other two— con*
spiring to levy war, and depose his migesty,^
are made treason by the act of his late maif^
jesty^s reign.
ror now about four hundred years, £nglish«
men have always held in veneration, as a pro«-
tection of their dearest rights, the statute of
treasons of Edward the Third. There, among
other treasons, it is stated that, whoever shall
compass and imagine — to use ^e language o€
the statute— that is, contrive or intend— ^the
death of the king, and by any overt or open act
shall shew he had such intention, s«cb iiitra^
l)
Ii6»^ pf9vtd by jwmft mptm d6i4, tha^l be coik
aidered w tveasoDs ftirabjtlmt statute also,
•otual lavying of war agaiiMt his m^^aaljr i»de>
darad a liMsoa. Thara have at times^ w sub-
aaquenianhappgr or turbttlant raigDa, atarted up
^ Tttria^ ol atattttaa avaativ^ of aaw tfeaaona,
W faioh hare always Withered aiwi^ in the good
Itoaa of oareoBttitution. There is, however,
•DO other statute now axiatiDg, which makes not
iMmly the oonnfMiasiaK. of the dudh of the king
Uaaaottf hut the oonsfiitfig to depoaahim from
hii state and digBity» and th»eoaapiring to levy
var againal his majesty. Thtse^ therefore* are
Ite fovir diatiaet queationa you have t6 try. —
firal I H|» the penon at the bar compassed
•r inagined the deafth of the king ? Secondly i
Sbaa he oo«apired to depeae him iram bis im-
poiiai alate and digDHy? llwrdiy: Has he
CQoapirad to lavy war against the king P Or,
iombljf : Has he actually levied war against
ther king ? And vfr those peinta or one of them,
yon must he satisfied in t^saffirsMlive, before
3^011 oan find a verdkft againal the pciaouer at
Ihehaf.
' Before I proeeed to comment upon the pr^
habiltly of the evidence) and the credit which
you will giv» to it, J would beg leave to call
yeiiv atten^oB to Uie couiae which has been
jMistted by the learsad counsel ibr the Crowns
The great maas of their evidence^ if taken to be
pavfiKtly tnae, appears to me to go to the £act that
ahete waa a conspiracy to destroy his m^>eaty's
nhoiatera. And it seems to me that my learned
friend the Atiomey-general relies upon that
fcat» as sufficient evSeaoe to prove one or
•tev of theae substantive treaaoos. It strikes
W^ hoowvat, OB the oontraiy, that you may
htbevo the whole of thatatatenfent, and stiU
diat it may net-he evidence of any one of the
Mihatantive tseaaotts charged in this indict-
Jttttit* Jk d«e8 not iallow aa a matter of
<dlNM, thai the rem^viag the administration
#f the king is te be feUowad by either the
4eath or the depoaiti(m of the- monarch. Let
tia 9» by staps^ These ia continnally in pai^
Jiamant a party, I may ventmre toafl^, who
thioli that the existing adaainiatraiion of the
dair ia not a good ont. Whan 1 say tha
•tfasiniattation of the day, I do not mahn to
apply that obsarvatmi to the mteiaters of the
^•aaaot day eseluatvelyyibr I will do iham tha
Ctioa to say» that every adminiatraiioB Uiat
I praooded them have alwstya found a party
that have thought them a had one ; and every
admiAistvatioa which' shall ibUow them, will
BO doubt field a party to Ihiafc them equally
bad. It ia clear, howevaa, that there is con-
tiaually ia the paclianient itself a mrly en*
daavpitHBC to reasove the existing administra*
taoa^ and I wiUgive tham fall credit for be»
Iteviai^ that it is firom a oonvictton that if th^
were removed anotbtr would he foond wheea
aarvieei wo«id be isara banaAdal to the conn*
Ivy* It fioUowSy thaiefi>i«,' that tha mere ra*
Moval of tha admimatsaiion of the day is not
aaaaiderad as seeaasar^y involvang either the
daaih or ^Ihe depmition of the monatoh : and
VOL, XXXIIlT
A. D. 1820.
[834
tha persons so deBtring wttl not necessarily 1)6
involved in tha cnaie of high treason. If tha
mere removal of the administration is not
attended with those consequences does it the
more follow, because that removal is to bo
efiected by force or with violence ? Men who
are desperate, if they cannot accomplish that
which they desire by fair means, sometimes
resort to foul : I do not meaa for a moment
to palliate the gnilt of assassination, but I
contend that you are not to take it aa a ne-i
cessary consequence, that the lemiewal^ nay
the death or destruction of the whole administ
tratioB, involves in itself neeessarily ather
the death or the deposition of the king. If
you should be of opinion, that the assassina^
tion of miniateiSy horrid as it is, does not
neceasaiily involve that oonaequenee, then, I
contend, the evidence given upon this occasion
does not support fhe two fimtsuhstantivetrea*
sons laid in this indictment
There are two other treasons alleged in this
indictment : the one is, conspiring to levy war
against his BM^esty in his realm, and the other
is the actually levying war. Now see whether
the evidence afibrda you satisfactory proof
either that there was a conapiracy to levy war,
or that the act done amounted to an actual
levying of war. In the detail which has been
given of this tmnaaction, more parlienlarly tha
very long detail by the first witness Adams,
and who in fact proved the whole case, my
learned friend me Attorney-general found
there was so much ridicule in his statements,
or rather so much to be ridiculed in the trans*
action he related, that he feh die observations
necessarily artsiatg ^pon that man's tale would
throw discredit upon the whole of his testi*
mony, particularly when coupled with the
infamy of his character. To obviate this, ha
said, I am obliged to call an accomplice, and
by the law an accomplice is a competent wit-
ness ; if an aecoasplice could not be called^
there vrould be inspunity for conspiracies, and
all secret crimes; I never meant to denv that
position of kw, as stated by the learned At*
tome^genaral, but I say^the evidence of an
aceompliee alwra has been, and always
most M, received with the greatest caution
and jaahnsy ; and if that caution and jealousy
b to ha applied in any case, it is more par-
ticulaily to ha applied in a case of high treason,
vrheve the law itself has throvm the strongest
g«iud Toand the subject, and by positive
enaotmeat declared that he shall never be
found guilty hot on the oaths of two credible
witnesses.
A very able writer, baron Montesquieu, has
said, that where the laws of treason are undev
fined, there can be no liberty : tyranny must
of necessity be the result And that observa*
tion iaequallT true, if, where the laws of treason
are wall denned, juries do not moat righte**
OQsljp and strenuously support that definition.
You canMK do that if you suffer any feelings
of moral guilt to infinence your minds, to pro*
nounce a verdict bei^ause you may think: ro cm
3H
939]
1 GEORGE IV.
Tfklqf Arthur miHtmood
esse
guilty of very eoormons offencet, unless yoa
cUo think them guilty of that precise specific
crime with which they are cha^;ed.
In treasons such as here charged, an accom«
plicey says the learned Attorney General, is a
necessary witness. It may be so, but though
he is a necessary witness, he is not of necessity
Id be believed in all he says. The more atro-
cious the guiU in which he steeps himself, the
less worthy is he of credit ; and if a most atro-
ciously wicked witness were to come forward
to tell you a tale, not only improbable, but
ridiculous in itself, I think you would act most
unwisely, indeed, if, upon such an absurd tale
told by such a witness, you were to take away
the life of man ; nay, you would be hardly
warranted in plucking a feather from a spar-
row's wing. I know it is no uncommon thing,
that those who lend themselves to crime betray
their companions in guilt, but there is some-
thing so CMdious in all treachery, Uiat he who
betrays associates even in guUt is regarded
with an additional degree of abhorrence, and
the mind recoils from him as a being unworthy
of any credit, as one who, to public crime,
adds the last sacrifice of breach of private con-
fidence. And you will invariably find that
the man who becomes the informer is the most
worthless of the whole band : for bad as his
companions may be, still there is some prin-
ciple of honour, there are some remains of social
duty, which keeo them true to each other; but
the last dregs of nonour and feeling are drained
from the heart of that man who adds to their
common crime the infarov of becoming the
seducer and betrayer of his companions.
Hence it is, that, anxious to gratify his em-
ployers wit^ important intelligence, all the
design that he represents as originating from
others, he himself is the man to seduce them
i nto ; and every one of his own base propo*
sitions he carries to his employers as the set-
tled resolves of his companions. Although I
am sorry to say I have not ample evidence, in
this case, of the conduct of tne spy, and in-
former, yet I do not know that I shall not be
able to prove in evidence to you, that the man
who was the informer of government^ instead
of giving information of that which the other
men had been doing, was himself the man to
goad and incite the unhappy prisoner to every
act of violence and outrage: that when he
(the witness) made a wild proposition which
was rejected, that proposition he carried to his
emplovers, not as a rejected proposition of his
own, but as an adopted measure of his com-
rades, and of which he was merely the in-
formant. Gentlemen, let no such man's evi-
dence be trusted.
Now, bearing these observations in your
fnind, view the evidence as given by Adams
to support the fact of a conspiracy to levy war :
lay out of your consideration, for the moment,
all that which relates solely to the assassination
of his majesty*!s ministers; and consider the
evidence as given by him, in support of the
at^bstaotive allegation of treason, that being a
conspiracy to levy war agtiiist bis m^esty is
his realm. You have, to garnish the case \yiag
before you, an aifected display of msty sabres^
broken pistols, and a |preat many other things^
You see the arms which lie before you, but
recollect the purpose to which yoa are required
to believe they were to be ap]^lied. Here is
the whole arsenal of the conspirators: with
this they were to do — ^hatf to overset a
mighty empire. You have here all the pro-
rations : aU the materials of the war are bemre
you : and now, what is the statement of this
man? As to the plan of operations to be
pursued by these formidable conspirators, be
says, that he attended various meetings froni
the 4th of February, I think, once axSl twice
a day down to the 23rd of that month (one or
two meetings more or less will not be mate*
rial), in which vras fi«quently debated the ae*
sassinatioB of his majesty's ministen, and the
destruction of the gownment. I vras led to
make the same inquiry upon the cross-exami-
nation, which was made, it appears, by one
of their own body (Palin), and mo seeaaed to
me to speak vrith some degree of sense. He
ia represented as saying to them, ** you have
many great objects in view, but where are the
men to come from ?''— At one and the sane
time, his majesty's ministers were to be assas-
sinated !-^a detachment vrere to go and take
possession of two cannon in Gray^inn-lane !
another detachment were to take possession of
six cannon in the Artillery ground 1— all the
out-ports were to be taken possession oft
Brighton was more particularly to be secured
by a force 1 — the Mansion-house vras to be takea
as the seat of provisional government ! — ^Asd
what is the force to do dl this ? — ^An army
that, counted to the utmost expectation, was
forty men 1 — an arsenal of a few old sabres^
pikes, and pistols ! — an exchequer of six shil-
Ungs and a reputed one-pound note! Who
were the men to manage tnis madiineiy P with
the exception of one (Thistlewood) a pared
of mechanics of the lowest orders in society I
These were the men, and these were the means,
to ''twist this rooted empire from its base"—*
To depose a king living in the hearts, and
guarded by millions of fiutfafol subjects — To
destroy a government protected by myriads of
bayonets^To exhaust a treasury into wbicfa
is flowing, not only the wealth of Britain,, bat
the treasures of the £ast<— This is apian vrhidk
you are required to believe was deoated and
adopted by men not declared lunatics. When
an infamous witness tells you so incredible m
stoiy, can you or dare you take away the life
of a man upon such testimony? If it were
possible for you to do so, I should not hesitate
to say, that I must believe your undeittand-
ings as bewildered as is imputed to the pri*
soner at the bar and his associates.
Now, as to the other point, Aat of actual
levying of war. With respect to levving of
vrar, it is clear that every resistance of Uie civil
power, or of the military poww of the Crowia
is not a levying of war: what should be siid
837]
Jw High Trenton,
A. D. 1820.
t83S
.to be a war or not I hftidly know how to de-
fine. I had rather read it from the lan^^uage
•of a very eminent writer : he says, that '' it is
a question of fact to be determined by a jury."
L<mk1 Hale, in his Pleas of the Crown, speak-
ing of this particular treason, says, ''What
shall be said to be a levying of war is a ques-
tion of fact ; for it is not every riotous or un-
lawftil assembly of many persons to do an
milawlul act, though, dc facto j they commit the
act they intend, that makes a levying of war,
for then every riot would be treason, and all
the acts against riotous and unlawful assem-
blies, as 13th Henry 4th cap. 7. : 2nd. Henry
5th cap. 8. : 8th. Henry 6th cap. 14., and many
more had been vain and needless, but it must
be sudi an assembly as carries with it ^eaem
heiH, tiie appearance of war.** Now, did this
assembly carry with it tpedem beUi, or the ap-
pearance of war t He ffoes on, *' as if they
ride or march vexUMs exfScaiis, with unfurled
banners^ (is this marchmg to attack the king's
troops with unfurled banners?) ''or if thev
be formed into companies or furnished with
military officers," were these formed into com-
panies, or furnished with military officers?
jilie only militai^ man among them appears
to have been a disbanded soldier, and the only
purpose to which he was to be applied was, to
-^ the destruction of his majesty's ministers,
which, I contend, was not a levying of war.
Then he says, *' or if they are armed with
military weapons, as swords, guns, bills', hal-
berds, pikes, and are so drcumstanced that it
maybe reasonably concluded diey are in a
posture of war, which circumstances are so
rarions, that it is hard to define them all par-
ticularly.^ Then, if it be hard to define all
the circumstances of levying war, particularly
being a matter of fact, can vour own good
.sound uiuierstanding infer it from the facts in
evidence before you ? If you had been told
a war had been levied against his majesty in
ibis country, and the transactions in Cato-street
had been narrated, would not you have treated
the thing as absurd and ridiculous ? Where
is the war? in a little back court ! Where was
the battle fought? in a stable! Where were
the traitors encamped f in a hay-loft ! How
were the traitors armed? vrith a few rusty
jnrordsy and broken implements of war. Put-
' ting it to your own common sense and under-
standing, can you upon your oaths say, that
the jprisoner at the bar is guilty of actually
levying war against the kins ? lou find that.
In many of their meetings, these men who were
levying war, as it is called, were afraid of the
approach of the parish constables ; that at one
jneetiag in particular Thistlewood looked to-
wards Uie door, and spoke low when he spoke
of the west end job, as dreading the presence
of the civil officer : on which one more bold
than himself said, " we do not care for the
traps,'' that is, for the parish constables, not
for the king's troops : so that it is evident that
these men were kept in awe by the dread of
the mere dvU foree of the countiy.
If there is no levying of war, is there a con-
spiracy to effect that purpose ? The only evi-
dence you have of any such conspiracy comies
out of the mouths of those three witnesses who
are all implicated in guil^ and who, I say, are
so far contaminated that they are not to "be
credited, because they all confess themselves
guilty of a participation in a most horrid trans-
action, namely, a projected assassination of his
majesty's ministers; the only evidence that
relates to levying war comes out of their
mouths, and even as they give the transaction,
it is very doubtful whether any thing can be
raised that might be considered as evincing
an intent of levying war against the king, ex-
cept indeed theproclamation which one of the
vritnesses says Tnistlewood had penned. Why,
if such a proclamation had been existing— if it
had been to be found any where but in the
wicked imagination of that witness, do you
think it would not have been produced? —
Would not the spy of government have secured
a copy to confirm his tale ? But what procla-
mation is it P Mark the absurdity of this sup-
posed proclamation 1 " Your tyrants arc de-
stroyed ; the friends of liberty are called upon
to come forward ; the provisional government
is now sitting. — James Ings, secretary.'' — You
are to take it upon the word of that man
(Adams) that such a proclamation was framed.
Do you suppose that Thistlewood is a man so
absurd, that if he had entertained the designs
they impute to him, he could have penned a
proclamation of this sort? No, gentlemen,
this witness some how or other thought it ne-
cessary to have a piece of evidence of that
sort to support his aosurd tale of consultations
to levy war against the government ; and this
was the best piece of evidence that his stulti-
fied imagination could produce. — A provisional
government !— Who was at the head of it ? —
Nobody! Who are the officers under it? —
Nobody ! How is it to be managed 7 — No one
can telll Where is the provisional govern-
ment sitting ? — You are left to find that out.
All which the world is told is— t^at Mr. Ings,
the pork-butcher, is the secretary of the new
provisional government. Gentlemen, common
sense must guide you in your deliberations
upon these matters. You will not lay aside
your knowledge of mankind, and believe a
story entirely because it is sworn — still less
will you believe it wheh it comes from such
contaminated sources. You will apply your
knowledge of life and human affairs, and if
the story be told you, nay if it be sworn by a
credible witness, if it is beyond all human
credibility, you will spurn it with contempt,
as a base design to impose upon your under-
standinffSy and mislead your better judgments.
Does this absurd tale derive any additional
credit from the ostentatious parade and display
of rusty muskets, and broken sabres, and pike
heads, and gunpowder? Why, nolwilhstancl--
ing this formidable materiel of war thus spread
out to appal you, I will undertake to say, that
there is not a populous alley in the city of
839] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of Arthur Thitttenood
[840
London, that would not^ have furnished arms
and men, that would have defeated the whole
^ this gang of conspirators, at least the whole
that we have heard of in evidence, and termi-
nated this dreaded civil war in less than half
an hour. Then can you seriously believe that
it was intended by these men to levy war
against his majesty's government — whatever
their intentions hiight have been against his
majesty'^ ministers.
The subject resolves itself, at last, into these
few short points. You wilt consider first, even
should you suppose it to be true, that the assas-
sination of his majesty's ministers was in-
tended, whether that event of necessity im-
plies that his majesty was also to be deposed,
or put to death? If you do not think it fol-
lows of necessity (and there is not from the
beginning to the end of this evidence a single
word which points distinctly at the royalpeir-
sonage or his family, except I think that Tnis-
tlewood is stated once to have said, that the
present family have reigned long enough ;
with the exception of this short piece of evi-
dence, there is not one sibgle word that has a
hostile aspect to the royal family), whatever
may be your feeling with respect to the pro-
jected assassination, if you think it does not
necessarily involve the other point of the de-
position of the king — however greatly you may
abhor the men who could cherish so horrid a
purpose in their minds, you ought not to find
them guilty of treason, upon those two first
counts, which charge their intent to be the
death and deposition of the king. And if you
think the story of the accomplice too ridiculous
to be believed, or himself too infamous to merit
credit at your hands, when he relates the sup-
posed conspiracy to levy war, you must also
find them not guilty upon the count which
charges them with that substantive treason-
And. if, with respect to the remaining charge
of actually levying war itself, you think that
too absurd to be entertained for a moment^
then you must acquit them of that also.
I do not ^now that I can say more, and I
will not waste your time, and my own strength,
already sufficiently exhausted, by two long
days close attendance to the evidence of this
unparalleled case, by using words unnecessa-
rily ; but let me implore you to do your duty
strfctlv, according to the rigid rule of law:
consider what is the law of the land, and step
not aside either to the right hand or to the
led ; but mark only the issues and the treason^
you have to try. I implore you to do it, not
only for your own sakes, but for the sake of
our common Country ; for, if ever juries suffer
feelings of indignation to warp their opinions,
and to induce them to find men giiilty ot
charges which are not proved, because they
feel or think them guilty of other charges which
are not before them, there will be no safety
hereafter for the life of man. If this prisoner
has been guilty of other offence^, there are
other indictments against him upon which he
must answer for those offences, and should the
' facts be there proved against him, the conse-
quence will be, that he must suffer the penalty
of his crime; but on this occasion do Aot find
him guilty of high treason, because you nay
tiiink him worthy of death for another deed.
No, not even though that deed may be a plan
of murder and assassination.
Mr. Gttm^.^li ia usual to state the «Qci if
•vid^ce wUdb ti» inttfidtd lo be calla^ dn^t
it may be seen vhetto it is receivable.
Lord Chief Justice Abbotts— T^bX is the usual
practice certainly.
Mr. CurwQo^.rrQ«9Btlemei), I m^saxki lo sMe
tbftt I skmi\d call » wiM»eM to show the Utile
cmdit du0 to thiwe witnesses, who wiU stal9
that 8 gmu many otf the iostiuiiEi/SDts and we^
pons now lytni^ Moi^ you, were bro«giU Ip
the d^pdt bv AdaiDS, the accomplice» who is
called, and by Edwards, th» «c«ompliee, who
is mot called : that on the 2ard of Febiipary-
they were taken awajr by them» and aAerv^urds
brought back again by a b<^ Deobi them, a|i4
plac^ where lonnd. lh.e ip&rence X dra^vr
trom this fact is, ttol ii is a confinnatioa of
what I stated to you befofe^ that these ««&
who are now the accnasrs^ were themselvrw xhtt
fabricators of the plot, and thes« arms were so
(>lBced by them to oontfinn thair inlendod toi-
tiflK>ay.
EVIDEXVeS FOR TH£ PRXSOKfiH.
Jlniy BsHiEsr swam.— EsaniMd bf
Mr. JriojpAfff r
Are you a daughter of dither of thjS prisoners
at the bar ?— Of Richard Tidd.
Did you Kve with your father t — ^Yes.
Do you remember at any time the poliee
officers coming and finding any boxes and
thinp there t — Yes.
What day was that ?— On the 24t|i of Pe)»-
ruary.
At what time in th£ morning did the officers
come ? — About half-past eight I suppose.
How long, at that time, had those things
been in the house befbre the officers came ?^Tr
About a quarter of an hour.
What did they take away? — ^I am sure I
capnoc say : t was in such a situation I cannol
speak to it.
Was there a box? — ^Yes ; ^here was.
What was in it ?^— I cannot say.
Did they take some things like these? [pdee
staves.'] — Yes.
How long had they been in the house?-— They
vrpr^ brought there that morninG[.
Do you kpow who U was that broaffht them ?
— No.
Was it any person In ypur fiither^s employ.
or that you knew of as bejpg employed by hxta r
— No.
He had been t^ken into custody, we tu^der-
stand, the night before f -r-Yes.
Had you seen him siQce fie wfnt out ike
night before? — No.
641]
jot Higjk IVwiow.
A, D. 1820.
CMS
Doyou knom a person of Um«m(ic of Adams?
—Yes.
Had yoa Men biA at any time before at ytmr
fatlier*sr— Yes.
Do you know a person of the name of Ed-
jgrards f — ^Yes.
Had you seen him t^ere ? — Yes.
Had Edwards been there before your iatfatf
jvas taken up P-r-Yeo.
Had he been there seldom or often }-^^OH6n-
If I understand you rightly, those things that
we^ taken «i?»y 1^ the ofiioers, had not been
in the house above half an bouri before they
came and took them ? — ^No.
Had you seen then Iheie before Ihe day
when the officers came? — ^Yes; I had seen
eimilar things before.
To the best observation yo« oonld nakd
upon theni; do you believe them to be the
eame things or different ? — ^The same^ I thiafc.
Who took those things, vhieh you say yen
think were the aam^y away ? — Edwards took a
part.
' Who the odier part ?— *! do not knew.
When was it that Edwards tAok that part
;iwa^ ? — On the Wednesday.
Yon say some other person took the ethe^
away ? — ^Yes.
Did your fother take any ef them awi^r*^
Ho.
Who took the other part away l^*— I do net
know.
What part did Edwards take, the bos or tbe
staves ? — ^He did not take away any box.
The box was not taken ?•-— No.
What was taken ?— Some things that I have
understood since were grenades^ and likewise
some powder.
Was the box there all (he time ? — No ^ , the
%ox was brought a day or two before the time
my father was taken.
Do you know who brought that ? — No.
Was it brought in the state in which it aftei^
wards remained ? — Yes, it never was uncorded.
You jdo not know who brought it ?•— No,
You have talked of things called grenades ;
were there any larger than ethers ? — ^There was
one buyer than the othen.
Who brought that ? — ^Adams.
What was Edwards, do you know ? — No ;
I did not know at the time he used to come
to my father's; 1 have heard since h^ was a
modeller.
Mr. Att9rm^ QtneraL^^l l^ve nothing to
ask you.
Sdward HucklesUm sworn.— Examined by*
Mt.Curwood,
Do you know a man of the name of Dwyes?
—Yes.
Have yon seen him here te^ey ?>«^No, I have
not, for I Jiave not long oome.
How long have you knpwn Dwy^rJ — For
some years.
Have you known him iptimately ?— 7I haye
known him intimately, by using the ^aipf t^ub-
lic-house as he does, and a few friends.
• ■ «
t>o' yon Vnow emm^ to' say, wlieiher hei
is fit to be believed nnoQ his oatii?— No; I
do not think he is fit to be taken upon his oath.
t4^ur4 gMrtfeiftwi<csoflS»eyamin»d !y
Mr. Aiiomey General, ^ .
Iton have known him by meeting fiim at the
rablie-house ?•— Yes, at the public^honse where
have supped. \
That is your only knowledge of liimP— X
have seen him with a great deal of money,
knowing that he seldom or ever did any work;
he was a bricklayer^ labourer, and seeing hiijpi
always hulking about, and with socb a quantity
of money^ I wanted to know bow he came by
it ; i said J was poor, and he asked whetfier J
had not got anv money, and be told me if I
would go wtlh him he ^ould nut me in pos-
session of man^ a bright nound. I went with
him to Hyde-paik, and he t<dd me to keep
within hearing, and he would soon shew me
how he cpuld go on, that he would watch a
Sentleinan out, and to catch hold of him, and
iat he would say he was an unnatund gentle-
man, and that then I w^ |o come up as an
officer, and draw him towards a watcn-'housey
but not to take him to a watch-house ; I was
struck with the idea, and shunned his com^
panv.
When was thist — About three months ago?
and he has said he got seventy pounds at a
time, by doing so, and lie jawed me as being
a coward : the next night I met with'' him, bin
I did not wish to have any thing to do with it^
he said that he got TOL of one gentleman Ih
Saint James's-street, by enly catching hold of
him by the collar.
Where did you meet with him the next
night f — At the Rodney's-head, in Chandlep-
street.
Yon have met him frequently since at the
public-house f— Yes ; but I never would have
no more goings with him, for I told him of the
dangerous cpnse^uence, his brother was trans^
ported from this saiqe place for die same ot-
fence ; and he said, aye his brother did not
)cnow how to general it as well as he did, his
brother was transported with angther jfoung
man for fourteen years, but he got away.
When did you mention this to a magi8->
trate Pr— Why, I ought to have done it; but I
was afraid, because there were a great manv
Irishmen round our place, and t was afraia
I should fall a viotia to them, and I thought I
had better keep oat of hia way, and not go
into his company any mor^.
But yo\| were 'm hi? vPQP^ny afterwards? —
No. r ^
Not at all?— No, only iftefting him Jn the
street, ana aikilig hipfi hPW ho did^ ^ii4 f^^p
going away.
You spoke to him?— Yei^ jyst tjie tiwf of
the day, and sp pn.
What are you?— I wa3 brought Mp ^ ^h<^r
maimer, bqt I am articled to a cow-doctor*
Where do you live ?— No. 15, LitlJ^ Port-
land-street^ Oxford-street.
8483
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial qfjirt^ TUttUwood
C844
How long have you been appientSot to the
tow-doctOK? — ^Wby^ ever since last Jone.
Who is the cow-doGtor? — Edward Skillet.
Where does he live P — ^At No. 4, Newman-
mews, he keeps that as an hospital for cows
and horses.
As you were afraid to mention this to a
magistrate, when was it first you summoned
up courage to communicate it to any person ?
^— The first person I communicated it to was
myjbrother.
' when was that ? — ^About a week ago, when
the list was in the paper, and I said that man
I knew was a bad character, and with that they
jubpcenaed me here.
You did not even communicate it to your
1>iother till a week ago ? — ^No ; but there were
a great many of them in company, and a gre^
many that used that house, and I was afraid,
as my bread depends upon going round to the
cow-keepers, doctoringi that I should get ill-
treated.
So much afraid that you would not even
mention it to your own brother, till a week
ago ? — ^No.
Are the same Irishmen living in the neigb-
lK>urhood, as were at that time ? — ^No, some of
ihem are gone away, then I summoned up
courage enough to mention it.
They did not go away, I siq|>pose, till abou^
A week ago ? — They have gone away lately.
And that induced you to summon up
courage to mention it to your brother f — ^Yes.
. How long ago is it that this communication
was made by Dwyer to you? — I may say,
about two months ago, I cannot say within a
week or two.
I thought you said three months ? — ^It may
be between two and three, I cannot say exact;
^ have other business to mind, instead of such
.business as that
You have other business to attend to ? — ^To
get my living.
Ana this made so little impression upon you
jfou cannot say whether it was two or three
months a^ P — -No, I did not pen it down.
You did go with him to the park? — ^Yes;
,but when he told me, I was horror-struck, and
vot back : I thought the best way was to get
.back as soon as I could, lest my own character
flhould be izgured by it.
Where does your brother live? — ^No. 2, Bul-
atiode-mews, Mary-le-bone-lanei
EAoatd Hmckletionf re-examined by
Mr. Ado^fkm,
MThile the matter was a complaint of your-
self, you mentioned it neither to magistrate,
nor your brother, nor anv body else ? — No.
Juord Chitf Juitice Ahbott.^1 understood
you to say, that he mentioned this matter
'to you first at the public-house P — Yes, he did.
Did you ^ with him that same day that he
mentioned it, or another ?-— I went that same
night with him up there.
Mr. Gfttm^. — Do not leave the court at
pteseat.
Jbtffh Domie swore.— Fiiamiwfd by
Mr. Adolphm.
Have you any public employment or situa-
tion ?— I am called court reporter.
Do you prepare for the newspapers the
accounts that are given of the movements and
intended morements of the nobility ? — Of the
court.
Do you prepare them for one paper in par-
ticular,' or sena them to all the papers ? — ^To six
papen.
Is the New Times one of the six? — ^Yes.
Tlie Morning Post, Chronicle, and so on ?— »
Yes.
Do '^ou send them to all the papers at the
same time without partiality? — All alike.
There is an announcement in that day's New
Times, the 23nd of February last, under the
head of Court Intelligence : did you prepare
that or how much of it ? — ^As for as relates t*
the Royal Family, I did.
What is the next article to that P— '< Tho
Earl of Harrowby gives a grand cabinet dinner
to-morrow at his house, in Grosvenor-square.'*
Did yon prepare and send that P — I cannot
speak to that at this great distance of tim^
but from the wording of it, it is my impression
that I did not.
What is there in the wording of it that
induces you to think you did not send it?^It
says ** grand."
Did you ever put such a word into that
announcement at all? — No; becanse I know
that the cabinet dinners are always the same.
There is no particular grandeur attributable
to one as distinguished fi^m another P — ^No.
Andrew MxUhdL sworn.— Examined by Mr.
Cunoood.
Have you the manuscript of this artide^
** The Earl of Harrowby gives a grand cabinet
dinner," and so on ? — Yes.
Do you bring it from the New Times ? — ^Yes,
this is it. [prodwing it\.
What are you ?— I print for the New Times.
Is that the original r — ^It is the original.
Mr. Cwwood^ — Let Mr. Doane look at it.
(To Mx. Doane.) Is that your hand-writing?
—-No, mine is done by a manifold.
Mr. Cuaioood. (To MUcheU.y-UKm do you
account for that? — This is the original manu-
script we had : it did not come from Mr.
Doane.
Had you any other manuscript but that ?—
I do not know whether Mr. Doane might send
a dnplioate, but that is what we printed from.
Mr. Gtimey.-- It is a series of fashionable
annunciations. . ^ Mr. Honeywood is arrived,**
and so on.
Mr. CunomMl^*— Mr. Doane, can yoo aooonnt
for this ?— No, I know nothing of it
Mr. Cunoood, (To JWite^cfi.)— From whom
did you receive itP — From a person of the
name of Liwenu, who is in the same way as
Mr. Doane.
8451
Jhft High TriaMOHi
A. D. 189a
L846
Mn, Wkkdker Mrora.-— EkamiMd by
Mr. AdaiphM.
Hare you searched in the newspapers jmb*
lished on the 22nd of February^ for theartide,
**Lord Harrowby^s dinner."— Yes, I hare.
How many ?— Eleven. I will mention them ;
Ibe Times ; the Brituh Press ;
Lord Odef Justice Abbott — Was not Monday
the day that was spoken to f
Mr. Gvrruy, — ^No, my lord, Tuesday.
Jfitneu, — ^I seardiedfrom the 17th past that
time all those days.
Mr. Ado^^hus, — ^Was there any rack an-
nouncement in any of them, as that the earl
of Harrowby was to gi?e a grand dinner that
day?
Mr. Attorney General. — ^It is not worth while
objecting to this, but the proper evidence will
be the papers themselves.
Mr, .iio^iAtct.— Have you searched inth a
view to find this article f— I went to Peel's
coffee-house for the purpose of seeing all the
papers : the New Times alone had an account
of the dinner to be given at lord Harrowb/s
on the 23rd9 and l£at was in a paper on Uie
22nd.
Mr. €hrfuy.—We will call back Dwyer with
your lordship's leave.
Thomm Dwyer called again. — Examined by
Mr. Gvrney.
When you were here before, you were asked
whether you knew any man of the name of
Hufkleston ? — ^No, I do not,
Mr. Gumey, — ^Let that man stand forward*
Do you know that man f — ^Yes, I have seen
bin, but I did not know his name was Huckle-
ston.
Where have you seen him? — ^I have seen
him in Oxford-road.
In a house, or in the street ? — ^In the street;
Have you seen him in any house ? — ^Not that
I know of. ^
Did you ever propose to him to go out, and
lo charge a person with an Unnatural crime,
and to get money?— Never.
Do you swear that solemnly ? — I do.
Did he ever go out with you to the park on
aach a purpose ? — ^No, never with me in his
life.
In January or February last, were you out
of work ? Out of your regular work ? — ^Yes, I
Where did yon go to work when you were
out of your regular woik? — ^I went to work at
Mr. Elmore's.
Before you were at woik at Mr. Fimore's,
did you work at the parish mill ?— Yes, I did.
A mill in your parish worked by men who
eome to claim aasutance from the parbh ? —
Yes.
Did yon «teeivft amiey liom the parish
while yon were so working at the mill T— I re*
ceived 3i. a day while I was at the mill.
How muiy days did yon work at the mill ?—
Twice in diomnt weeo.
Have you a wife and funily ?— A wife, and
three children.
Thonmt Dwyer cross-examined by
Mr. Adolphna*
Upon your oath, when you were coming into
that place this moment, did not you at the sight
of this man say ** Oh, Huckleston !'' before you
got into that box ? What I am asking you is
before mv learned friend put the question to
von ; did you not say directly you saw him,
before any question had been put to you ^ Ott^
Huckleston r'— I did not.
Mr. Adolphm, — I was told you had*
Mr. Qwney* — ^I can vouch for it, that it was
on my putting the question, he echoed my
words.
Mr. Adolphui4 — You say that now you see
his face, you know him ? — ^Yes.
What name did you know him by ?«*•! did
not know his name at all.
How often have you seen him ?-— Very often.
He resorted at the end of James-street, and I
lived in Gee's-court. There were a parcel of
chaps that used to resort about that place, but
he was never an associate of mine.
Lord Chief Jmtiee iiMol^.— James-street is
near Gee's-court?— Yes, the next turning.
Mr. Ado^hut,-^Did you ever see him but
in the street, upon your oath ? — ^I have aeen
him at several places.
What places r— I have seen him in several
parts ef the street. I have seen him several
times.
That is any thing but an answer to my ques-
tion. Have you ever seen him any where bat
in the street i>— Yes, I have.
Where ?— I have seen him in Hyde-paik.
Where else ?— No where else that I know of.
In what public-house have you drank with
him ? — I never drank with him in a public-
house. I used to resort to the RodneyVhead
in Chandler-street, but I never knew him to
resort there.
Have you been in the habit of resorting there
lately ?— No, only when I can afford a pint of
beer sometimes.
That is the house you go to ?— Not particu-
larly.
Why do ^oa fix upon the Rodney Vhead ? —
Because it is a place that my countrymen in
general resort to.
Were you in court when that man Huckle»*
ton was giving his evidence ?— No, not that I
know of.
Where were you fetched from now ? Were
you out of court, or in court ?— I waa out of
this court ? I was in the witnesses room.
Then did you not hear him give his evidence ?
—No.
847]
1 GEORGE iV.
Trial ^AHkur
[84a
. WtU tott mjt vpoft your eadh^ jpni hcte mM
repeatedly met him ina poblit-Veoae ?— I will.
ThttiyoiiheveootwhatWrhatI have not
repeatedly met him in a yhlie kmn> *
How wutfy tihitfa do yen oaE ripeetedly K^
I do not remember ever to have aeea him in a.
publio-bouse.
Will jFov spvf^flf yrMi hsve not sera him
in a public-house f-*^! know I have not for
some tiine%
Tben you ha¥e at eoma time?-*-I wiU not
Bweaif thiat I ever have.
Will you sweaf you hme not seen him in a
pobUohooM ?-^Xt ia haid in me to do that^
X think it is. Will you swev you never
saw bim in a publioJiousey as you swear to
having seen him in several streets ?— I 4o oo^
know how I can do that.
Nor I. I ask yon, v^l yeo swear youlntve
not seen bim at Ine Rodney's-head }•— Yee } I
have not seen bim in the Rodney V>beadv
That you never were with him at the Bod*
ney's head ? — It m^st have been some length of
tine ago if I ever did such a fithsg.
Will you swear you have not been with him
tlete within these three months ?-^Ye8, 1 will.
Within four, will yon! — I cannot say; T
cttunot leeoltect that.
Was it before or efter Christmas fliett?
-^ eannet say.
Do yea mean to swear it wds sinee €htiM-«
mas or before Cfarbtmas, or three or fbur
iOontbf>?— Sinee CbrittiEias*
Will you swear that before Christmaa you
were not with him at the Rodney's-head ? — I
da not tecoUeot flmtrl wht.
IK^ll ymk swear you wete wst f^-lio^ I oan«-
not swear that, because I do not bring my nH
oDlleetion to being nt the Rodney's^hedd vi>ith
him at any tine belbre Chriiiiia% not aftee
neither.
Yon will MH gfnecr ton did nol|^•~He may
hBM been tbere and I aot talM nottoe of it.
It is a house that is qoiSe full on Sailanlay and
part ol Sunday.
. Yon are qnite poiitiipe yon nevor wnlked
with, him fttem thai booio to any other plnoe ?
-«I ans positive*
On vrbal oenniien did yoa see bim there ^-«
Ona-anndaytf
What part of the day was it?— The fore*
or it might be the afternoon, for angfat I
How came you to fix on having seen him in
tke paiiq ^^He was a men I nerer aeiooiated
with at all.
How. came yon to iic on Hyde^paldi F^I
nagbt miMCn thousand there*
Therefore the more unlikely yon skooUl Ax
on anyt one? wbai made yon foe upon kim } —
Yon asked me whether I ee^f bios ia aiqr otker
place.
And theiefove yon iiked immediately on
%aoiMek f-^No, I did not.
Have yon any porticnlar reoson for remem-
bering hoxring. seeo bim in Hyde-paik ?— I
have no particular reason, but seeing him the
same as any other specteiore that, might be
going through.
Did you ever see him in Saint James's-paik ?
-^No.
The RegentVpark ?-— No.
But you did in Hyde-park? — ^Yes.
r lonR aeo was this ?-^I caanc
the time.
How long ago
cannot tell yon
I do not ask you as to the third or fourth of
any particular monibt but how long .ago? — 1%
might be before Christmas, or it might fe after.
It maybe before the flood, or it may be after 7
Lord Chief ^atkt Ahbcti.^lt cannot be
before the flood.
Mr. AA)l^fkm, — Mot in human poeslbilitx*
WUneu^^A thousand might pass by, and I
take no notice of them.
You saw him at some time or other in Hyde^
paik ?— 'Yes.
He is a man you do not associate with, and
yet you remember seeing him there ? — Yes.
On what occasion was it you saw him there ?
-^I do not know on what occasion. .
Nothing passed between you ?^--No.
Was it in winter or in snnuner ?-^I do not
know; yon say it must be either before or afier
Christmas, but I did not take notiee of the
time ; it is impossible for me to tell the time.
Was it in winter or summer ?^It must have
been the winter.
A Jttrymon.— Are you a bricklayer, or abrick^
layer's labourer ? — ^A brieklayer by tmdb ; ibe
man I worked for» I have worked for twelve
or thirteen years, Mr. Smith of Mortimer-
sUreet, Cavendish-square; T have worked twelve
or fourteen years for him, 22, Mortimer-street
Cavendish-square, and Mr. Elmore and Other
gentlemen^ in Piceadily, and other places I
oosdd mention-
Mr. Ado^Hus, — My lord, I hardly know how
to frame toe request I am going ,to make to
your lordship, but there is one solemn doty I
owe to the unhappy man at the bar — if it be
consistent with your lordship's duty to grant
the request, I know I shall not ask it in vain,
and if your lordship refuses I shall willingt^
acquiesce—it is a request that I may now have
till to-morrow tO Consider this important and
multifarious case ?
LoH Qurf Jmike AUmtt.-^Yoji wish to
postpone your addins to the Jm^r till to-
morrow ?
Mr. Adolphus.-^YeB, my lord; T have no
reason to ask it but from the total* %ant (f
preparation in point of time.
Lofd' Ckuf JtaUee Abbatt.-^li mnet be tbs
anxious vrish of the Court that every assiitanee
that can be rendeiM to a pcieom standisig in
tbe situation in wbioh the nnforUmnle man ai
the bat now stnndesbould beaibnded; wbe-
^r if we were lo hear you new we^hould fan
able to go through the whole case to-nnriiiy
may be somwvter^dbidAfnl ; Wf fHfat dlffi-
1
849J
J^ High Treason.
A.D. 1820.
185Q.
faulty is at it raspects the convenience of the
gentlemen of the jury, but ^ ought not to
proceed with haste, where the life of an indi-
vidual is concerned*
A Jwymm. (Mr. AUeney^.^Yfe are of opi-
nion that our convenience is not to be consi-
dered at all in comparison with what may be
the issue of this trial.
Lord ChitfJuttke Abbott.— Youx expression
b exactly that which I should expect from vou.
We have not yet arrived at the time at which
19 an ordinary case we ought to adjourn, but in
the very peculiar case before us, and adverting
to the tact mentioned by the counsel for the
defendant, of the truth of which I cannot
doubt, that it was not until a very late hour
before this trial came on, that they received
their instructions, perhaps the administration
of justice may be better consulted, by allowing,
9X the request of Mr. Adolphus, that he may
have time to consider his client's case.
Mr. JWcrwy.— My lord, it is the wish of
flome of my co-jnrors to have it ascertained
whether Dwyer, whose credibility has been
called in question, can be proved in any way
to have mentioned it to major James, and the
Secretary of State, what he states himself to
have mentioned, bow far he is or is not borne
oat in that.
Lord Chkf Justice Abbott,— The Attorney-
general will have no opportunity of considering
that.
Mr. Gumey. ^It is open *to the prisoner' to
give any contradiction.
Lord CWef Jw/icc JWo**.— Certainly, the
prisoner may contradict that.
Mr. GoafcAiia.— Dwyer's evidence has been
endeavoured to be shaken, and we wished to
to see whether there was any thing to cor-
roborate him.
Lord Chief Justice i4&fco«.— Perhaps we had
better forbear mentioning that subject; there
will be an opportunity for all parties to ob-
serve on it, and for you, gentlemen, ultimately
to decide.
{ Adjonmed to to-morrow morning nine o'clock.]
Wednesday, 19th April, 1820.
Arthur Tfutthwood was set to the bar.
Wstkwood.—TAy lo«d, I should be glad of
the indulgence this morning which yon were
so kind as to allow me yesterday?
Lord Chirf Justice Abbott.— Yea, certainly.
JAt.Attomeif General — In consequence of
t)ie wish expressed by the jury last night, that
major James should be examined as a witness,
I have procured the attendance of that gentle-
nan in court, and he is now here. Your lord-
ships know it is impossible for me on the part
VOL. XXXIII.
of the Crown to call him as a witness, his name
not 1)eing in the list ; but he is here ready to
be examined, if the defendant's counsel wish it.
Mr. Adofyhus, — ^It is certainly no part of my
case to call a witness who is in the knowledge
of the Crown, and is not named in their list.
I cannot examine a vritness unless I am ap-
Frised of his knowing something of importance ;
therefore feel that though the Attorney-ge*
neral does not mean to put me into an awkward
situation, yet, as lord £llenborough said, if you
take a witness in that way you must abide by
his evidence, which I do not think I should act
right in doing upon this occasion.
Lord Chief Justice Abbott. — ^It cannot be
expected, under these terms, that you should
call the witness : whether he ought to be called
on either side is another matter.
Mr. Attoma^ General. — Neither my learned
firiend, nor the defendant, can think that I
mean to place my learned friend in an un-
pleasant situation.
Mr. Adolphus. — Gentlemen of the Jury ; — I
have to request your attention to the humble
effort it is my duty to make on behalf of the
unhappy man at the bar, and I cannot do so
without first expressing my thanks to his lord-
ship and you, for the kind manner in which
you acceded to my request, to allow me time
to make such preparation as was necessary.
Under any circumstances the situation in which
I am is distressing enough, but that distress
would have been infinitely aggravated, if I had
had to address you with a body fatigued, and
a mind jaded by the mass of matter Uiid before
you— with thoughts necessarily wandering to
the different parts of the case, — and without
time to arrange and simplify, even in the mo«
derate degree I have in the few hours stolen
from sleep, those thoughts which it will be my
duty to lay before yon.
It has been said that this is an anxious and
important inquiry ; truly, if ever there was an
occasion in which the mind of counsel for a
prisoner might sink almost into abjectness, it
IS furnished by the case now befiore you and
the situation I stand in. The prisoner is, of all
the men I remember tried before a jury for the
crime of high treason, the piost unhappy, and
I may say, without meaning to alter the case
of guilt, if guilt shall appear against him, the
most unfortunate! I have known many trials
in the course of my life on these subjects, but
never saw one when a prisoner was so abso-
lutely denuded of aB countenance and support
—so much thrown on the mercy and charity of
those who would undertake his case, as the
prisoner on the present occasion. To say that
the prisoner has against him all the weightof
office, the force of talent, and the influence of
renown, is to say nothing but that he is indict-
ed for high treason at the suit of the Crown ;
for die Crown upon such, and upon every other
case, has a right to the best services of its best
servants, and it would be most unjust to com«
31
Mil
1 GEOHOt IV,
Triai ofArthw fhtstkwood
tSftS
hhth of tfaat which is merely mdifentftf^ ud
Justly ttnd properly so, totfiesitttatiov in which |
he stands. Bat upon fenner occasions I have ;
teen advocates of the highest celebrity, o# the {
most established reputatjen, entefiagvoluntarily {
into the cause of a prisoner ; taking it for a *
long time beforehand, and methodjai^ and i
digesting every thing to be done ; they have \
eome to the combat prepared, in a considerable
degree, to meet the lalente, and to grapple
with the ease againet which they were to be
i^pfDOsed.
Far different ie the situation of this unhappy
■lan, who, on the very eve of his trial, and
then alone, obtained the feeble assistance I
can give him. I never beard of his case till
Thursday last ; I was out of town on Friday,
I had notray instructions till Saturday night, and
I had to appear before yon on Monday, f do
not complain of this^ but I deplore it*^it is^an
mnbappiaess to which, his deplorable ease hae
[fubjected him> that the want of preparation
and ability in me may-prejudiee bun. Other
prisoners in the same situation have been allied
ny party, connexion, or other means, with some
Considerable number of men of influence, weight,
and reputation in the state. This poor man
^nd his associates are deserted by every one ;
no voice is raised in their favour, no effort is
made on their behalf ; none has been attempted
with my knowledge. I have not had the ad-
vice or assistance of any individual upon earth,
ttive the solicitor, who has gratuitousily under-
ttiken his- case ; and so ihr from receiving any
information to enable me to ovoid difflciSties,
my information has been all comprised in the
4ight instructions diis gentleman has collected^
and thus I apjj^ear before, you.
But there is another circumstance which
presses still more* heavily on the prisoner. In
all the trials I remember on cases of this kind,
and particulariy the last I remember in this
Court, the trials in 1794 and 179Jt, every pri-
soner who obtained his discharge from the ac-
littsation was set at liberty, and the inquiry
ended with the question whidi was submitted'
to the jury. This man is so unhappily beset
by the circumstances of his case that, if at your
hands he receives an acquittal on this indicts
iheut, other indictments still await him ; — an
indictment fpr murder, an indictment for ^ootr
ihg uh^er lord Ellenborough's act; and, in
flAiort, he is surrounded, by all the perils that
can 'involve any individual : indeed, it seems
he is reduced to this melancholy choice, whe«
ther the office of the executioner shall end with
tiie execution, or whether after that,, his body
ahall be hacked to pieces, and disposed of at
iftie meroy of the Crown, or be subjected to Ae
l^nife of the surgeon.
If he be guilty, and I must presume there is
tfronnd for supposing he may be so, by the
Dills- of indictment being found, he has no
right to complain that the law is too hard ; he
must ascribe his desperate situation to his own
fiSLuU ; but, in the first place, I implore a total'
«tclusion horn your mind of every thought
aristlig our of o^er charges, or other ciraom-
stances, that can affect you in the dedsfon of
this case ; and f entreat that you will consider .
him as if he were like any other prisoner otk
ttial, toldly sfiDonerated ftom other impntatjons,
and subjected onW to the inquiry which brings
you to^Bther to-day. It is difficult I know,
but I expect it from your conscience &nd your
justice ; the Attorney-general made the same
request of von, it becomes his rank in life, and
in the proression to do so ; it becomes hi^ cha?-
racter as a man, a Christian, and a: Briton^ to
make ^at request, because it is not in his
office, or his disposition, to fun down as cri>-
minal any of the subjects of the Crown, but to
hold them op fairly to their country answer^le
for their crimes, or entitled to acquittal, as tfa^
are guilty or not guilty : stHl there remains this
behind— a matter that has been disclosed to
tiie public for a long time, which has fteea
talked of with unreserved reprobation and d^
testation, firt>m every mouth, is not so easily
dismissed from 'the nlostj corieot nAnds, but
that some taint of prejudioe may still remain^
some opinion, some unconscious whispering
in a man*s ear,, from the internal auggestloB^
that this is the man about whom so much haa
been said', and it cannot be said without hit
being guilty of something ; in short, the opii-
nions of private life steal into our baeaflta.; «nd
it becomes me, therefore, most earnestly to
implore you to resist every such suggestion, to
refuse your ear -to every such insinuation, and
to view this case, as I am sure you are dispbsed
to view it--^o.make a great effort so to- view
it — ^I mean as if you had never heard the
name of this man before, and as if you knew
nothing of him, but that which has been dia-
closed in this cause, and on which you musi
decide and give your verdict.
I hive olMerved to you, that this ia a case of
infinite importance. I say of infinite* import-
ance ;— to the prisoner — ^my learned friend the
Attorney-general has put it because his life is
at stake, but under his particular circutaistancea
of less importance in that view than ever a
trial for high treason was to a man. But it is
important to the state, to the present genera>
tion, and to their posterity, that this caae
shdiiM'be decided, not on impressions agninsft
an individual, but on the fair results of die
evidence offered, and upon a fair examination
of the parts of that evidence, according to the
. most sef ere test by which evidence can be
tried. It' ia of hnportanoe to poaterH^ ; for
■assuming, this prisoner to be a bad man, if as
against a bad man certain evidence can be
received, and can find its way into the mindh
of juries, so as to procure a conviction, no man
knows: i^fsinst whoaa die same sort of eMtoce
will not be next produced — no man knowa
whose life may not be sacrificed^ — no idaa
knows whose fame may not be destroyed,
and property taken away by evidence which
ought never to have had the credit of a jurf^
or pet>haps the sanction^ of any court. Tins
is the important point, oa wbicb it |>ehoveft v$
««3]
Jqt U^b Tr^son*
lo he particularly circumspect, mlteu a bad
man -is before us. Such atiempts are never
saade at £rst ^mawt those «bo have good
chaij^ei^ great friends, /ox the means of
deSending themselves ; they aire made on the
poor and al)ject, and then as a precedent, it
goes elsewhere to destroy others. This leads
me to caution you ; for it is not the value
of this man's life (though God forbid I nhould
undervalue human hfe), that stands upon this
case, it is the value of the lives of others, and
the safety of their posterity; it is the value of
a precedent in a case of hi^ treason, which if
^ifmore imp<M^ance than any other case, it is
of more importance for this reason, from the
time that the kingly govenunent began to be
established on defined principles in Uiis conn*
4iy, and to be curbed by regulations for the
benefit of the subject, the law of treason hae
been guarded with particular vigilance .by the
k^lature, and by the execution of that law
vith commendable anxiety by every jury who
has sat on it; there never was, any law so free
from doubt or contradiction ; these never wese
aaet of iecords(taken all together and subject
to epcc^tioQS only isom the badness of certain
timesX*so perfectfy accordant; there nerer waa
a aulpect upon which so much rigilance, cor^-
cect judgmeot, and -care on the nart of juriei^
have been everted, as on that of treason. In
tnUhf it is an awful case to discuss ; in other
cases the king is the prosecutor for tne benefit
vt the public; but here tlie king in person, by
Vs own officers, is arrayed against the subject ;
and it is therefore upon a Jeaioua vigilance, lest
itm power and influence of the Crown-»-lest
the natund love in every good subject, and his
saal and desire to preserve untouched the
•afoty and the right prerogative of the Crown
should be brought into pU^, to work opprea^i
tion upon any individual so enlarged and in*
cnlpated; therefore, I say, this case is nf pe-
culiar importance, as all otber trials for treason
bare becRQ. It u necessary to observe a most
ateady and exact attention, and not to sufier
prejudice te sway your nunds, to receive one
tittle of evidence that would no^ be admitted
on every other occasioo^ and rather to lean to
the side of the accused, if it comes to be a
doubtfol or measuring cast in your mind, than
lean to the side of the prosecution, however
you niay he interested for the preservation of
the throne, and for the prevention of all those
attempts by which its authority may be im-
paired.
I ba^e already .stated to yon, t)iat this task
of defending these prisoneis has come to me as
a forced duty in my profession ; I have not
Mught it; 1 havenot avoided it. I think thatin a
qase like this, when an advocate is called on to
fijieacise such talents as he lias in the way of hiv-
Qianity towards unhappy persons like these—
ap^.Iia^e it not on my own authoritv alone,
but refer to that of others — ^I think it is his duty
sqt to refuse the asc^taace required : I do not
^^w that jt js necessary, or always decent or
opinioofl «r poV tics into ^ jcase ; but as I an^
. going into an investigation of some kngth, It is
fit I should say, that in ^fae course qf my Ufe^I
never have be^n in thought or act, assenting tp
any of those principles or combination^, by
which the established constitution iiMsbun^ and
state could be brought into danger. I was
bom a subject of the late king, I lived con*
tented with n^ fortune under him, I am a
foitfafol subject of his successor, I do not see
the necessity of these agitations, aod have
never lent myself to any of them : whether {
had or not, in another case would not be of
the smallest importance ; but standing here as
the voluntary advocate of 4liese prisoners, it
may be right to state, what I am not extdllii^
in myself f but describing myself coTreotly, that
it nay not be su{^K>8ed diat party feeling leads
to any one thing I am to say on the preseni
occasion, but that it is in the {performance of my
duty only, fiut wh^le I say that I foel that inr
dependently of the denial of any such political
pnnciples, I have a high principle to advance
as a man and an advocate ; and if there are
one or two^ which is the most I can aupposs^
who interest themselves for this unhappy man»
I trust St will appear to them that no prejudice
against his measures will relax my eiSbrts, or
cause me to neglect my duty in the smallest
degree i: he shall have a fair and Legal defence
— that it will be defective in ability, is hi^
misfortune in thepresentcase, mine permanent-
ly, and through my life.
The line of defence which I shall have te
pusBue on behalf '4»f this unhappy man, is one
more difficult than av^ X knew to fall ta the
lot of an advocate ; and I think I should be
trifling with your good sense, and be deficient
in the respect you must have obtained froo^
evaiy one in court, for the last two df^s for
your attention, if i could suppose that it is in
the power of man to make it appear that
the prisoner at the bar is guiltless of all manner"
of crime. To hav9 medttated a^sassinatioi^
under any circumstances, — to havte caused, or
been privy to causing the death of an indi-
vidual, coming to axeoute bis duty, — ^these ar^
crimes which admit of no palliation ; they are
Climes firom which the blood recoils and the
judgment vevoUs ; they are crimes that would
make it absurd to say, the individual tainted
with them can be held up to you as innocent.-
But foeling a honor and detestation of suob
crimes, I deprecate the ajpplication of those
feelings to the criminal, •until he is justly taint-
ed with the crimes whidi excite them. Our
hortor of oiiae must never extend to the party
accused ; every man must be reputed innocent
till he is found guilty. I am only anxious, and -
am desirous you wiU take it wi^h you, (hat you
will not come to this conclusion, ** bepause f^
believe a man in heart an assassin, and in ac^
a murderer, I will pronounce him atrai^rwhn
meditated the dethroning of the king, the sub-
version of his government, aod the levying war
against him ;" these are the qhaiges against the
priioner, gjUd unJ^esa they aie pr<^v«4 by «vji-
655]
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of Arthur Tkiilitvoood
[856
dencCi which weighs beyond a doubt in your
hiinds, if they are not so proved that you can
be as much satisfied as upon any point which
is the subject of charge and of proof, then I say
upon this indictment the prisoner is entitled to
an acquittal^ and in acquitting him you do
honour to yourseWes, and render an essential
service to all posterity. Do cot believe I want
improperly to influence your minds, for I say
without hesitation, let it operate against my
client as it may, that if, in your opinion, the
evidence be the contrary way, you would dis-
grace yourselves and injure the cause of pos-
terity, if you refused to act upon it ; but I must
beg you will not suffer any tning but evidence
to influence your minds in any degree ; but .
attend to that and that alone, and give the
prisoner all the benefit of an accurate sifting
of it.
I had thought to make some observations on
the law, but I think with the Attorney-general,
that the law is so clear, that it wants little
elucidation, and perhaps none but what will be
safely trusted with, and will clearly and with
the best authority come from the Court ; but
the indictment has been read to you, and as
well as its length would permit, you have at-
tended to it, and gone through the different
charges. It is necessary that I should state to
you, that there are four of what are called overt
acts.
Mr. Attorn^ GeneraL — Four substantive
charges*
Mr. Adolphu$,^l meant so. There are four
counts : there are to each of the first three
counts ten or eleven overt acts, all of which
must be viewed by you as having relation to
and tending to prove the original concep-
tion alleged to exist in the prisoner's mind.
For example, it is said in the first count, that
he conspired with others to depose the king
from the style, honour, and kingly name of the
imperial crown of this realm. Now, in sup*
port of that there are eleven overt acts^tatea :
for example : that he did conspire with others
to compose and prepare, and cause to be com-
posed and prepared, with intent to publish the
same, divers proclamations; and that he did
various other acts in furtherance of this original
intention of his : but you must be persuaded
of one of the four original intentions, for with-
out that, if all the overt acts could be proved
over and over again, you cannot infer that such
an intention must have existed, you must be
satisfied that the intention previously existed,
and that the acts were done in furtherance of
that. If you should be convinced that the
prisoner at the bar did intend with a certain
force to go to the house of the earl of Har^
rowby, to murder the earl of Harrowby and
all the other ministers assembled at dinner
with him, that does not amount by itself to
high treason, nor are you unless satisfied of it
by the evidence, to infer that the former trea-
sonable intent must have existed. It is not
what you will suppose he meant to do, it is
necessary that you should be convinced that,
the treasonable intent had been predetermined,
and was existing in the mind, or else the overt
acts prove nothing in an indictment for high
treason, because they are separated and isolated
facts, capable of punishment in another way.
To kill a privy counsellor is not in itself hi^
treason; it is mere felony by the statute of
Henry 7th; and under other circumstances
to assault them vrith intent to kill them is
made felony by the statute of Anne ; but to
kill them is no where declared high treason,
unless coupled with other intentions, and as
an overt act tending to demonstrate such an
intention existing in the mind.
I think it extremely necessary to put that
point to you, because nothing is more difficult
where men are unpractised in the separation
of the different parts of law pleadings, than to
bring their minus to the mam subject, and to
discern what are the circumstances which alone
are to guide them in the consideration of the
case : and, gentlemen, when I say this, I say
it with the utmost confidence, that you have
all the knowledge and understanding that are
to be expected io your situation, and that could
be found in a juiy of the country : but the law
is a science having its own technicalities,
which, God knows, those who have been mauT
years devoted to it do not always understand,
but which those who have not been So devoted
must have explained to them, before they can
exercise their talents on the consideration of
the case. With that caution, I leave the law
upon this subject, premising that yon must be
satisfied of one of four things, either that the
Srisoner at the bar with others ^ did intend to
eprive and depose the king of and from the
style, honour, and kingly name of the imperial
crown of this realm," or that he did intend to
'' excite insurrection, rebellion, and war against
the king,** or, as it is stated in the third count,
that he did '' compass, imagine, invent, devise,
and intend to levy war asainst the king," or
as it is stated in the fourw count, " that he
did levy vrar against the king." Now, I do
contend that there never was evidence tender*
ed to make out so great a charve which had
less application to that charge man the evi-
dence submitted to you; and it vrill be my
duty to go through some parts of the evidence,
to examine it by degrees and with care, and I
shall endeavour to impress on your minds the
difficulties in bringing the evidence to bear on
the particular subjects, how weak and defective
it is, how incredible, let it be related by whom
it may, unless well supported, and how par-
ticularly incredible coming out of the months
that it does, mouths from which the life of man
ought not to receive danger, and to which sul^
fident credit ought not to be given to put the
meanest subject and in other respects the most
guilty, into one moment's jeopardy of his life
or liberty.
In proposing to call to yon an accomplice
as a vritness, the learned Attorney-general
made some observations upon the oidit to
8571
Jot High Treai&n.
be given to an accomplice, and upon the maft-
ner iti which that accom^ce must be support*
ed in his testimony. This I think will be
quite clear to youj that the whole case of the
Crown as it is to taint or aflTect the prisoner
with high treason, tests entirely upon an ac-
complice ; for if you can dismiss from your
minas the evidence of Adams, there is not a
shadow of proof of high treason ; there is not
that which could convict him of any such
crime, loosely and indefinitely as the other
evidence has been pointed in support of the
facts,' or the presumed facts, deposed to by the
first vntness. I am quite sure that, in the time
you have spent upon this long trial, you have
Bifted Adams's evidence in your minds, and
that the result to your understandings must
be, that if Adams is not believed, there is no
case against the prisoner, and I think it can*
not have escaped the observation of some of
yon, that if Aaams is believed, there is hardly
a man who can present himself in a court of
justice who has not a right to command belief.
If a man under such circumstances, telling an
incredible story, can be believed, without sup-
port from other witnesses to set him up, then
no witness can be rejected because his testi-
mony is incredible.
It has been said on this trial, and said so too
by the Attorney-general (take it with as mnch
qualification as is necessary on such a subject)
'&9t an accomplice is not to be supported in
every point ; ror if he were, there would be no
necessity for his testimony, the other witnesses
could prove the case without him, and the
accomplice would be useless. I give the sense
of the observation in an inferior mode of ex-
pression. That is true, as far as the necessity
and nature of the case supposes it to be true.
It is true that on some occasions such con-
finnation as vrill support the credibility of a
witness as to loose collateral circumstances
may be taken : but, if it may be taken, it must
be taken I should* say when all the support
possible is given him — ^when no one is kept
nack that could support him — ^when nothing
is omitted that mignt be done --and when
care is taken to nve him all possible credit,
by shewing that they who produce him are not
anaid of confronting him with others, for fear
discord among them should produce disbelief.
I say more, that those who expect to avail
themselves of the evidence of an accomplice,
are bound to give him all possible support,
and subject him to all contradiction : he is a
sel£«ccusing guilty man ; he is not entitled to
confidence : and he puts himself on his trial
by pointing out those who can support him.
llio^e others are a sacred gage and pledge to
his truth; or, they are like a subscribing wit-
ness to an instrument in writing, given for ihe
benefit of all parties interested.
This point has been anxiously considered
before, and I am going to read an observation
of an eminent lawyer * on the subject. I do
• Mr. Sergeant Copl^^ at tha time of this
trial SoUcitor-gentnl.
A. D« 1820. [858
not name him for reasons which will occur to
some who are present j but he expresses this
matter so much better than I can, that I will
put it to you as to the confirmation of accom-
plices— ^as a matter beyond all doubt for its
clearness, ability, and justness. It was said on
the occasion of a trial of a man for high treason
at no very distant period, and I subscribe to it
entirely : observations mo^e philosophical and
just could not be made as applicable to the
human mind. Said that learned gentleman^
** But it is said that he" (the witness) ^ is con*
firmed ; and because he is confirmed in some
facts, you are therefore to believe him in the
rest. — ^This is a position which lawyers are in
the habit of stating in a very unqualified man-
ner ; but, it is not a position which can be
maintained to this extent, according to any
principle of common sense. There is no man
who tells a long and complicated story who
may and must not of necessity be confirmed in
many parts of it. The witness was a long tim^
in giving his evidence, and of course stated
many facts which no man denies, which have
been in all the newspapers for weeks and for
months past ; and, because he is confirmed in
certain particulars, you are therefore required
to believe the whole of his story to be true. Is
this a proposition to be insisted upon ? Can it
for a moment be maintained to this extent, and
in this broad and unq^ualified way ? But, gentle-
men, every profession and science has its
phrases; the necessary qualifications are by
degrees lost sieht of, and the worst errors are
thus introduced. Let us then look at the mis-
chief of this doctrine, and see the evils and
injustice that have arisen out of it. — The noto-
rious Titus Oates, the witness for the Crown in
the trials founded upon the popish plot in the
reign of Charles 2nd ; — that most infamous and
perjured wretch, who was afterwards convicted
of perjury for his evidence upon those trials,
ana sufi^ered the punishment or the law for his
crime, was confirmed in his testimony in many
most important particulars. Unfortunately,
the juries, misled m those times of heat and'
party animosity, were prevailed npon to believe
him, and many unhappy persons suffered in
consequence the extreme punishment of the
law ; and murders were committed under the
forms of justice, in consequence of the reliance
placed upon the frail and fallacious testimony
of a man of that description. You perceive,
then, the danger of this doctrine ; and that it is
not because a man is confirmed in certain cir-
cumstances that you can safely believe him as
to other facts where that confirmation is want-
ing. What is the character of falsehood ? Who
has Uved in the world, and has at all examined >
the operations of the human heart and mind,
who does not know that this is the usual and
proper character of falsehood* — that it does not
wholly invent. Falsehood engrafts itself upon
truth, and b^ that artifice misleads and de-
ceives; truth u exaggerated; things that exist
are dicoloured or distorted :—4hese are the i
asual operationi of falsehood^-dua is a part oC
«5»3
1 GEOAGE IV.
Trial gf^rAttr TAisUetoood
[8§0
its nature^ its address, and deztiirily. It atiaeiiy
tbeieforet, out of the yer^nature'of peijmiyy that
k ^uat be confiimcd xo a oerfeain extent." *
On Jthe poresent trial^ X sa^^ that if I had desired
the beat of my friends to assist my feeble
powers, and enlarge my humble understanding
Dy infusing into them jnstphncifUes appHcabli
to the consideration of this casi^ no friend that
I have or ever had could hare given me aen«
tences so ^posite— ssentences that can be re-
lied on for their accuracy of expres^on and
justice of conceptioB, so much as these. If
you can letain them in jf our minds from fhe
imperfect manner in which I have read them
to you/ for God'e sake do^ and let them be a
shield fof this man, against the attack made on
him by A viiness to whose testimony I say
(not merely because it is my duty, but necause
itiSTfiy conviction) not one moment's credit
oug^t tp be given^ Aor one tittle of faith added,
except in those particulars where he is ex-
plicitly confirmed- He may reeeive confirma-
tion in many particulars, whsneb^, the jcommon
voice of common {sune, every thing bas been
communicated U> the public^, and has given
him the myeans of being assured of some co|i-
ftrmation so as to leave him free from
hesitation jn advancing those things, and to
enable him to add vwever else he pleased,
according to his original intention whei^ he
formed acn^iaintanee with the unhappy o^aa at
the bar, xa according to those suggestions,
inspired in ium bj ojbhers under whom he
acted*
Befocel enter into 9. closer examination of
the evidence^ it is necessary to give an outline
of the defence of the prisoner^ to which I me^n
to apply niy observations. I may not meet ail
the expectations of the prisoner, in the con-
cessions I am going to make; butatandin^
here to perform a duty, I can only perform it
as my own heart and judgpient dictate ; I ^all
state correctly the view in which the defence
strikes me, and you will see whether it sup-
ports a more rational story, or whet|ier tne
incredible evidence you have heard forces you
to believe (he story told in spite of all the
fK)i»tradictions and absurdities which it con*
^ains^ and to which it has been exposed. I
say, I have no doubt, that the prisoner ajt the
bar, and the party who were to move with him
on the night of the 23rd of February, intended
to murder all his majesty's ministers, at the
Uouse of lord Harrowbv, in Grosvenor-square ;
to entertain a doubt o/mat, would be, as if, at
this moment, looking on the smiling frice of hea-
ven, I were to endeavour to convince you that
there is no such scene, and ^bat there are no such
things as the sun, light, or heat. I mean not to
deny^ that that party being, interrupted in the
prop^s of that crime, a miwoy of the namp of
pmithersi frvmi some hand or other, met his
death and was munlered-*vhen I use the miti-
gated expression fijnl, I mean it as not \)eing
a^ti«fact(9r]ly proved, at least it will ba for you
or another j^iy^ to •consider beroaftei^ or
whether it* is proved that the prisoner com<«
mitted jt, or wbether, under all the circumr
stances, it was'ipuiiaer;'but,takiDg it on the
narrative, a^ it stands now communicated beca
by two police officers, I would say, Smithery
met his death there and was murdered. Mak-
ing, however, these ooncessions, and admitting
the fiicts axe as bad as an advocate can con-
cede, I do conteiid, diat this case do^ noi
amount to high treason : and that the charge
of that crime stands untouched, and incapable
of receiving light in the investigation, from the
evidence onered by the CrowiL I admit th«
prisoner had a view to (he extent I have de-
scribed in the first part of my address, nameljjp
that ih>m personal motives he was disposed to
kill some of his auagesty's ministers^ aud ba4
no objection to consent to kill all the rest; so
^r I admit ; but this will be evident to you, in
the whole course of this transaction^ that dur^
ing the whole meditation of this cnme^ he vnis
beset by a spy, and accompanied by an iur
former; and it is upon their evidence or their
disclosure that you are a^ked to convict him
of high treason^ that is, tW the machinations
of the spy, inciting him to crimes he was dis-
posed to cominit, is this day to be exhibited to
you in a blended form by the informer ^ and
Qie facts which prove that ne concurred in one
mode of crimi^ are to be used to convince yon
that he meditated another which never entered
hislieart, and of which there is not any evi^
4ence upon which a jury can rely, to pro-
pounce a verdict of guilty. And, again an^
again (I am afraid of being tedious, but I can-
not repeat it too often), I say, the concession^
t have made ought not to affect the prisonei^
on the present trial, let him receive judgment
upon them in other cases when they come be-
fore a jury, but at present the charge of hi^
treason is unsupported by the fact of murder
intended or committed, it must be an intention
to do one of the four things chaiged in tbie
indictment, or it amounts to nothing.
I have already stated that if the evidence o|r
Adams does not convict the prisoner, there is
nothing to convict him t I say, if his evidence
does not, because if his evidence were put out
of the question, and the other witnesses stated
that which they have stated, it wouhi amount
^o little or nothing^ Adams's evidence is re-
ceived, and i&xey are taken to support his evi^
dence, and set it up as a whole^ that the cas^
may, in some sorl^ be taken to be proved
against the prisoner ; but if the evidence given
b/ Adams is utterly unworthy of belief, thei^
the separated parts proved b^ other witnessea
will noL in tnemsel^es, jointly or severally
amount to a fharge of hi|^ treason against the
prisoner, or make out that charge, so that a
verdict of goilty ought to pass upon him ; anf
with this it will be necessary to dixect your
attention to three particular points.
tt is conceded by the Attorney-general^ |1ia^
an accomplice ought to be confirmed; t have
t9i^^ the Jibejiy 0 state mgr ofanion^ ^ ibat
Mi]
Jor High' 2ihftw»?r.
of oncf other 0er96ii^ fotrftitc extent! ^t oa^bt
to go ; and I AaXi beg yotr to examkie m the first
p^ace, hxrt^ hf is Adanrs confirmed! in tlbe par-
ticular propositions relating to high treason,
tvhich he has advanced*. In the neitt place, H
^ill be your duty (yon know your duty, but I
merely ^ggest it as a thing tbat nmstbe con-
dirfered by you^eNes to be your duty^ ko ob-
serve bow much he is contrsSdicted, and! wbe-
tfier he is in any way contradicted by bii own
Evidence, or the evidence of those who are
caHed'to support hiin ; and laslfy, it will be of
importance to you to conisider how he might
ftave been connrmed, if there hacf not been
^ome strong reason to withhold that confirma-
tion. This is a most particBlar and important
feature in ttie case, and to which I shall, in its
turn, most seriously enure and direct your at-
tention.
Robert Adietms is^ introduced to you air the
first witness in this cause. He states to you that
he is a shoe-maker, and that (which he ought
not to have stated withopt more feeling than
tie seemed to have), he once had the honour of
serving his majesty, as a soldier; in the regi-
ment of blues — that such a man should be
found in the situation he describes, and that
he should have gone to the extent he has with-
out finding it necessary to repent, or to feel
any compunctious visitings till the plot had
failed for four days, is a circumstance credit-
able neither to his feelings as a subject, nor to
bis courage as a soldier ; but,- however,, these
are the circumstances iU which he presents
bimself ; he ^tates to you that Bhint, on^ of
the parties indicted here, had been an acquaint-
snce of his- of three years standing ; that he
made that acquaintance at Cstmbray, when he
was working for the Ehritish army, in his trade
of a shoe-maker ; and when Brunt was there,
merely as a follower of the aimy, then their
acquaintance began, and was continued with-
out any circtmistances of particularity till they
came togfetber again, in the month, I thiolk, of
January last — and then the witness was intro^
duced by Brunt, to the prisoner Thistlewood,
and, perhaps, the most extraordinary thing
took place that ever was heard of out of this
cause ; but it seems to have been the ftishion
In this ca!u^ that the conspirator, at the Head
of the conspiracy, begins without reserve, and
tells .every one on the first meeting, what the
nature and scope of his conspiracy is, that is,
I am a man so determined on evil, and so
careless of life and liberty, that I put myself
ii^to your hands ; and if you have one grain of
honesty you will report,, and loyally inform
against me. I condemn myself by my own
words, and cannot blame you. That is stated
of ^ma'n of Thistlewood*S age, who has had
experience fn matters of this kind. Adams
•ays Brunt and Thistlewood went plump into
the matter;. and let us see what they say, and
what they pu^ to this man ; there is a complaint
of the times^ and we are to infer from the
whole of the conversation, not from separated
expressions here and there, what may have
* A.iD. 1820. [(iQ2
been thetfe^^of tKos«whameditiitedto«imfr4
der nrinisters. Suppose' they thou^hlf thtf
would arm themselves tb mtkt- ^ good seeue
of pliinder ; that enhances^ their guift, but it
does not make them guilty Of high treiason.
Brunt introduced Mm, by saying* * ^ii^ is th^
man 1 was speaking to you about;*' thett there
was some talk about the witness* beingitt' fhe
life-guards, and a good swordsman; Thistk*
wood said, ''there wses hor person vAicf w«i
worth ten pound, Who trae worth anytliiiigfoir
the good Of his country;** the siuiple posses^
sion of fen pounds was^ Wealth enough to eov^
mpt them. '''The shopkeeper of LondiMi
were' a set of aristocrats sdtogethier, and aH
worltrng under one system* of. government,'*
and theti fbllows the first declaration Of his
wisfi — a dteclaration towards* them, if any pert
6f this man's evidence is- to- be befieved, 1^
should glorv to see the day when* all the shops
should be shut np, and well pkmdered . This
is as unlike deposing the King' as aaf thing
can be, but it does, if the evidence is to be be-
lieved, consort widi the rest of the- evidenee,
and with another part of it, that of providioi^
the mfserable resource of arms ; tfiey had a re^
source veiy Useful for' the plunder of shops^
but absurd for the' pnrpose of overtvrming- a
state, or of ruling a country^ sbAoient for the
purpose pointed at, but quitie . insufficient ib^
any other purpose. If there wtsre ever in tH%
pnsonei's mind) an intentiOtt to* plunder i9it
shopSp r lament that such ar man could Be
fbund ; but I am- not here lb pass sentence
Xn his morab, nor are jw, but to* examine
tther her is guilty of the ehiirger of nvosndu
ing- to overturn the govemtnent; and unless
you cair be l%d fo infer that murdering men we
h^Lte, and plundering shops, is* \&ryitig war
against thv kin^, aAd intending to overturn
the government, diere is nothing in thircharge^
whatever there may be in any bther^ Wftieh it
may be* thought fit; td bring; /
But let us see if the witnesses? tcrB^bcSlend
in any part ; is there anything that enuouragee
the supposition that diis was not afl, bat thatt
there really was something' ulterior f Why,
you cannot have fbrgotten i^fit'ot one meeting
it was said, they declared they vrere so boot
they could not wail! any l6Ugef than next Wed^
nesd^. If poverty was the cause of their
inoving hot one waiy or anotfaei^ poverty had
ho allurement to^ excite them to aeddnon that
m6re than on any other day, because the day
niost convenient to overturn a* government is
the day when it nnst Be overturried, but the
day to plunder shops is* when they who mdefs.
take it cannot find a dayV meaT, but by rob*
bery, tod when they must do it or* sturve ; that
therefbre gives countenance to the prc^biKty,
that some ofthepar^^ bad that desivn: whether
they had or notFdff not know, but there' is
some evidence pointing^ tb it^ and* if that was
thewhole design, then there is an end of' the
charge of high treason.
The conversation afterwards became a little
sportive*; two public men wete characterised
863]
1 GEORGE IV.
Triai tfArtluar Tiutltmood
[864
in a particular way ; with that howerar I hara
nothing to do, because we are not here to
assign character to any body but the prisoner,
and the witnesses exankioed against him. This
conyersatxon, if I remember rightly, took
place on the 13th of Januaiy, that is to say,
one month and ten days before that was done
which occasions your being assembled here to
day. After that time, was the situation of the
witness such as to make you belieye, that he,
a poor man, was applied ,to, not to overture
/ the state, but to take some measures to put a
few pounds in his pocket? — He says three
davs after that, he was arrested for some small
debt, and taken to the prison in White-cross-
street, where he remained for seven days, until
the 30th of January, and never came out Is
this a man who is to OTertum the state, who
cannot answer for his liberty a moment, or is
he a person who would relieve himself from
present want by embarking in some dangerous
scheme to get a meal's victuals ?
But, on the 3rd of February they met again,
and Edwards* was of the party, and I beg you
to observe, that Edwards, who does not appear
to have been an accomplice, who is not in
prison or in custody, is stated to have been of
' evenr party — he is in the list of witnesses for
the Crown, but he has never been in the wit-
ness box before you ; however, upon this occa-
sion the 3rd of February, nothing very material
seems to have passed ; but ihey began then to
to have a room in the same house where Brunt
lived, taken for the apparent residence of Ings,
but in which they had frequent meetings ; Uie
witness says, that these meetings ^ere held
twice or thrice a day, he is present at those
meetings, and we shall presently ^see what
account he gives of his own presence ; but he
having been a soldier of the king, and if a
good soldier now enjoying a pension from
the king, or some alldwance, never thinks it
his duty to disclose any one of all these coun-
cils to any person in existence. Why not
gentlemen f if it had been treason, if a man
with the understanding of a soldier, had heard
the absurd plot which I shall have to state to
you hereafter, he would have recoiled from it
vriih fear and abhorrence, and have given
information to the constituted authorities ; he
must have known no part of the plot could be
accomplished, but that those who engaged in
it would expose themselves to certain destruc-
tion ; but he knew as a thief that it was plau-
sible, or that if he should afterwards fail of
the desired plunder, he might come forward
as king's evidence, and secure at least his own
persoual safety. I say it is impossible for this
man to have believea the story he has in-
vented and put before you ; but in another
way it is possible he should have concurred in
such a plot as I describe, and most probably
he would do so as a medium between him and
desperation, as a resource against starving.
* Concerning this person. See the Debates
in the House of Commons^ 1 Hans. Pari. Deb*
N, S;, pp, 54, 342.
Between the Srd and the 19th, acoording to
the witness (and it must have been near the
1 6th for this reason, that the funeral of the
late king took place on that day) they hail
another conversation, and between the 3rd and
the 19th this plot assumes a shape, in this
witness's miserable representation, which is
to bring it here as a case of treason. What
passes then ? — " I went op to the room " says
this respectable witness, ^'the prisoner and
Harrison were there in deep discourse, they
told me the subject. Harrison said all the
life-guards, and foot-guards, and ** (let it not
be forgotten all the Polioe too)'' all the Police
would be at the king's funeral, and this would
be a £sivourable opportunitjr" to do what ? to
overturn the State ? no, it is not in the first
proposition at all ^^it would be a favour-
able opportunity to kick up armOy and see
what would be done." Kick up a row f the
very phrase explains the whole design ! that
all the troops should be at the funeral was
impossible, but all the police officers would ; a
few troops or police officers would put down
their attempt, but, as the troops would not
probably act without the presence of the
police, if they kicked up a row, they could see
what was to be done, that is, to what extent
they could commit depredation. Thus ftr
the evidence has been consistent, for there has
not been a word about overturning tl\e State,
and it was only in this conversation on the
Idth of February, that this matter began to be
talked of, and this is the way in which it is
first mentioned. '^ Thistle wood (says the
witness) approved of the plan," and without
any introduction of the matter, by any thing
said in the course of the conference, bolts upon
this subject, ** if they could take the two pieces
of cannon in Gray's-inn-lane, and' the six in
the Artillery-groundy they would have pos-
session of London." The possession of Lon-
don 1 I should have thought that any man
with a military education — I should have
thought that any man who had seen the march
of a single regiment, would have said at
once, there is nothing less probable, than that
you would have taken possession of any one
parish in London— of any one populous street
in London — all that which is here proposed »
and all that which is afterwards proposed,
would not give secure possession of Oxford-
street. Of Oxford-street ! it would not give
the possession of a street of half its importance,
because there are avenues that would require
the guard of four or five hundred men, and
much more artillery than these conspirators
prop<»ed to have, but ** if they could get the
two pieces of cannon in . Gray's-inn-lane, and
the six in the Artillery-ground, they would
have possession of London before the morning,
and if once it was begun, and the fact was
communicated to the armjr" — what woald
happen do you think ? — poor men " they would
be at his majesty's funeral, and they would
be too much fatigued to do any thing," so that
twenty-five men were to hold London with eight
k
sas]
Jor H^ t^maton.
A. D. 1890.
IM6
e
i come to moue the metropoUi
titod with tittttg up a MgW ni|^ uid
«iiA the kingioM iroM a handfiit of detpemto
Is it to be eodurtdt that a man shall oeme
^fith these crude and cash inventions to swear
away the lives of eleven men, upon testisMBjr
«tsch wottld, in another plaee^ wei^ nothing
«n proving a milL4Core or a wasberwovian's
Inllr Can such idle dieaaM and dotages be
foeeived in a court of criminai judicature^ or
ahoald they not rather be disanssed with the
eoom and eontenq^tso eminently their due?
fiat when X make this exdasaation, I am oaiy
•t the banning of the aaUect ; he adds, ^ 1^
penevering afl^ they had got the caimoii,
ehey aught prevent aay oomnMinioation irom
London to Windsor ''-^^ey were to poseess
sdlLondoa, and idl the road to Windsor, and all
the avisnttes by thme notable twenty-five aMn,
and eight pieces of cannon — this is Thistle-
afood's plan, and against it the soldier did not
aay a word in the way of remonstrance ; but
•t aeems that lenonstrance canm fiom a man
eiha was not a eoldier ; he used a little ccsn-
anon s«nse» and stated obvious diffionUiea, al-
<hou|^ Haffison and Adamsi with all their
miliUify ezpenenoe, said nothing against the
The eonipiratois who coidd devise snc^ a
iploty might well be considered as mad ; but
mx least they had mediod in their madness—
eh^ were to do a great deal, they were to se-
«ni8 London against the troops, comsaand the
jead between London and Windsor, and to
^aaae a diversion and take possession of the
telegnph at Woolwich, for fiuur eoaae informa-
tioa should be oenveyed to tim P^*^* "^^
w&m roads to be commanded in tms direction ;
important ^venioas operated in that; tole-
fraphs secured over the water ; a metropolis
Aka London secured, and an army paralysed,
by a band of five-and^twenty paupers, who, in
addition to their other wonder-working &eul-
<ies» must haan posseesed tlie gift of ubiqui^.
Most -we not wonder howsndi things could
«nter into any human mind ! Is it possible
40 suppose that a man, unless he were too in-
sane to come befoe a jury fiir trial, could
lws« been the father of toese plansf That a
^cbed asan may hAve invented dmm, I can
««U undeistand ; but that any seven or eight
sneo, two of thmn sdldjers, should have met
eo net on so ridiculous a proposal, eiceeds all
baaaan ereduMty. If lUs oan be credited,
there ie -nothing in orienml ictien— nothing
in ancieat or modem poetiy— ^Mthing in the
legends of the ^utheiB, or the lives of the saints,
but may be received as history and
B«lt mstlewood hasnot yetdone : insphod
siitbiha presumed sueoess of his fiist operup
tions, be observes, that « that win be the time
OofsTmaprovisaonal govemfflont." Yon see
their aajiitaiy exploits are nothing hi oompaii-
mm iwith lOieir pioiMnid politieal adhemes:
VOL^XXXIUT
^en fhey steuld kwre gained poisesaicm of
London, these obscure be^ars, these wretched
panpen, who had not a man of any cdosiderar
tion, fortune, or figpire, to support them, are
to foim a provisional goveromeut. That
phrase is essentially necessary; that consti-
tutos the ehief point of their guilt. If you dis-
believe that, gentlemen, whatever you may
think of them in other respects, the present
case vanishes, like the kbric of a fairy vision,
into thin air. The forming a provisional go-
v«inment--4hat pretty phrase which has been
transposed into a. hand bill— is to make out the
guilt of these men. A little before the late
king is buried a thought comes up, that this
would be the time to form a provisional go-
vemmen^-*-to form it, aad out of what mate-
rialer It is not pretended by any body at
present-^it may be hereafter, if yon believe
Che witaes»-^hat any man of rank, wealth, or
oonsequenoe, had any thing to do with this. Be-
lieve him to^ay and you vriU not want that
afterwards: but these illiterate beggarly
wretches, who could not agree with each other
aboat tfafoe or four lines to be written on a
piece of cartridge paper, one began it, then
another, and at last disagreed about it, were
to form a provisional government. ''The
peovisioilal fovemaaent" then, says Thistle-
wood, ^ is to be formed when we have got
poaeession of these cannon, aad when we have
commanded the roed to Windsor, and im-
paired or pomesaed the telegmph at Wool-
wich; and there is every chance of not being
interrupted by the soldiers, because they witt
be too tired.'' Mr. Adams and hlr. Harrison
in their military education never heard of a
bivooac or a night maioh; they believed the
soldiers eonld not have made a forced march
of twenty miles ; that no means could have
been invented to bring them by water or in
icarriages to quell a revohitien, undertaken by
twenty-ifive bold men, who had possession oS
oidbt cannon* waUraut a horse to assist them.
What was next to be done ? business multi-
plies upon us fast; we have done a pretty
good stroke of work already; but another
thing mast be efibcted, we must get posses-
sion of sevend out-ports, Dover, Brighton,
Ranugate, md Margate, and prevent any
persons ftom leaving Bngland vrithout a
licence. Very fine indeed 1 I wonder they
omitted Harwich, and others, which might
have been of use; but, however, Dover,
Brighton, Ramsgate, and Margate, are the
ports which are to be secured ; and all this
was to be aceom^lisbed on the night of the
king's fimerai. I do not know how many men
were to be detached on this exploit; it was,
however, to be done, and Brighton in particu-
lar must be taken possession of, because it
brings the mind of the witness happily, and
forms his tongne most naturally, to some io-
tenlion about the present possesaor of the
down. Long may he continue to wear it.
Brighton was to be taken possession of, whyl '
beeauae tbe king wns there ; yo«iiio«
3K
8671
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of Arthur ThitUewood
the king was labouring under as ••vera, an in-
disposition as nature can endure, and bulletins
of his state were issued every day ; and there-
fore he was not likely to be at Brighton for
some time : that every newspaper would shew.
His majesty is now happily recovered from
that indisposition, and, in common with every
good subject, I pray to God that it may be
long, very long, before he experiences the re*
cniTence of that, or feels any other calamity.
I pray too that the sceptre of these realms may
ever continue in his illustrious house. But
these sapient politicians and bold conspirators,
it seems, have decreed otherwise. Tne king
was not likely to be at Brighton, nor at the
funeral ; but now comes the real aim : all be-
fore has been shot in the air — *^ He could not
be allowed to wear the crown." These
twenty-five men, with the eight pieces of
cannon, could not allow him to wear the
crown, ''the present family had inherited it
long enough. There has l>een no change in
the succession for the last hundred y^ars, and
we think they have inherited it long enough,
and there cannot be any use in his wearing
the crown : " and these sage politicians, as it
is represented to you, decree toe deposition of
the present king, and fulfil the first count of
the indictment. There, gentlemen, is the se-
cret unravelled ; these are the words of the
wise ; these the edicts of the powerful. Here
is a kingdom to be overturned in an instant ;
the soldiers are to be absent ; and these men
are to meet with others, aod agree to move
eiffht pieces of artillery, without a horse that
would grace a hackney coach, to subdue the
greatest metropolis in the European . world ;
without any more force than that already de-
scribed, they are to possess the greatest public
road in the kingdom ; they are to incapacitate
a large body of troops from marching twenty
miles, secure the telegraphs and sea-ports,
without any other means than their own will.
Such is the plot as it has been represented to
you by this shameless fabricator of incredible
falsehoods, and by him alone is the first count
of the indictment supported, lliere is not a
soldier who oould have lent himself to it for a
moment, and I should have thought, if I had
not seen the witness in the box, that it exceed-
,ed any confidence a man could possess to have
dared to state it.
But it was also stated (because now the
other' parts of the plot begin to emerge) that
two or three had drawn out a plan to assassi-
nate the cabinet ministers at their fiist dinner.
Now that is a curious phrase ; it goes through
the whole of this narrative, and it was known
the cabinet dinners had been suspended during
the period which followed the death of his late
majesty, and during the illness of his present
majesty ; and now, mark how this tale of this
wretched witness breaks itself to pieces directly
it comes to be touched. The ministers were
to be assassinated at a cabinet dinner, tind that
/wa»to be before the 16th of Februaij : there
5pras no talk of a cabinet dinner before that.
and yet the explosion was to take place on the
16tb, and the govemmeut destroyed, although
there was to be neither meeting of ministers
nor cabinet dinner at the time tfa«y were plot-
ting it : these fabehoods astonish one by their
absurdity, they are gross, open, and palpable ;
too flagrant for detection, too gross for exag-
geration.
tt seems at this time there were other meet-
ings at Fox-court, and particulariy on Saturday
the 19th, and on Sunday the 20th ; and at the
meeting on the 19th, nothing occurred but
this remarkable observation, that ** they must
do something on the following Wednesday.''
His late majesty bad been buried, the troops
had not been absent or so conducted themselves
that the conspirators could surprise and over-
turn the government, that plot had gone to
nothing, and now their attention .was to be
called to something else; but now they 'are
scattered in their views, and fall back on their
original scheme of plunder ; the announcement
of the cabinet dinner in the New Times had
not come to their knowledge, but something
must be done on Wednesday next (and Ed-
wards was there), because they were all so
poor they could wait no longer. If there is
any truth in this, it still resolves itself into my
original proposition, that poverty was their
goad, and plunder their* aim, but nothing
which could be called a political motive, or be
put in question as endangering the govempaent
at all. Then it is said, '' if nothing takes place
between this and Wednesday, we will go to
work ; we are all so poor that we can vrait no
longer,'\ and then a committee was proposed,
and we shall see the next day the sittinss of
this committee, and the propositions made at
it. — ''.On Sunday morning, about eleven
o'clock," Adams says, '^ 1 entered the room.
Owing to the thickness of the snow I could
hardly see. I afterwards saw Thistlewood,
Brunt, Ings, Harrison, Hall, Davidson, Harris^
Cook, Tidd, Bradbum, Edwards, and Wilson.
I found the business had not been entered
into, Tbistlewood proposed that a committee
should be formed, and Tidd should take the
chair.'' Tidd, therefore, I suppose, - as a re-
hearsal of some intended scene in the provi-
sional government, is duly installed with a
pike in his hand \ and now let us hear what
he proceeds to do. Thistlewood was 'on his
left. Brunt was on his right. Thistlewood
said to the committee, " I presume " — for cer-
tainly they had had no time to talk of it before
all (his had been done, without the least know-
ledge or suggestion on any one's part : you
have heard the plot detailed by this witness^
but Thistlewood says this according to his fic-
tion,— ''I presume you know what we. meet
here for." Upon my word, it was no. small
presumption, lor no man could possibly know^
" be turned to the door, and said, I mean the
west-end job." Now this is the first time the
west^end job comes under our notice. Brunt
never speaks without an.oath» therefore, to
make him natural, it comes out thus..—- Bnmt
809]
Jbr IBgh Treaiott.
A. D. 182Q.
[870
laid) ** Dama. my eyes, mention it out ; and
Brunt was called to order by the chair." There
is regularity ; there is decency and propriety !
Thistlewood then said, ^'Gentlemen, as we
find there is no probability of the ministers
dining all together, we will come to a determi-
nation to take them separately at their own
houses. We shall not have so good an oppor-
tunity as if they dined all together ; so that we
must take two or three at a time,'' that is Mr.
Thistlewood's proposal, as the witness states
it. — *' I suppose we can have forty men for the
west-end job ; so I propose, that the two pieces
of cannon in Gray Vinn-lane, and six cannon
from the Artillery-ground shall be taken, and
that Cook shall command them f* here we have
the old plan brought forward again of the eight
pieces of artillery. — ^The main body being gone
to the west-end job, the artillery is to be taken
by the residue, which is to be fermed out of a
number which never has exceeded twenty-five.
The fint witness swears he never saw at Fox-
c^urt more than fifteen; the doubt between
him and another witness at Cato-street is, whe-
ther there were twenty or twenty-five, but
these were to be manufactured, into forty men
for the west-end job, and the others were to
take the cannon and to seize the Mansion-
house. ' — The Mansion-house ! -^ twenty-five
men would have been completely lost in the
passages: they might as well have gone to
take the Tower of Babel. But the Mansion-
. house is not all ; they are to proceed to the
Bank, and make an attempt upon that ; and
Palin by himself, uninterrupted, and carrying
his satchel of combustibles at his back, is to
set. fire to buildings in different parts of the
town ; the provisional government is to be in-
stalled at the Mansion-house— nobody to instal
it — the Bank is to be attacked, and Palin, in
the mean time, is to be wandering about.
Betting fire to houses for his amusement, and
for the perfection of the plan. This is pro-
posed : what becomes of it in debate ? This-
tlewood said ^ there would be time between
that and Wednesday to improve the plan,*' and
he dropped the subject for the present, as
Brunt had a proposition to make about assas-
sinating tlie ministers. Thistlewood after-
wards says ** he will not drop his plan," and
after some little obstruction and difficulty, he
has it put to the question, and it is carried
without opposition. A glorious beginning at
least in the provisional government — there, is
DO opposition — it is carried nem. con. ** Brunt
then proposed, that they should divide them-
selves into separate lots, and go forward to as-
sassinate the ministers, separately, unless they
had a cabinet dinner.*'-*This is Sunday.—
** Gut of each party one should be chosen by
lot to assassinate the person designated, and
whoever the lot fell upon was to do it, or be
nraidered himself.'' now how was that to be
done, or who was to be the spare assassin, who
was to kill his accomplice ? — I cannot tell, but
this is one of the ipany fictions you have to
sws^llow, if you can give credit to this man's
testimony. But on that, the witness began to
fight the old soldier; he saw difficulty in it, and,
speaking for the first time, he said, '*may not
a man fail, and is he to be run through if he
fails from unavoidable circi^mstances ?'' " No,''
said Thistlewood, *' not unless it is through
cowardice." To what court-martial the failing
assassin was to be subjected does not appear,
but the whole comes over you like the dream
of delirium, or the illusions of frenzy ; and you
are to believe it, however repugnant to credit
bility, because ;this witness states it on his oath.
Then Brunt's motion was put and carried. In
a few minutes in came Palin, Potter, and
Strange ; Thistlewood communicated to them
the plans, and they agreed to them ; but Palin
seems to have been a politician of a higher
class than the real, for he, in a very parlia-
mentary form, " rose to say a few words," and
he said, '' agreeing as I do in the plans proposed,
there is one thing I want to know, there are so
many things vouhave proposed to do at one time,
that it woula be of the greatest benefit to us if
it could be done ; you talk of taking forty or
fifty men to this west-end job, you doubUess
know better than I do what force you are able
to bring, but before I go round to the friends I
can bring, I wish to know, am I at liberty to
tell them what has been resolved on in the
whole, or in part, or am I not ?" Then This-
tlewood gives this answer, an answer which is
usually given somewhere else, importing con-
fidence in ministers ; Thistlewood said, " Mr.
Palin undoubtedly knows what men he has to
depend upon, and he will know how far he
ought to trust them." An answer prodigiously
wise and sententious, for it tells him nothing
one way or the other.
Now you will see the importance of what
Palin has said; it is demonstration of the
weakness of their resources, and the impos-
sibility of their having entertained the design
charged. He expressed himself doubtfully of
the plan, on the ground of their weakness and
inabihty to execute it ; he doubted the exist-
epce of resources; yet no satisfaction was
given to him ; there was no pretence of an
ulterior force ; he obtained only a general an-
swer. " Mr. Palin, undoubtedly, knows what
men he has to depend upon ; and he will know
how far he ought to trust them." On their
separation on the Sunday, what was to be
done? Palin the engineer, was to go and see
what could be effected ; he was to view a
building in the neighbourhood, which appears
to be FumivalVinn, and it was said, " it that
building could be set on fire it would be a good
job." Palin, afterwards said, ''it could be
easily done :" if the test of fiction is to be in
this case what it is in every other, some re-
mote pointing to possibility, but a total want
of rational application to probability, tliis
would be sufficient to stamp this as .a gross
and flagrant falsehood. Of all the buildings in
that neighbourhood, Furnival's-inn is the one
that presents the least facilities for being Bred ;
it is a new building with party walls, accord-
9tt] I 6BCMR6B It:
THa^AHM^nMkmood
cai»
higto ^ BattAn^ AM no di»H <^ ^^t
«a as to prerent the eommvnication of lire, and
to make it fiir from easy to aet the whole pile
in flames ; if they had pointed to other places
where some of us Irre, the buildings are older
and the commonications more free; but For-
niTal's-inn is the least probable of tdl the inns
of court I know. If they had gone a door or
two on either side nearest to Leather-lane^ the^
wonM have found buildings of wood, which if
they had applied a match to, would hare raised
an tnextingoishable conflagration. Peihaps
eld FumiyalVinn was in his mind, and this
ftiTDured his fiction : but if any man were to
say the new building is easy to ftre, he must
be such an idiot and driTeller as hardly exists
on the fttce of the earth. A man in prison
inventing something he is to tell Die Privy
eonncil and a Court, may strike on sndi a
•ubject as this ; he states it in enunination
before the Prirv council, and he must be taken
as he is found ; for those employed by the
Crown would not suggest what would make
his story probable, they bring him before the
Jury, with all the credit they can give him, but
with no assistance beyond that — ^fbr they would
disgrace themsdves if they did give it; and
from the Attomey-geDeral to the deik oif the
Solicitor to the Treasury, there is not one I
am sure but would disdain potting his hand to
such a thing. Therefore, having once said
Aat that new building is to be the object of
attack, and that PnKn and another man ap*
5 roved of the plan, he comes to teU you so to
ay, that is, to swear to a fiction he has fa-
bricated, in hopes that yon will believe from
him that which is impoasible. Any man
opening his eyes, and seeing the inn guarded
by a gate, protected by a porter, and diiBcult
of access, would say, that never could be the
place chosen ; it being entire within itself, with-
out communication with any thinff else, and
leading to nothing which can much attract or
engage the attention of the public. I appre-
hend that that inn being on nre from one end
to the other, would create less sensation than a
chandler's shop wonld at Charing-cross, be-
cause the streets diverge ttwn that neif^boui^
hood in so many directions, and the popula-
tion there is so much more crowded together
than in the part of tiie metropolis when the
supposed fire was to be made. In the analysis
of this man^s evidence, you see the grossness
of fiction, and the fondness of delusion : he
hopes to gain reward or save his life ; and he
states what first comes forward, to prove a
plot, which (if it existed) a vrise government
might have overlooked> a strong one might
iiave despised.
We come now to the business of the
Exchequer. It is represented by some one,
^t if men ar^ to be collected to do aU this haid
work they ihould eat a little bit, upon which
Brunt says, ''Damn my eyes;" and I most
lequest your attention to the expression, from
what was said in evidence, ana by the Attor-
«»ey-geiietal, in his opening. I beg pardon if
I 4iocft yonr HUhf ifen rtpotHlnB aT tiMO*
execratioos, premising H is not a needieii
repetition; bat Brunt introdnoes faia-kpoechy
as usaal, by these woids; and ho says, **lit
has been oat of wotk a great wMle; bat he hii
got a one ponnd note, and will spend it all !•
treating his men • the uMgnificent Bur* Brmil
treating his men with a one pound note. Sop-^
posing Bmnt did exeeuto the geoerMt bUbtm^
tion, that woold give yon an insight into Ika
secret; for if Ke gave them onljr a iriiea «C
cheese and bread, and porter, or gin, the find
wonld be exhansled on forty men, and Aeie la
an end of the Exchequer and the lefolirtimiisna
*--for the most money prodneed was on ono
occasion six shillings, on anodier a shiHtng, «a
another seven-pence ; this was all the treaaort
that astottisbea the eyes of the gnwrs^ and a
one ponnd note was talked of, that tey isighl
see on some fbtare occasion if he possessed it,,
or rather if this man is to be beheved; for I
ask again, is it credible, that twenty-five men,
firom the dregs of society, could be aHored by
sharing in one ponnd to overtoni a atata? or
whether it is not probable they had some oAoT
view ? or whether it vras any thing more thaoa
the hope of such plunder as confbsion and
uncertainty might assist Aem in obCainingL
when they had done something whidi wooM
create a very considerable alarm.
I have endeavoured, in the houfs I have
stolen from my rest, to direct yonr attention
to the niaterial parts of the evidence. I do
not affect to go through all parte of it ; I e»-
deavonr not to omit any thing against the
prisoner, and I make such observatioas od H,
as I think it bears. The task of reciting it at
large belongs to my lord ; I know how it will
be done, and need not dwell npon Alio aabgocl.
There was a meetinflr on the Slst. The plot in
ripening, and somemingis to be efiected. On
the 21st something is said that might throw a
litde doubt upon the proceedings of these
gentlemen ; nameW n comaranication frona the
landlord of the White-hart, that Bow-ctreet
and the Secretary of Stete's olBee had got
notice of their plans ; but it frightened them
not a whit; they are as brave as ever. Whether
there had been communications to Bow-atreet,
and the Secretary of Stete's office, we ought
have had the meaae of knowing ; bat we have
not ; that Aero had been some commonicatioos^
we know, from lord Haivowby, but to what
extent we do not know, because one witnen
has not appeared. But commuiucatioiia had
been made (as I have no doubt this witaeai
well knew, at the time) to the Secfelaryef
State, and to Bow-street, and therefore, aosae-
thttig must be done to force the plan forward
a little, and we shall see what it is.— Upon tlia
next day after the papers had been axaminedy
and^ no man had reason to believe there ^paa a
cabinet diimer fixed — ^who do jou think aa-
nounces that there is. one? Mr. Edwards
—who produces the only pnper wttdi eoo-
tains it f Mr. Edwardfr--Ae pointo oat tiM
only paper whidi contains the inteHifsnce
sni
J^ tSgk t)mum»
A. IX ItSO.
1974
ohI U» fM^Mr li boD^^ Mid M you hav#
hea^ in the evidmee and cannot & balieve,
tiMil inteUigaBea<»*£^>ricatad to daeaiva tha
eoBdnetor of the paper and te baeooia the
atmnbling block or theae people— -Uiaft ftdaa*
hood ia put into tha New Timaa, which tha
CouTt reporter did not know of or eom-
Mmdeata, whioh appeared in no other paper,
hot which Boet ttiraenkniely crept into the
New Tunea* and that nnder eircnmitancae to
aaaka it quite dear that the Conn reporter
bad not given it, becanee he aayi the term
grtmd covdd not be applied by him, that one
cabinet dinner ie not more grand than tnother,
and therefore it woold mean iiolAiing. Then
yov aee hmw the matter had been fkbricatedy
and for what pnipoee :-*then oomee thii
gloriont new8| as it maybe deemed, to these
men, announoed bjr Edwards, and prored by
the pioduetion of the New Times. What is
Ae fiiet thing that passes npon it f and from
thu time I shall disdiarge Brunt's imputed
execrations from your attention. The At-
torney-general, belienng his instmctions, made
an animated obeenration upon the impiety as
wcO as the obduracy of a man, who could
state his belief m God, in consequence of his
prayer haTing been granted* in the appoint-
ment of this dinner. To be sure if the thing
were true, it stamps an iniquity uid infomy
beyond example; but you will see it is im-
poesible. Brunt ie reported to hare said
** Now I will be damned if I do not beliere in
God ;" in the mouth of this fiction-making
witness, Brunt said this, ^ I have often prayed
that there maT be an opportunity when these
thieves may all be got together, and now God
has answered my pnycr."* What is this f I
did not believe in God when I prayed to him,
but now I do believe in him. I blaspheme
his holy name, and the best of his attributes.
I, Brunt, had never believed in God till this
■KMoent, but now I will begin to believe in
God ; but I have prayed to a God in whom I
did not believe, to grant me an opportunity of
awrdering a certain number of his creatures,
most fovoured, in point of wealth, fortune,
talents, and dronmstances, and now that prayer
is granted, I shall begin to believe— and I, who
prayed when I did not believe, confirm my
mith, by blasphemies and execrations. These
ere the fictions of a gross, rank, ignorant con-
e^rator, who thinks that everything he swears
will be believed ; but his inventions are bdow
human ingenuity, and almost defy the grasp of
human investigation; if we examine them
w« are almost prompted to believe them, bo-
oause they are impossible; es a person once
^d, « I betteve because it is impossible,'' that
ie, because no man would invent that which is
eo incredible. Now, I put it to you, that un-
less, uponatridoflilhanddeath, you would
«dopt what WM sportively said, in anhikieo-
phieal argument, you cannot believe this; for
if this witnew is contradicted out of his own
aaoutfa, and states that which is incredible,
«m that moaett, hisevidcBoeis tainted with
the d(sbett¥fai your mfaid, his credit ia per-
forated by his own act, the tide rushes in, it
sinks to the bottom, and can no longer fora
either a vessel or a bqoy ; it is gone for ever.
But I must proceed with my observations on
this statement, now we have got tiifough M^
Brunt's exclamation on whidi the Attorn^
general made his observations i then a commit^
tee was to sit directly, << and V* says the miu
mm-^ynm put into the chair; ThisUewood
wanted to propose a fresh plan respecting thm
assassination, oecsnse now the mndsters are
caught in a purs»-net— fourteen or sixteen of
them— a good hauW-ond therefore, it is necea*
sary to form a new plan, but'' says the Chaiiu
man (the witness), ** I interrapted Mr. Thia*
tlewood in this, referring to what I said yester*
day,'' that is, to what luul been said about in*
formation being siven at Bow-street and the
Secretary of Sutrs. Upon that there vras a
confusion and violence, and I l>eg you to carry
your attention to that, because I shall have to
advert to it hereafter. Harrison said, ** If any
man should do any thinr to throw cold water
on the busincM, he wouM run him through the
body." What, after such threats as this, could
attach this man to his assodatesf he had tioM,
he had means, and yet he mentioned this to no
one, and the next day he was baited like ahull
or a bea^, but he remains firm, he does not do^
sort them, bnt however he was deposed ham
his kingly dignity, and Tidd vras put in the
chair; then Thisiklewood vranted to proceed,
Palin slopped him from ftirther explanation,
and they moved, that a watch shoula be set at
lord mrrowby's house, and accordingly n
watch was set. Now, tfiis is the truth not to
be doubted, and this is one of the extraneoui
tiuths proved, to which I shaU direct your at-
tention*-Hi watch vras set at lord Harrowby'e
house, as part of dM plan which I sajr moil
undoubtedly did exist, of assassinating his m»-
Jestyli ministers ; vrhetber there would be ssy
material impediment or obstruction to thoC»
thai vratch was set to asoertain, and Davidsoa
was the man who occasionally watched ; this
is confirmed to an extent I cannot deny, and I
shall observe upon dmt by and by, because it
never shall be my vrish to press any obeervnM
tions on the jury, vrithout treating that which
could be sud on die other side as fidrly as I
can. Una meeting is on the S2nd, and the
vratbh was then proposed ; it was to be set at
six o'dodc, and to be relieved every three
hours, up to twelve; there was no grsat sagn*
city in tne measure, but such as it vras it vms
pursued.
Then they go on to the proposal of the plan,
by which the mfaristera were to be assassinated ;
I shall oi^y refer to it brieiy, because, though
I do not widi to urge newspaper knovrledgo
more Ihan » necessary, stiU it is imposdbU
you should not have miimtely informed ye«i^
sdree of the means by which it wis proposad
to carry the anurder into esecution, and tho
narrative of the witnem in the box agrees vrUli
it, to the nlBUtesl paiticulors. IbisOewood
875] 1 GBOftGE IV.
TfMi ^Atihtr TkMmood
[876
was to kiUM^ at the door, and'obtain admit-
Cknce, on the pretence. of havkig^ a letter — ^the
servants were then to be secured — the ooo-
spirators were to rush up stain, and the par-
ties were to be murdered — ^these (with a little
additional figuring which comes out then, or a
little after, about the butcher who was to take
off heads and hands, as his share of the plun-
der) are all the particulars of the plan, and all
which he has stated without a variance from
what was given in the newspapers deriyed
from his own information and that of others.
' After having murdered so many of the min-
isters, what are they to do next? — they fall
back, so barren is their invention, "upon their
old plan : Gra/s-inn-lane and the Artillery-
ground are to occupy them all, they are to get
eight cannon without horses, bv merely touch-
ing them with their fingers I suppose ; and
ap^ain the unseen, unknown, unnamed, pro-
visional government is. to be installed at the
Mansiou'^iouse ; what is to be its operation no
man has said, what it is to govern oir whom,
whether it is to depose the lord mayor, or any
other king, is not disclosed; but the whole plan
is a provisional goyemment. Unless there is
magic in words — ^unless you suppose that the
pronouncing of them will <' raise spirits from
the vasty deep** — I am as ignorant what is
meant by them as I was'when the Attorney-
general began. I did not know ^hat they
were aiming at ; nor has a^y one person yet
thrown the least light on the subject.. These
men were to be engaged in feats of arms, or
scenes of pluqder, and that there, was any
other person connected with them you have
not heard as yet. I&all I say why ? — ^if they
had said so, as was done upon a former.occa*
sion, upon a trial where the name* of Thistle*
wood was mentioned, some of these persons
might come here as witnesses, and say, we
never knew nor heard of, nor. consented, to
any such thing ; nor do we believe there was a
plan to make us a provisional government.
And then the. credit of the witness would be
broken to pieces on another point, in addition
to the many I have already mentioned.
Butlet us see, furtherywbatthese redoubtable
inspirators are .about, according to this man.
One generally supposes that a printing-press
is one of the engines without wtiich a revolur
tlon cannot move for a momenL Have they
any press ? — No ; not the means of printing a
solitary placard; but-Thistlewood is to write
in such a hand as he can (and I wish you could
have seen his writing) on .three pieces of car-
tridge paper, certain magical words sure to
effect a revolution in the country : ** Your ty-
rants are destroyed-— the friends of liberty are
called -upon to come forward — the provisional
Sovemment is now sitting.^ Your tyrants are
estroyed ? surely they do not: mean that his
■majesty^s ministers are the tyrants of the coun-
try ; if they do, with all my heart they are de-
stroyed, and there is no view to any other, ty-
rant to be destroyed. If they say it means the
ninisteiSi there is an end of the treason ; be-
cause, in point of fiut, there is nothing done,
but to muider those worthy persons. It is a
wicked murder, but not high treason. If the
meaning of the words is his majesty's ministers
are destroyed, there is an end of the under-
taking ; and it is only required that the friends
of liboty should come . forward, not stating^
what they are to do ; and that a provision^
government is sitting, not stating where. — ^The
gross folly of this would exceed all human be-
lief, if stated by the most respectable person.
If a dying martyr said it with his last breath,
it would stagger credulity; but how much more,
when it comes from a man tainted with ftdse-
hood in.eveiy part of his evidence.
. Upon the walls of the buildings in flames
were these papers to be placed, to the end that
the people might see them by the light.
These invitations are to be put on the walls of
the houses on fire, to be consumed or crushed,
and .this is to be the miffhty engine to levy the
whole mass of the friends of liberty. The con-
spirators having no communication with any
body, — being incapable of disclosing their in-
tentions beyond the spot where they instituted
them, — the friends of liberty, whoever they
may be, were, as they passed the fire, to be
called on<by this paper to come forward— for
a provisional government (we do not know how
composed) is sitting, we do not know where.
Is it possible to sacrifice the life of men upon
such fictions as these ? Is it possible that a
jury of the country can take the lives of eleven
men, on the deposition of such a witness,
swearing to such egregious falsehoods as no
man can believe? — ^fictions which. are incapa-
ble of being brought into contact with common
sense ; and which no man who can count five,
can be supposed to have suggested or have
countenanced? We get rid then of those
three phicards which are to be the means of
raising the friends of liberty ; and all this is to
be done before there is time to go to the Mao«
sion-house, because, if you set a house on fire
in Holbom, and go to GrayVinn-lane to fetch
cannon, the placard will be gone, and there
will be no finger-post to point out where the
provisional government is sitting ; whether in
a garret in Crown-stieet, of at the Mansion-
house, no m.an could see from this bill ; 'and
yet you are to believe this was a plan for
overturning his majesty's government — for
levying war against the king — and for deposing
him fiom his regal Crown and dignity as tbe
sovereign of these realms.
; I ; am tired of repeating the incredibility of
this story, and I proceed reluctantly to a further
statement; I do not intend to pursue this man*s
evidence, in his walk from the room in Fox«-
court^ to Cato-street ; but before we go let me
.remark on one thing stated by In^, the butcher.
I .wish some part of the exhibition, made.here
yesterday, were here to day. I have foipied a
conception, — beggine, that if it is .unfounded,
.you will dismiss it from your minds,« apd not
,let my client be .prejudiced by^^ q4.sia]^en im-
pression of min^'-Tbut Ing^ ii^.repf^nted to
877]
Jbr High Trwton*
have equipptd himsdf ivith a belt and ti^o
bags^ the oelt containing sereral pistols ; lie
having a sword, and the two bags being also
about him. And you are taught to. believe by
this witness, that a human head was to be put
into each of them. If there is in the mind of
man, any thing sufficiently atrocious, to have
crowned and confirmed assaasinaition and mur-
der, by a display so barbarous, I lament, and
am truly heart-stricken by it. When I have
heard and read, as I did many years ,ago, of
those exhibitions in< France, to which the At-
torney-general adverted, I was then at the age
of twenty or thereabouts, and even in that
gay inconsiderate period of life, every nerve
in my frame thrilled, every drop of my blood
ran cold with horror, when I read of human
heads paraded about the streets of Paris, and
of the cruel insults ofiered the royal family, hj^
exposing to them, through the grates of their
prison, the bleeding remains, of those whom
they had most loved. • God 'knows I felt com-
forted by an honest assurance, that while Bri-
tish • sentiment remained, such scenes - never
could take place here. No man would dare
to publish himself as the perpetrator of such
acts ; but to day, to grace llus cause, and to
make additional impressions to the disadvantage
of the prisoners, it is to be imputed to Ings,
that he had this unnatural.and ^acnedible atro»
city in his thoughts.
Now, I come to the observation I meant to
make ; it may be unimportant and unfounded
— but if I remember rightly, the bags brought
before the Court, taJcen from the person of Ings,
were such, as no man who haa exercised tha
trade of a butcher, could have proposed to put
a human head into— they were not lan;e enoyigh
to contain it. I am told I am mibtaken ; I
thought it was so, and I am onlv convinced of
the contraiy, because one of my learned friends
obligingly corrects me, wishing that I should
not persist in an error. But be the possibility
as it mav, do not for God's sake let us be de-
'ceived oy these ignorant fictions— fictions,
abusive of the nature and quality of English-
men— fictions, which unless we«>give up all
sense of nfttibnal character, to favour the tale
of such a witness as Adams, cannot gain belief
in our minds. But examine your own thoughts,
gentlemen, take the declarations of all these
men, from the beginning to the end of their
eupposed plot — their dedantions of poverty-r-
their expressions, that they were so poor, that
they coul<l not stav beyond Wednesday — that
they -shall not fear the tropty those are the police
officersy-rand then see whether it was the lood
chancellor's^ head, or lord Harrowby's plate,
that was to go into those bags,*-that a needy
man, in the perilous situation in wl^ch Ings
was placed, should encumber himself with two
unprofitable heads, is altogether incredible.
The intention was, to strike Sie ministns from
the face of the earth ; but Ings vrould not haye
loaded himself vrith their heads, when salvers
and goblets, and beakers and spoons, were
within his reacfai and would hav« enriched him:
,%
A. D. 1820. ^ [«78
plunder was his bbject ; ,for Ings is the most
clamorous about poverty ;- and Ings, therefore,
is much more to be supposed to intend to stead
the plate he should find, than to encumber him-
self with human heads, of no use,^ but to raise
all mankind against him, and with a hand, the
hand of lord Castlereagh, which was to be put
in pickle, and shewn on some future occasion,
whether for money, or as a trophy, does not
appear.
* I have said I will not accompany this maa
in his walk from Fox-court to Cfatp-streiet, the
circumstances . he discloses there are of. little
value in this cause; but^when you come to
Cato-street every moment, assumes some .'im-
portance. • He goes in, and tells you that there
were numerically (he does not say as he com-
putes or believes), but numeriqally .there were
twenty people in the house besides himself
and he separates them exactly, eighteen in the
room, and two below stairs. - He tells you there
was one candle,- and one candle alone ; that
that candle (for he mentioned it in the singular
number always) was put out on one occasion,
and he cannot tell who did it That when the
Bow-street officers came up, they used these
exprese&ons, which I took, down : — Two stood
at the door and said, '' Here's a pretty nest of
-you. ; Gentlen^en, . we have got a warrant to
apprehend you, and we hope you willgo peace-
aoly.'' To these ireryiplnrases and . sentences
he swears most distinctly... It will be my duty
hereafter, 'When I- state where he is confirmed
and where contradicted, to beg your, attention
to these ciroumstances, -because, they are preg-
nant .with strong contradictions,vand::aad>to
my belief that he was not present at the place.
;What was the whole exploit 'as to -him? — a
thrust with a sword vras' made,, and •he was
very- near the officer, but he escaped imme-
diately, and .walked, away as uncoqoerned as
if nothing had happened : those were his very
words. ' If he: was present then he was known
to the officers who -came there, and, who fa-
voured his escape. If he was not present, he
is stating from public report what he has sworn
to, helping. it out \ff such additional cirbum-
stances as at his leisure he could devisie. .
' With your experience, in courts, some of yoa
may have been astonished that my learned friend
cross-examined this witness so shortly ; that
he did not go more into the circumstances;
and that he did not endeavour to get from him
contradictions upon particular points, where it
might be expected ne should betray himself
into contradictions.' Genti^men, I had the
honour to submit* to you that every science has
its own particular technical. points, and my
learned friend never shewed himself a more
consummate master of his profession than in
the brief examination of that man. To have
examined him. again and! again, would only
have produced the repetition of the fiction you
saw so much of, under tl^e examination of my
two learned friends the Solicitor-general and
Mr, Gumey. You saw l|pw accurately he had
Gonoedhisetory; bow ready he was to prevent
879]
I GBOmOE IV.
Trial cfArikwr TUttigwaad
rsso
fbririuimingttJkeid, iHran tbqf wm pro|M»
'ttf %i «tid ngukr questieBs acondiBg to cktir
•ai^rieaee woA judgmea^— ha dwckpd tbt
mmtiflal : ^ 1 101 w>t cdint to tfan part of th«
otorjr yety" or, ^ I haT« MMnethiag ebe to ny i before I proceed furtlier in this moA arduouft
befote I come to that;'' and not once bat re* case, let ue aet myielf right in one particalar.
|iealedly)--«ofldact Terynatond in a man «dio> ; Hare any of my cxpraaiionB induced yoa to
olty lo atatid up bolece yoa, a diaaemiag jury
of the couBtfy, and state that frhidi the childian
of a nuteery would reject a% unfit for beUef.
I haire now done 1^ his examination ; bnt^
duiing tbe term of his impriaonnent, had
pianaed aad .chalked down« and drHsed^ and
designed, every thing that he could say; who
cosdd not be put out ef fait way ae to a single
word by any pfopoutioB, and wbo would not
aoArlus itofy to be mutilated, wbatarfir dm
■eternity and oesiie lo do eomighit have been,
«Bd bowever fit it might have been to put hit
ttaiiative odierwiie« ^No-^I have not come
to that part of ^ story vet ;" aad then be
ri OB witb words and phraees pracoooeived
the purpoaoy and gives you hu lesson as if
ke had leanit it lirom a book^ Then, if my
learned ooadjutor bad wasted his eaoallent
talents ia crose-examiaatioa, what woold have
been the result }«-4ie would have aaid twice
Ibat which be bad said oaoe. Witnesaas like
Hm are oot oveicome by ereet«eiaminatioo,
but by an ezaminalion of their maaaer in gi^
bag tbair evideooe, by tavestigating tbe impn>-
bmlity of tbeir slory^ and bj seeing bow much
«f it must be mei% matter of iavention \ ther^
lore nothing came out ia eroi»«tamtnatioa
cacept tfaia*^aad moat important it is — ^tbait
when pressed ijpon that pan of the subjeel,
Imd wiih aUusioB to a pbnee which the
Attomey-geneful had impeited into his speech
Irom te graatest poet in our laaguage, whether
be bad any <* compunctious visitings,'* be
awote'*-«beUeva it if vou oaa<— that oouaoieice
aloue I^BO fear for bis aalsty-'-ao hope of a
better state ia this world, by reward orpuniahk
ment bat his heart«trickeiMXMMoieaee deae
•«-indnoad him to be quiet Irom the murder of
fimithersoB Wedaesdaynigfat, tiD his owa being
taken quite qfietlyaii liiday; and then on
Sataiday he plumes his winos and goes before
the pii^ council to disburmea his soul, and
■nke atonement for hie offeaoe. I bava heea
much ^in courts where ^nfoimers have been
called oa to disclose what tey knew ef a ma^
ier; aad I renwmber a very wise and able
anaistrale of Middleeex, who filled tbeohair
af that sessions for tweaty-eia yearn, who, vrhea
an infiirmer answered that he biooght the
ftoseoutioa ferward for the love of public jue-
tiee, alwayi said, ^Sir, the momeat youaay
thai, you beoonm ioeredible; and there is ao
bebesiog a word ftam your mouth/' Now,
oau yoa b^eve thie man's siwy? He has
been attacked as by a boa aad a butt dog, pot
oat of tbe chair, treated with mdigaity. He
aeca a maider cmamitted, walks away as
WBBOBoemed as if aothh)g had happened, ifis
eMMcioBce' stidces him, tboagb nis piMa was
ant hurt. Heiasisonthestingeof coaacteiiee
four days, and then he vabuithwa himself.
Oae woahl eupposo that yea had aot hearts,
Ihat 9nm wave not tMnaeious of yanrown foslU
tegt, «r«hft « Mb fMid not Mve
think I have treatsd the case with levi^ ? — if
Ihey have, abaolve me from such an impatatioa.
I never meant to do it, Mea of right nuunds
canaot treat lightly matters of this grave im»
portaace. I cannot hear without shuddering
•^I oannot believe without amaaemeat — ^with*
out i&digaatioa<^without all the foelinge of
abborrenoe that can enter the miad- ■that the
person who has for so away ^ears preshled
with unexampled iadastiy, ability, and ime*
grity in the highest aad most important ooait
of this eeuntry for the decision of questions of
property, was ia one aioment to be a seaselea
corpse ; that the victor of Waterioo, the prid^
and glory of the British name— 4m vriio exalted
to its bluest pitch the reoowa of our natioaal
valoar, and oeoame at the same tisae the
avenger and liberator of Europe, was to have
fallen under the hands of vulgar assassins, aad
to have perished in aa inglorious broil.
Oentiemen, I omit lo name other intended
victims for other reasons. I do not brag of
my private or oeeasioikai acqoaintaaoe with
any body, but I may have a slight acquaittU
ance witn some of diem : take your measure
60m these two individuab aloae, and say that
they are connected with all the wealth and
wisdom and learning and talenta which ware
ta be present at that cabinet dinner, aad I aa
lure Uat the atoutest heart mast reooil with
imr aad melt with oompassioa, at the mare
tneatioit Hi sodi a borriMe butchery. And if
you ean suppose that I have tieaied it ia aay
degtae widi levity, it has been from the inad*>
verteace of the league, «id not the ootrupiioei
of the heart* I ae^r intended it ^ aad if I
have doae it, I entreat you to replace me ia
^ur aMxleraile aad fhvoatable lagaid, to view
It with the kindacas which I aught t» claim as
aa Englishmen.
I proceed to the task of namiaing in what
degree the witness is aapported; and for that
purpcee I beg to briag back jfteur sainda to the
passage I read foem tbe book, aad beg yoa to
see how for this witoess, teHing a tale stigiaa^
tiled vrith appearaaoes of folsehood from tin
be^aniag to the ead, is eucportad so as to
gam your aaliaitted cradit* He is auppoited
ia propositiona of very little importaaoe m tfaia
way by Mary Regeia, nistresB off the bomw ia
Foa-coun^I da oot go through all thetnaames :
— 4bere was aeemat ftom theboaee wbopreeed
nothing, but that riie had ebewn tbe lodgiaga
to somebody in Jaauary; but Mit. Riogam
proved that the fodginga wem taken for iapa
-Hw fomitttve eeat hi, and eometimes cbsua
were tricen ftom another roonu and oace a
table: so Ikr be is conAitnod-^tne «|[^»SBBtieay
JoatphHaie, cottfiimabim tomieKisntiieerfy
ibnilir* I sUl abeseaa admre tbar eonemdiot
6613
Jiir ttigh Treamt.
A. D. 1 82a
[882
bim. NoWy with respect to this Uiere is no
dispute. Joseph Hale supports him in saying,
that during the latter days of the occupation
of that room, heifore the explosion in Cato-
atreety numbers of. persons used to resort
there ; that is the confirmation he has generally
given with respect to that matter. Lord Har-
fowby and his servant confirm the intention of
having this cabinet dinner on Wednesday^ the
S3rd of February; of that there cannot be a
doubt, nor is it part of my case that that was
not intended to oe the day of the murder — it
is unimportant as it relates to the treason ; but
lord Harrowby confirms another witness,
Hiden, who did communicate to his lordship,
in the Park, in the manner afterwards disclosed
to the public, the danger to which he was ex-
posed, and stated the reasons for doing so.
There are three witnesses called (I do not
cavil at the wisdom which presides on this oc*
easion)to prove what would not have been
disputed, namely, that the room in Cato-street
was taken, and that Davidson was seen about
it from time to time, that serves for a parade
to support the witness, it seems to say, you
must oelieve this man — here are our three wit-
nesses who swear they saw these persons at
Ihe room before the explosion, and that they
were carrying things m. But this does not
weigh one feather in the cause, it is utterly
vnimportant, and these are all the confirma-
tions in direct terms. How is there collateral
confirmation ? I put out of the question here
that which affords no confirmation of the wit-
ness, because the witness has stated none of
the fiiets ; I do not mean that you should for-
get Mr. Underwood's man, who sharpened the
sword fi>r Ings, or the pawn-broker from whom
the blunderbuss was redeemed-^no doubt, if
ministers were to be murdered, it uas conve*
aient the persons who did it should be armed,
and therefore, it is not necessary to observe
upon that : that the sword must be ground,
and tliat the blunderbuss must be redeemed,
15 consistent with the plan of murder, without
adding any thing beyond— and it does not
confirm that witness, because he stated no one
of the facts, except that Harrison, like every
otiier cavalry soldier, knew how die barracl^
in Portman-street were situated.
Now, what other confirmation arises from
the evidence of other men who have been
brought forward, as connected with the cause ?
The Attorney-general has most justly said,
^ Although I dwell so much on the evidence of
accomplices,'' applying that to the witness
Adams, and to another of the name of Monu-
ment,''yet there are witnesses whom I shall
call, namely, Hiden, and an Irishman, Dwyer,
trho are not accomplices, and require no con-
firmation ;" Uiat is true ; and if their evidence
eollaterally and independently could be im-
, Illicitly believed, it goes to saprport the facts,
tbiMigb it is not directly ffiveu in confinmition
of the &et# advanced bv the pxiacipal witness ;
Imt trndottbCedly they io aid your b^^of that
wUeh tiie principal tfitoisf in stited.
V0L.;exxiiL
Let us examine Hiden's statement; He saysy
that *' a long time ago, d urine the life of his
late majesty, he met with Wilson, One of the
eonspirators upon this indictment, and that h6
had no acquaintance with any of them but him,*^
and I believe never saw any one of them but
him. He says, ** I was formerly a member of
a shoemaker's club ; I knew Wilson. A few
' days before the 23rd of February, I saw him.
He proposed, if I would be one of a party to
destroy his majesty's ministers," and, most
curiously, he says he used these very words ^ at
a cabinet dinner, — they were waiting for one,
and all things were ready ; they had such things
as I never saw, and ^hich they called hand-
grenades. They depended on me to be one, and
he said, Mr. Ihistlewood would be glad to see
me : — ^they were to be put under the table, and
they who escaped the explosion were to die by
the edge of the sword, or some other weapon : —
they were to light up some fires, which were to
keep the town in coniiision several days, and
then it would become a general thing." That
was his conversation with Wilson :— then he
says a thing which does him great honour, that
he stated to lord Harrowby the danger in which
he was, but he did not state any general revolu*
tion, or any ulterior design. He went first to
lord Castlereagh, who seems to have been aik
object of particular spleen, and then he went
to the most obvious of the cabinet ministers,
and made a communication to him, which
was to have the effect of preventing this plot
taking place. On the 23rd he says he saw
Wilson again, between four and five in the
afternoon; he had never been at the<*place,
he had taken no measures, but he saw Wilson
again on the 23rd, between four and five in
the afternoon, he met him in Manchester-street;
Wilson said *' I was the very man he wanted
to see, there was to be that night a. cabinet
dinner at Grosvenor-square ; I was to go to
the Horse and Groom in Cato-street, or to stop
at the comer till I should be shewn into a
stable close by." It was to be by six, or a
quarter before; he said there would be be-
tween twenty and thirty; this then was the
whole force to murder the ministers, and this
is the force by means of which it is to be im-
puted that they were to effect a revolution in
the country ; this is matter of mere speculation
in the mind of this person, and of him alone^for
no man else concurred in it, or supported it. He
said '' there were to be a party in the Borough^
aiother in Gray's-inn-lane, another in GeeV
court, or the city," that is somewhere at the
further end of Oxford-road, or somewhere be-
yond Temple-bar. He said ** all Gee's-court
were in it, but would not act till the English
began, because they had been deceived so
often. I understood the inhabitants to' be
chiefly Irish.'' This is the conversation which
he represents to have taken place with Wilson»
only not acted or concurred in by others ; uid
ti^ether Wilson was the deceiver or the de*
ceiifedy that was his conversation; but liow
traly itcoald be the intention of a man's mind
8L
883]
1 GEORGE IV.
Tritl qf Arthur
C884
to cany Uiis plan into effect, it is for you to
■ay.
Hiden says, ^ I told him I cannot go with
you now, because I am ordered to carry some
eream to a customer of mine ;*' and supposing
it might put six-pence in the pocket of this
maoy or one sbillins or half a crown, the whole
of the plot vanished before him, and he goes to
buy his cream, and leaves the plot to succeed
or fail as it may, giving himself no further
trouble about it, for he is unconnected and un-
concerned with it, not going again to lord
Harrowby, and saying, " My lord, be on your
guard, the peril I announced is imminent ; I
know it, for I have met the man who commu-
nicated it to me." Not a word of all this, he is
so fearless of danger that he goes to buy his
cream — he vrill not sacrifice a six-pence ; he
knows no such thing is intended as a revolu-
tion, and therefore he pursues his quiet occu-
pation of purchasing cream, and gives bimself
no further trouble about it. This is not the
way a plot to overturn government should be
proved — a talk with another man in the street,
who is too idle to ffive up six-pence ; that is
not the manner in which revolutions are effect-
ed, and states brought into danger. That is
all that is material in this roan*s conversation.
I do not say (and I will not lay myself open to
observation, by seeming to suppress what I
shall be supposed to rear), that this is not
matter to enter into your consideration : but
so far from proving the case or supporting the
witness Adams — ^unless you believe Adams-
it does not weigh a feather in the scale ; and
that you cannot believe him, I hvre laboured
for a long time to shew, for which I ought to
fray your patience ; but it has been in vain, if
have not made some impression on your
minds tending to convince you his evidence is
Dot to be relied on, but that be must be dis-
missed Arom your consideration.
Then we get another witness of the name of
Monument, a person present at the time of the
final explosion in Cato-street. He, it seems,
^mes newly into the affair; he has never
been at any of the consultations ; therefore,
with respect to them, which are the material
points where confirmation b wanted, the wit-
ness Adams is not confirmed in the slightest
degree, 'fhey call the man. Monument, who
was not present at any former meeting, to
state what happened at Cato-street ; and he
declares most positively that he has no recol-
lection or consciousness of having seen so re-
markable a man as Adams there: he does
not remember, nor has he any belief in it; he
tells you something most important to notice
hereafter, but I think he does not say any one
word tending to shew that any thing entered
into the contemplation of the parties beyond
the murder of the ministers at their cabinet
dinner ; and perhaps creating some confusion
afterwards, of which they might take advantage
in the way of a general, scramble, reckless of
fife, so that they got softie share of property.
That is the evidence of Monument; and
I
there the case would be left,- but for the veiy
extraordinary and very incredible testimony (»
Dwyer, given as it is, and under all its cir*
cumstances. This Mr. Dwyer is a very honest
bricklayer, who has worked (according to his
own account, and we cannot contradict him at
present) for one master for thirteen years, who
lives in Gee*s-court, and is supposed to have
some influence there ; he says he was invited to
engage them to rise in insurrection, and he pro-
mised to do it from fear, but at the same time
his conscience told him that it was a bad thing,
and he told the person he was speaking to (I
believe Thistlewood) that it was a very ham
thing for him to inveigle the minds of inno-
cent men. Why, if it was a hard thing to
inveigle the minds of innocent men, the man
whose perceptions of right and wrong went
that extent would see it was of vast importance
to prevent the consequence, and he should
have been one of those who gave information
on the subject, but he does not in any degree
state himself to have given sudi information
till after ^the 23rd of February— on the 2Srd
February —
Lord Chief Justice Abbott. — ^Within an hour.
Mr. Adolpkus. — I thank your lordship for
suggesting it ; — he disclosed it to major James-
within an hour after the communication was-
made to him, namely, on the 33rd of February,
and major James advised bim to go to the Se-
cretary of State. I forget whether he went or
not. If there were no persons behind in this—
if there were no emissaries to give accounts that
would serve certain purposes, and swear to
them afterwards — thia man's evidence would
be of more importance than it is ; but as it is,.
I submit to you, that impeached as bis credit
is by the evidence brought forward with respect
to him ; impeached as it is by all the circum-
stances of incredibility attending him, it does
not deserve belief in support of the proposition,
of a plot to overturn the government.
Let us see what the evidence is as it is taken
down for me. ''I became acquainted vritb
Davidson some time before the 23rd of Feb-
ruary. I had seen him twice ; he introduced
me to Thistlewood about the 9(tx of F;ebruary»
Thistlewood said nothing to me particular —
that he had been in five or six revolutions " (I
do not know what they call revolutions now-a-
days, gentlemen, nor where he found' them)
*' but however he said ' that Ireland was in a
disturbed state.' '^ Now I should have thought
Dwyer with his Gee-court acquaintance must
bave )[nown that as well as himself, '' that he
had a good many of my countrymen. In the
afternoon of the 22nd, I saw Davidson,, who
said he was going on sentry.*'— These com*
municationahad been going on from the 9th
till the 23rd. — ** On the morning of the 23id9
Harrison called on me, and took me to Fox-
court," there, he says, he had a bundle wrap*
ped up in a paper. " We went to a two-pur
oack room, in which there vras nothing but an
old chair. Tbistlewood| Davidson, and a few
J
e85i
fir High Treatdn.
A. O. 1820.
tsso
ttiore came in ; Davidson had a blunderbass, a
|ttir of pistols, and a bayonet in bis side
pocket ; there were one or two others came in,
Bmnt is one of (hem. When Davidson pro-
duced the pistols, he said he had given twelve
shillings for them, and Brui\t said he would go
and buy a pair. Thistlewood spoke to them
all at large, and said some of the hand-grenades
were to be thrown into the horse-barracks :"
there we come to something of a contradiction,
upon which I shall observe by-and-by. ^ This-
tlewood asked me, how many of my country-
men i could muster for half past eight o'clock
that evening, and I said about twenty-six or
twenty-seven. I was to be at the Pomfret-
castle, at half past six, in Wigmore-street, and
I was to take a few of the best of them to the
Foundling, and knock at the PorterVlodge, and
put a pistol to his breast, and to turn round on
the right hand, and there were twenty-five or
twenty-six stand of arms/' Now that is a new
plot which Dwyer imports into the case, and
not one tittle of this has been communicated
to any of the parties on any former occa-
sion. They were to make -a breach, to get can-
non in Gray*8-inn-lane andFinsbury. '' This-
tlewood mentioned the cabinet dinner at lord
tiarrowby's. I saw a bundle taken out of the
•cupboard, it contained gunpowder; a tin mea-
sure was taken out, and it was measured out
in bags by Harrison ; • it was said a dosen
pike-handles were to be. taken toMary-le-bone,
the remainder were to.go some to Finsbury,
and some elsewhere. "
In all this, there is an appearance of riot, and
an intention to do something or other beyond
the murder of ministers ; but I deny that there
is any one disclosure of any intention to carry
the matter further than the assassination and
plunder of the moment— of any intention to
overset the government and effect a revolution,
and there is not a little of mention of a provi-
sional government*
With respect to other circumstances, which
cannet tie or deceive you, namely, the arms and
ammunition found— this, I believe, as far as
jny judgment informs me, is all the confirma-
tion the first witness has^ received. Unimpor-
tant as this confirmation is to the proof of a de-
sign and intention to depose the kin^, let us
see whether in any part Adams's evidence is
supported, and I think you will find it falls to the
ground like the card-house of a baby, directly
the finger of a human being is applied to it; —
there is not a thing that can stand on this tes-
timony, and there is this curious circumstance
attending it, which would alone destroy that
^hich is much better combined than this,
which is, that no two of the witnesses ever saw
one another. Hiden .never saw Adams, never
saw Monument, never saw Dwyer; so with the
others, th^ never saw one another; and which
is most curious and most extraordinary, the
maa of a^ work, Mr. Adams, never states he
saw any of the other three ; they avoided
-each other in order to. support each other ; and
^on are to take it, that they support each other
because no two of them speak to the same facts.
Dwyer says, on the morning while the pikes
were in agitation and the cartridges about,
he was in the room at Fox-court. Adams says
the same thing, and yet they did not see one
another. Adams says, that upon that morning,
and during the same transaction, fiinting the
pistols, I think, preparing the ammunition,
and so on, he was there, and most extraordi-
nary it would be that these two should never
meet. Hiden is never met with or seen, nor
his existence known of by Adams; and no man
ever sees Dwyer, or knows of him, except a
single individual person. Monument is never
seen by either witness : and Monument, like
Wilson, is so cold about the plot, that when
he has a pair of shoes to mend for a customer,
he savs, 1 shall get a shilling by the job, and I
will have nothing to do with the plot, and he
declines the interview on that ground ; and
these are the mighty plotters who support each
other on this formidable conspiracy, and on
whose united credit you are to betieve this
story.
I say, upon this mean and empty plot, so
void of judgment and common sense, so inca-
pable of effecting any danger to the state, so
certain to effect that which was just meditated
— the murder of the party of persons intended,
tliat it is a plot beneath the attention of govern*
ment ; and instead of an indictment for high
treason, a common process to convict them of
murder would have been sufficient. I submit
that it is a plot not worth mentioning — that a
wise government might well have overlooked,
and a strong government have despised, even
if they believed it to the extent they have been
able to state. An act of assassination, which
wonld plunge the whole nation in tears and
misery, is the operation of a single individual,
however incapable of good, however unimpor-
tant in the ranks of society, and nothing can be
done too effectually to guard against such an
operation, by any means that can be devised
or applied ; but in comparison with an act of
high treason, it is, to use the words of a late
inestimable writer, '< the chirping of the grass*
hopper in the field, while the stately ox feeds
on, regardless or unconscious of the noise "«—
so might a wise and strong government, — I do
not mean to impeach either quality in our
government,— so might they have treated this
miserable plot, and not have brought forward
this apparatus, to convict as traitors, a dozen
miserable beggars, irritated by hopeless misery,
and impatient through extreme poverty. Such
are the elements upon which artful wickedness
can work ; and such are the victims which re-
solute villainy can expect to sacrifice. But, I
beseech you to remember, that if you find these
men guilty on the evidence of Adams, there is
a premium for perjury, aod an end of all se-
curity.
But referring to Adams, I have explained in
what points I consider him to have been con-
firmea and supported Now, let us see in what
he is inaterialiy contradicted, and when I say
8S7]
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial ofAftkur ThuUnoaod
[888
materially coDtfadicted, do not let me be taken
to oTecstate the matter. Witnesses have been
called to^proye, from small circnrastancesv
that this man must be telling the truth ; if,
from any of these small circumstances^ yon
conclude he is telling the truth, then I submit
with confidence, that the value of one con-
tradiction by his associated witnesses, sur«
passes ten thousand such confirmations. When
1 say associated witnesses, I do not mean as-
sociated in the crime, but in the cause ; I say
that the evidence of all these to a hundred
points, does not weigh so much as their con*
tradiction as to one.
Now he describes that two or three meetings
a day, of considerable numbers — the greatest
fifteen, and in many instances eight, nine, or
ten — took place in the lodgings ; is he coo-
iirmed in that? the buildings in town will
tell you how frail the buildings are in Fox-
court, but the landlady knows and hears
Slothing of these frequent, meetings except one
«n a Sunday. There are meetings to which I beg
your attention, at one of which all was tumult
and confiision ; at another men flew at him, one
like a bull-dog and the other like a lion, yet
the landlady and the apprentice were in a
«tate of unconsciousness of such tumult and
confusion. The landlady and her niece, one
1>eing at home attending to the concerns of
her family, and the other occasionally out on
business, so that she knew less of the matter ;
iHit the landlady who was almost always at
liome, and the apprentice were called, not one
of them giving the least countenance to these
weetings, at which alone, if you believe Adams,
the plot was disclosed, and if you do not be-
lieve him, the plot flies into the air with the
mere eflusion of your disbelief.
I beg your attention particularly to his state-
snent as to Cato-street, and I hope it exists in
your memory. At Cato-street he sUtes there
were twenty persons exactly, and divides them
by eighteen and two : Monument says with
«qual positiveness, that there were twenty-
live, and he says Thistlewood being called
upon to enumerate the strength and dispose of
it, distinctly stated, we are twenty-one here,
and tliose below four. A witness who pro-
tends to be confirmed, should be confirmea in
all his circumstances : now in these two he is
father contradicted than confirmed. But he
«ays, at Cato-street there was one candle only,
mnd it is important to say so. Now here are
the two officers, and one of them, Ellis, de«
dares he saw eight candles all alight, and that
they were put out at the time the pistol flashed :
this is a point of contradiction, upon which
there cannot be a mistake ; because if there
'Were but one or two, that is a fact easy to be
ascertained; if the witness had said theje
were foor or five candles, or more or less, I
should not have addressed you upon that part
•of the testimony as being contradicted, but I
do say that here it is materially, efiectually,
grossly contradicted.
Bat we advance to another. oontradicttoD,
much higher ; he s«rs (wmA he makes a speech
for him), that the first officer who mane bis
^^earance, that is, Buthven, said, ** Here is
a pretty nest of you I Gentlemen (for he used
Uiat expression I remember very well), gentle*
men, we have a warrant affainst you, and so
surrender your arms." What do Ellis and
Ruthven say, was their expression when they
came into the room ? — Did he sayj here is a
pretty nest of you ? no, no such expression ;
that, like all the rest of the garnish and orna-
ment of this story, is a pleasant fiction of the
witness Adams. — Did he say, gentlemen, we
have a warrant against you, therefore sur-
render your arms ? no, the words which both
the officers stated, and they agree in them
exactly, are these, — ^*<We are officers, seise
their arms!" Now, the distinction I take
is this, with respect to this contradictioo;
he would know in prison, that the officers had
said something, and he would invent thai
which would do nu>st service to the cause;
therefore he invents the circumstance of their
declaring they had a warrant — ; therefore he
invents the expression, here is a pretty nest of
you, therefore he invents that — ^which both the
officers knew to be false, and contradict it
accordingly. If the officers had said, we used
a great number of expressions, we said there
is a pretty nest of you, and so on, and he only
repeated part of the words, it would not have
been an impeachment of his testimony ; but if
a man adds the whole matter, the whole
pungent matter, you may be sure it is a &bri-
cation ; and if tftie witness who stands before
you, lays his hand upon the Gospel, and ia-
vokes God to help him as he speaks the truth,
does not respect the Gospel or God, and does
not speak to the truth, it is impossible yov
should give him credit in any degree, much
more that yon should on his testimony deprive
such a number of your fellow-creatures of
their lives.
But besides beinr contradicted by others, he
contradicts himself. Always bear in mud,
gentlemen, that he has been in prison. Mod
therefore he cannot have assisted nis memory,
however he may have exercised his invention :
He stated that upon two occasions of long
continued meetings in Fox-court, Strange was
present — Strange is put to the bar, and the
witness is asked does he know him, and he
says no. He is put to the bar with two othen^
with whom he is not acquainted; this man,
who was twice with him in Fox-court, in the
day time, he does not know I If he had re*
membered ten out of the eleven, there would
be no danger in saying this man was Stmnges
but being one in three, he could not inveok
This is a trying, a strong, circumstance. If he
has deposed the truth as to the meetings, he
must have known Strange as trell as he knew
the others ; but he does not know Strange, and
unless some better reason cfm be given for
that than I can devise, a witness, whoee whcrie
evidence is composed of sudi absurd impco^
babilities, and jrhocomm tq diadose hie ovf
S80l fi^ ^*g^ TmuQiu
want of MTtMily y^nuiot h% believed by y<m is
any particiiUr.
I have stated to yoii, and I hx9^ made it my
tlieme all through this address, that Adams
has not been confirmed to the extent he might
iiave been, with respect to that whidi is alone
material for you to inquire into, namely, the
treasonable combination of these parties. I
■have looked, according to my iostnictions, to
the list of witnesses for tlie Crown, I find the
iiame of one Edwards, living at 166, Fleet-
street, lately abiding in Banela{^h-place, not a
prisoner— not taken op upon this charge— not
tainted as an accomplice by government — no
treason that we have known of against him— a
man cognizant of all the fiicts — a man present
at all the conversations — a man who pointed
«at the New-Times news paper, and saw and
knew and guided every thing, and yet that
man is not called — the spy is not called to
support the informer, because the contrivance
would have been made evident by his cross-
examination, and therefore that man, like
anodMr spy, is kept back from examination ;
because one spy, who in another case, where
Thietlewood was a party, and had been pie-
Tioualy examined, was, by the eloquence and
abili^ of oouosd, and by his own infamy^
blown out of oonrt f when such a man as
that, who could have told you all the facts,
who made tiie fnsei himself who vras
80 adave, so ministerial in every part of
the transactioDs, is made to abstain from
givinf^the support of his testimony to these
plots, said to have been agitated, matured,
and contrived in his presence, what are we to
say, but that the plot has no foundation in
Kiility? — and if all the dramstances could
be inveatigaled, it vrould prow that the tce»-
sonable past is idtogether the brewing of a
spy and an informer, to implicate in a charge
of Udi treason, a man who had gone nr
enoa{^ toward losing his own life, b«Et not to
tiie length of that greatest of crimes. The
manifest aim and contrivance had been to
fiomeBt, and afterwards disclose to public
view, a secret conspiracy, to vi^iich they had
aAerwaids added fictxtions circumstances
amounting to high treason, for purposes to
which {^eroMenl, if rightly constituted,
would not l«id itself but whscfa bad men are
wicked enough to mature and to perfect, by
apoealing to the fears fhey have excited,
ana giving the best appearance they can to
theb fiilse information.
The Attorney-general addressed himself to
3f0tt in this vray; what is to be said in answer
to this case? Is it to be said, that because the
plot which viill be described to you is an im^
probable one as to its success, therefore, you
are to believe such a plot did not exist ? Will
rm dnbelieve it cm thnt groundl Gentlemen,
think very humbly of myself, and I should
thiidc that the most inexperienced advocate at
*The witness Caslle^ on the trial of James
W«t|aii4h0 JBIdo^in the pwwiwg VfdwBji.
A« D. isao.
t«00
te bar would not have the rashnaas to advance
such an argument. It is not because it is im-
probable that the plot is to be disbelieved ; if
so, history would be at an end. Need I illua« -
trate this statement, bf adverting to a asost
familiar instance, the earl of Essex's * plot, in
the reign of queen Elizabeth, a nobleman of
his rank, in a moment of moody displeasure
against his gracious sovereign, whose power
and wisdom he well knew, and to whom he
had been infinitely obliged, suddenly and furi-
ously rushed into the streets of London, and
excited the citizens to follow him and take the
state by storm ; the madness that inspired him,
if it vras stated as a reason for not believing it,
would blot from history one of its indisputable
authentic pages. The earl entertained vain
expectations ; he put them in action by a very
foolish course of proceeding, and he met the
fate which such circumstances always must
lead to. He was tried and executed for high
treason I I do not disbelieve his plot; nor
should I disbelieve the plot stated to day, if it
was disclosed on certain testimony, and had
been so communicated as to encounge belief
in the foets. It would be in vain to reason
against the facts, beeanse ihey are improbable ;
if we admit them as facts, all reasoning aboat
their probability is at an end, and we can only
laiaent that men should form bad hopes upon
such miserable foundations. I do not ask Toa
to disbelieve this plot because it is improbable,
but I ask you to disbelieve the witness because
he has sworn to an improbable plot, unsup*
ported by facts, and himself not corroborated
oy witnesses who might have been adduced.
It is therefore that I bring to the test the pos-
sibility of this plot, and think I do not go too
for when I say it is impossible you shonld be*
lieve it. Eadi nan, and every indtvidnal foels
for himself the particular emotionf of foar and
anger, vrhkh particular circumstances exdte.
I am not imputing to any man a base and in-
manly fear— but when the table was screwed
vrith pikes and fife-arms, and a thousand ball-
cartridges, as the word escaped from persons
near me, so it might have come to you, how
should I lUm one of these pikes thrust at me ;
but who is there among us, inept and fooMi
enough to believe, that such an arsenal, backed
by such a park of artillerv, without a single
pair of horses which wooM grace a hackney-
coach to move it, could have been used for tho
purpose charged in the indictment? Snch
weapons and contrivances are the natural ad-
juncts of men who mean to begin in murder
and end in phinder; but it is absurd to suppose
Iheyoould contribute to the down6dl of the
state uid the subirenion of the empire. On4
of the party, when be vras taken, had two dosea
cartridges upon him: now, divide 1,2(K> by
34^ and I think you have arms finr exactly fif^
men. These are the means to overturn tha
state ; but where are the fifty men, and where
are the guns for these fMty mem ! — two or three
■■ ■ ■ -» I II I ■ II....*
• Fi* 1 How. StftU Trials^ p. 1139.
son
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial ^ArAur Tki$tknood
[893
vnetched swords, and two or thrae miserable
BMuketSy less than would be fit to protect a
band of street robbers. In times when geotle-
men carried swords and pistols with them, they
would not have enabled a gang of highwaymen
to execute one night*s adventure.
' This is the test of improbability and of im*
possibility, to which I bring the evidence of
tiie wretched witness, on whom this whole case
rests ; and when I come to state my defence,
see whether that does not, in every particular,
and in every part of it, range itself under the
evidence, and prove most distinctly what
I have stated to you. With respect to a great
part of this ammunition, let it not be forgotten,
that the night before the transaction at Cato-
ftreet it was taken away; and that a very
short time indeed before the officers came to
search the box which contained it, it was, by
some ingenious person, not friendly to the
prisoners, placed in Tidd's lodgings, as the
means of conviction and the source of con*
demnation. There is no doubt these unhappy
men have been most malignantly tampered
Mvith ; they were first exasperated to a design
of limited evil, it was afterwards aggravated
so as to favour the plans of those who wished
to give it the character of high treason, and
then they were betrayed.
You have been told, that the name of This*
tlewood cannot be unknown to you. You
know perfectly well, that the unhappy man at
the bar was only three years ago a supposed
culprit in the same degree as now, and vras
tried and acquitted ; he afterwards sufiered an
imprisonment; and only in June last was li-
berated from Horsham gaol, where he had
been confined for sending a challenge to lord
Sidmottth, one of bis majesty's ministers, the
Secretary of State for the Home Department.
This man, coming with a rancorous mind and
a bad temper out ot^ prison, to which he had
been sent on the prosecution of that noble
yiscount, is the veiy element which an artful
man would work upon, in suggesting a plan
for murdering his majesty's ministers. Im-
mediately after, on the 16th of August, comes
the fatal narrative of that transaction at Man-
chester, to which I do not mean to give a
name ; but you all know, who have read or
conTersed on the subject, how much that
transaction i^tated every mind, and how free
and strong were the opinions which many men
expressed upon it: here came the means by
which to bring together every feeling and
motive of a dissatisfied* person to point out
(and it was done in many dieap papers) the
ministers as the cause of all the evil, and as
men placed above the law, and therefore de-
voted to vindictive punishment, without re-
coutie to the law ; and can we suppose this
was all written and said in vain, that no minds
would be found weak enough to believe in it,
no. tempers anfficiently inflammable to act
upon it? This is the real origin of the trans-
action ; here you have the proposition of the
plot .exactly 9M detsaled-rt rash set .of men
who areicaiUed radicals, and who tbomrfat good
would result from it, meditated to eroct that
horrible design (which was less extensively
attempted in the assassination of Mr. PercivaQi
to massacre all the ministers. Now, Gentle-
men, take this with yon ; does it or does it
not agree with every thing that you have
heard? — ^here is Mr. Thistlewood inflamed
with personal anger against one of his ma-
jesty's ministers, but most probably against
more ; — ^here are othen swayed br &e hopes
of undefined good, if they could get rid of
^ese persons, and imbued with an qpinion,
that in their instance, assassination is only an
irregular act of national justice : I say, these
men so instigated, were likely to be allured
by a proposal to kill as many of the ministers
as th^ could at one blow: — first, they hope
for a cabinet dinner ~ that does not take place,
then do they devise means for an insurrectioa !
no, nothing like it — but to separate themselves
into small divisions, and muraer each minister
at his private house : then comes the conve-
nient and never to be forgotten announce-
ment in the New Times, placed there to be-
trav them, and to that they addict themselves,
and by that they are to be sacrificed. — logs is
represented to be the foremost man, in the
project of murder ; but let us see whether to
the very last the revenge of the Manchester
transaction was not chiefly, if not alone, in the
minds of those people ? you will see, that by
a speech imputed to' Ings, he said at one of
the meetings, ^I shall go forward into the
room, and say. Well, my lords,<we have, men
as good as the Manchester Yeomanry ; enter
citizens and do your duty;" in all this i^
there any declaration that the king has reigne4
long enough, we are tired of his fomily f is
there the least talk of an attack on Caritcm-
house, or of besetting his majesty, in his walks
or rides, in going to parliament, -or in coming
from it? — ^no not a word of it — ^no talk en
making away with any one of the royal family,
from the eldest to the youngest, from the
highest to the lowest — no, but the propositioii
is, that the matter was to begin with the mas-
sacre of ministers, whom they hated, and
whom, instigated by the vilest *of men, they
thought they had a right to hate. Having, e£-
fectMi that which they considered an important
public service, by that massacre, it became
necessary to consider, what they should do
next; except the private enrichment that
miffht follow from the conflagration of houses,
^na the plunder, there is nothing in the plot
to which the least probability can be ascribed.
When I sp4»ak of the baming of houses to
effect robberies, some of you can perhaps re-
member when that plan was carried to a oon«
siderable extent; it was in the days of my
youth, when a timber yard in Long«>lane, was
burnt, for the. sake of plundering a pawn-
broker's close by ; the same means might pie-
sent themselves to those who are clamorous
about their poverty, who begin by saying the
shopkeepers, of Ijoodc^ Jure fil arislociats^iaad
803]
fwt High Tr€a$on\
A. D. 18S0*
[894
tm lAl workSng under one system of govern*
nenty and there is not a man worth ten
pounds, who is of any service to the state ;
mnd that they themselves are so poor, that in
three days crime must be perpetrated, or they
must be starved. These are the men upon
whom, from these circumstances, some spy,
jetting on some informer, collects facts and
declarations out of which he may fabricate the
•tory brought before you to-day.
I shall not take up your time by adverting
to the contradiction or the explanation afford-
ed by the witnesses I was instructed to exa-
mine. The credit of Dwyer is in your hands ;
you have heard what a man whom £ called
has said about him. My clients are too poor
to get together the necessary witnesses — they
are too poor to support their wives and chil-
. dren while they are in prison; they come
tiierefore naked amidst all tliese perils. If
you betieve Dwyer, I am far from thinking he
makes out a conclusive case ; but I think, con«
sidering the improbability of his story, and
the nature of his character, it is for you to re-
ject his evidence, more particularly from his
never being congregatedwith any persons who
have given evidence.
One person has been tendered to me as a
witness whom you inquired after, and I might
examine. I have already had to advert to
what there is of technicality in our profession,
and if there is one mle more inviolable than
another, it is this, that we ne? er do call or ex-
amine a witness, who has not previously dis-
dosed what he can state ; because if we were
to do so, no man knows to what purpose he
might be calling witnesses — no man knows to
what effect they might be examined. I do
not fear calling the witness, but anoint of
honest prudence, by which I am obliged to
square and govern myself, makes me observe
those rules, from which I could not depart
without incurring more censure than any man
could wish.
I believe I have gone through &11 that is ne-
cessary to be said on the present occasion;
perhaps I have taken up an unwarrantable por-
tion of your time. I feel in my own breast
much reason to lament that I cannot have done
justice to the subject : I am not guilty of a vain
expression of mock modesty, nor do I pretend
« diffidence which I do not feel ; but when I
observe to you, that one of the best scholars
and lawyers at the bar, a man of eminent rank
and in great practice, thought it necessary to
declare on a former occasion, that he had spent
a whole month in anxious reading, to qualify
himself for the discussion of one day, you will
hardly think I am guilty of any direliction of
proper firmness whSi I say, I fear and tremble
^t what I have done, in my endeavours to save
tlie life of this unfortunate man and his asso«
oiates. I have had but a few hours to consider
^e case at all ; and it was only after four o'clock
tfiis moming that I could qualify myself to
come before you^ imperfectipr as I 'have done
to*day. • But on this occasion^ where I feel
doubt and tmxiety, and tremulous apprehen-
sion, I throw myself on you, — the orotector»
of the public, the shield of the accused,-«if you
can have such implicit confidence in the wit-
nesses on the part of the Crown, as to give
credit to all they have said, pronounce vour
judgment; as it becomes me, I shall submit
with perfect and unrepining acquiescence.
But if, from the observations I have made, or
those, which your own minds have supplied,
you doubt the evidence, then, fearless of the
consequences, and in the proud disdiarge of
your own dignified duties, act according to
your conscience, and acquit your souls be»
tween God and your country, by declaring
that the man at the bar is not guilty— -or to
use a better phrase, that the charge is not
proved to your satisfection.
I am aware that with all mv labour, I must
have left many things imperfect through my
own feebleness ; I therefore betake myself to
the refuge of the feeble, to pn^er ; and I pray
the God of our ancestors, the God '^ by wnom
kings reign, and princes decree judgment,**. to
amplify your minds, and to tou(£ your hearts,
to enable you to arrive at that decision which
justice requires; always remembering, that
justice is most lovely and most venerable,
when tempered with mercy. I know that if
the impression of the present case call for. the
exercise of the^more stern and manly qualities,
you will do what justice requires ; but if topics
of compassion, of doubt, and- of hesitation,
suggest themselves, let the prisoner have the
benefit of them ; — and whether the prisoner's
life shall be lengthened to the term originally
assigned by Providence, or terminated on any
odier charge with the expiration of the coming
week, he will-have to bless you, and posterity
also will bless you, for they will feel that they
may rely with security on the justice . of . a
British jury.
Lord Chief Jtatke ^IMoff.— Arthur Thistle-
wood, if you wish to offer any thing from your-
self to the gentlemen of the jury, in addition
to what has been addressed to them by your
learned counsel, you are at liberty to do so,
and this is the proper time.
Thiitlewood, — I should wish two witnesses
to be examined who are now in Court, against
the testimony of Dwyer, a man of the name of
Edmond Ward, to swear he had extorted money
from him.
Lord Chief Justice Abbott. — You must not
state that; the time for giving evidence is
passed ; the evidence was gone through last
night; but at the request of your learned
counsel the Court was adjourned till to-day,
it would be breaking through all the rules of
proceeding to allow any such evidence now to
be given ; if you wish to address any observA-
tions to the jury now is your time. /
- TMttlewood. — I am. quite satisfied, my lord*
REPLY.
• Mr. SoUcUoF G<iiefni.-rGeDtlemen of tha
8961
I 6EOB6B lY.
Trial ^AHhur TUdhnbod
r&w
j«fy ;^Ia riting to address yo« is ivppdct of
tint pTOMcutioiiy I hftYe t moat painM aod
MUdons task to perfonn. At the Miraot of
the pabliCy I am bound to discbarge the duty
which I owe to the country to the utmost of
my ability and power, and I feel anxioosy
therefore, that nothing on my part should be
omitted that may be necessary for the purpose
of presenting this case in its true colours before
you. On the other hand, however, I feel
equally soKcitous that in what I am about to
state I may not misrepresent a single fact, or
press a single argument against the prisoner
mrther than the justice of the case may abso*
lately require. And I beg leave to join with
my learned friend who has just addressed you,
in praying that you will dismiss from your
minds all prejudices and previous impressions
ttofavouraole to the prisoner; — ^that you will
fbrget, as far as it is possible, all that you may
have heard upon the subject of this proseen-
tkm, every thing that is not established by
proof,«Huid that you will confine your atten-
tion solely and undividedly to the evidence
which you have heard from the witnesses who
have been sworn in the oanse. But I fod that
in this request I am urging that which is un«
necessary and superfluous ; I am addressing an
English jury, sworn to adosinister justice im«
partially between the public and the prisoner;
and I ought therefore to apologise for inti-
mating a doubt that, in the discharge of so
important a.duty, you can suffer your attention
to be diferted for a single moment from that
evidence by which the fate of tilie prisoner
must alone be determined,
The situation in which the prisoner now
stands affords an admirable illustration of the
excellence of that system of laws under which
we have the happiness to live ; a striking proof
of their being built upon the firmest principles
of justice and freedom. It is admitted that he
had projected the assassination of all the prin-
cipal ministers of the Crown. It not only is
proved in evidence, but it is distinctly admitted
Dy the counsel for the prisoner, that such was
the intention which he had hiffboured in his
mind, and which he had actually prepared to
carry into execution ; you have it proved, that
by the prisoner's own hand, that unfortunate
man whose name has been mentioned in the
course of these proceedings, met his .death.
Yet while that passion and prejudice which
these circumstances were calculated to excite
in the public mind existed in its first violence,
he was not, and could not be put upon his trial
for the offence with which he is charged : he
was entitled to such an interval as miffht afford
an opportunity for that feeling to subside, so
far as it was capable of subsiding. He was
fhrther entitled, before he could be put upon
his trial, to that which is never allowed in any
other criminal charge affecting a man's life, to
have ddivered to him aU the partienlan of the
accusation which he wa« to be called upon to
answer, not yesterday or the day before, but
iMtttythreewedkf I beHew fiom die pment
time, in order timt, consulting widi his eounset,
he might have full opportunity to avail himself
of any objections in point of law, wftich ho
might have to urge s^nst the sufficiency of
the charge. In addition to this, he has been
allowed that important privilege which is eoiK
ferred only upon persons under the heavy
accusation preferrea avainst the prisoner,--^
he has had a list of all toe jurors who could by
possibility be called to sit upon thb trial. He
has had an opportunity of rejecting ariiitrarily
to the number of thirty-five, any who might be-
called to constitute the jury in whkh he is s0>
much interested ; and it may therefore be con*
sidered that you, who are now to decide upon
his fate, are a jury of his own selecting. Xtt
addition to all this, and which you wUI find
most material in the progress of this inquiry,,
he has had a list of every witness who could be
called on the part of the Crown. That list haa
been furnished to him, in order that he might
have an opportunity of inquiring into the
previous character, the previous histoiy and
conduct of every witness who might be called
against him, in order that he might have an
op]K>rtunitv of being prepared wirii evideneo
to impeach the chvacter of sudi av woiM
admit of impeachment. Snchy too^ gentlemen,
is the benevolence of the £ngUsh law, diat he
has been allowed to apply to the Court, te
appoint such counsel as he might think proper
to select, for conducting his defence* It is
therefore too much to say, as has been urged
by the counsel for the prisoner, that a person
standing in his situation has to combat with
peculiar disadvantages and difficulties^ sineein
no other situation would he as a prisoner have
experienced advantages or benefits comparablo
to those afforded on this occasion, in order to
enable him, according to the foots of the cue,
to prepare for his defence, against that moet
senous and solemn charge now prefisiTed
against him, — a chaige of conspiring to over-
turn that constitution and that system of
government, under which he is entitled to such
inestimable privileges ; and that, with a view
of establishing some other form of government,
in which the establishment of advantages of n
similar character and description could never
reasonably be expected.
This is the charge preferred against the pri-
soner at the bar; and when I mention the
grave and serious character of the accusation,
I merely repeat the language of my teamed
friend, and with the same view, namely, to
call upon you to be careful that vou do not, on
light and general evidence, find the prisoner
guilty of so grievous a crime; that you will
bestow upon this inquiry that anxious and
careful attenti<m which its importance de-
mands ; and that you wUl not deliver a von
diet of guilty against him, unless you are satit'
fied of nis guilt on the dearest evidence* At
the same time, however, if that is the imprei*
siott which shall ultimately be made on yoor
ttindf by the evidence, then, fhariast of eDB«
se^nenctSy looking Qt^hir tp li|« i%^C kM^
W9}
JfSff
TVvtitps.
A. a 1S90.
[606
#9r t» A>4lrft»«iithflitf hiitfitiMl <riibout feyawTt
^goUHsgir yw Auljr 0 your cowo^tj ao 4he
j^duAAt wbicb i^QU tiifdl proacmAca*
WiUi M^pect 10 wJbtat has l)een said upon the
Jaw 4>f (he^objec^ ittcasoot I think be n^cestaiy
lor me ^ •taowble yoiti jvrUh any obierF«tioof .
Xb« iBhwve preierjad j^gainat uie prkooer^t
4}ie tor ta0 nothing in it 4hat is technical
--^iMM^iiM that M 4iffioHltcif afqpcabenaiQB. It
b in its AaraAlw and 4^eaoiu»tu)ii the plasaest
4batfla» poiisibLy be coneoivecL Heis «bairged
fviih bajRuig oanspirad fee •oaaKarn ibe goiarv-
anaotfof itba^eopnUyj and svith bamng amod^g
lathar laeans andeavomed la aooompUsh that
«l^apt by ftfaa tapaagintlinn af bis .m^lesly^s
jDiniitan. SI yon find tba^ be is tguilty of
Itfyrit^iso oQp^ved — ^i^ you SM that iba has
A«an iOODoamad m takiag xaaasjoras lor the
lattajnmant of 4bat and, tbeo in point of law
Jiieiis,gvilty'Of the ^moa which is io^puted V>
Jbimivpen Am raaard ; and ^b^rafoia^ aa^ri^g
Milui^g moot upon the )awj.bat4irecti4igjFour
attention .siopiy 4a -tba bc^s, yau «xe Appnaad
^ the .substance of tba.cbaiga, and it wiUiie
tof {Fan 4p ac^ wbatber it is made out to your
«ati&w>tioii in the evidence which <bss ibaan
.^fiaiad iu tsx^ppoit .of the acousation.
Thane ai^e some fitcts admitted on ihe other
JUa, af s> anost stoking Mid as;tiaoiidinanr
^hawM^ar, It is admitted >thaft the .filot «vhi<&
i hava atalbed aaas fonpad Jaut the assassination
itf Jus «Byias^iS ministaxsy not ior 4ha >tywa»-
ainatinm of itwo ar three indsvidnals among
^ham, lagwnat avbom the pcisoaar at 4be bar
AighttbeiSNpposed to entertain aoma panonal
^maitytbutttbeprqieot waa, at^na Jbin>^'to4a«
4tnif .all the «oonfidential aanants 'Of ithe jgo-
sasnmant. ^Qms has bean adauttad in tha
most uaaquiy(¥>aUanguage,ia tbata>adastand
watm 'dimfkci^mt^ by the loounaal ior the
iviaanar. 'She objeot whiob the parities rto
ftfMS|^iiyfio^}hadMi'aia^j«FaiyAs westata>and
hmm praaed in lavidauQe ^^ 4he .pa«t of the
4Mvwacution, 4o oaerium tba KMrammant of the
Mamtryj land ^be^ecttihat.ja Jnggaatadand
aqppoMd 'On iba lOtber aid^ -but wAich is jKit
altentttod .to -be proved^ is, ttbat this plan wpa
Hammi rmavaly xvitb ^ view of |»lu9dar, and ,
^ the puiip«aa ofoiaatiag aou&Miioii, .of .whiob ,
fi^Bdar alana waa la be the lobjaot* Iiiemam- '
ic, ^hanwvag that n^ ikamed (xjandt te'
fiounaalifiwr the pmmar^ who jiowi^its near m^ ■
i&4ha'i:ousBe m hia addrasstto you ^aateidagb'
aMadlbafctbe aibaWafiihisacimmal^Mgn^iaaa
Mi qf(p!oiitical )matia)as:aad political waws.^ If
tbis aUtaaoskt'lo ^■nfleiuofte>kis moifisivSi minirt
taas^did 4heu;aiise<ont .of ipolitiaal imalivas Mid
political views, what ground is there iinr 'that
mai&l^vaaulation of *Uia«aDtls»ianvu4H>fias
imn^fftinp ihat>tlia.al|jw!t4if ita«ias404waajte
wiafaiiou, 4iotamb m viow^to^iauoliilionaffy mo-
jaals, but mWy far iba pucpaaa of |)luQdarl
Am ^^mn <p|f laamed iriaod ris speaking .of
ibe>v4si0nasy project attiibutad lo the piisoner
al.tha bar,; wbaa iba talks ^ its aatrvtmifaioa
n|bw iamolniWe. i^^mmail itaiparta iud
wkU aUaag avideaca you ought ta raqniia ba-
fysft you can ^ring yaur minds to t>eliaFe i^ I
ask aritb confidence wbather Iba suggestion
which be hi^ made a9 tp the ob^t which these
pai<ie| had in view in the assasainatiou of his
mj^esiy's ministeiay namalyy that it was solely
with a yiaw to oonfusion and plunder— whe-
ther, I say, that is not in a tenfold degree
more improbable^ mom absurd, more extravar
,gan^ 4han (that whiob I have stated as the
motiaey and which <«« have proved by ^
aumesoai witnesses called on Aba pact of ihe
prosaontiaa?
{•shall nowibeg. leave to direct jour attention
to the evidanoa. I will not wander out of it to
make a single cfcaervatiau that it does aat
furly •warrant, uay« aeqoire from thaoounsel
ibr ^heuiosaoution. My learned fidend who has
just addressed yott,atate8 that this ease, »a &r
9M .the treason is oonoecnedf rests solely upon
the testimony of Adams : I beg leave entirely
to dissent from this statement of my learned
Inend' J trust I shall satisfy you when I
coma 40 direct your attention more particularly
to Ihaendence^ .that this is a mare gratuitous
and unsupported assertion on tba part of my
learned fnand. At present, theretoie, I state
that it does not depend by any means upon
the endenoe of Adams alone ; on the contrary,
them is in this causa, even if you were to blot
itbe evidence of Adams from your notes, sufi-'
gieat avidenoe from the uncontioverted facta
.proved by ^witnesses, sot imtpeaohed or im*
.paachabla, 4o justify and je<)uire you to ooma
.to the aanolusion timt the pnsoner is guy ty af
.the fiffianoe with which be is charged.
' jBut m fio much has been said upon the
•taatimeny -of Adams, give me leave for a nM>-
manttto call your attention to the situation in
ukhicbihetatands, and<to those rules and prin>
mples not.meael|r «f Um^ btttiof common ^enae
nnd laasan, is^ob ought ito b^ ^used in ithe
aatiaiata af ttha esadit •due 4o his testivmpy.
Wbaa a.-paraopioemes ficnwaidin'tbeiaitualion
Af an afloomplica» iar 4be purpose of giving
^mdanoaa^iiusilaa.asaoaiMtei^ it is admitted
that his testimony 'anght to te i^eoaived. Jf
ftha aaidanee Qf«tpei«m<in dibisaituation were
ip be aUiseiaaejactad, «c» if it wave>to<be dia-
aepMrdad by Juriesiin the pnoticalieKafciaB of
■tbair 4uty^ aba coaaequanoas would hie moat
iajwions to te intaaests and safety of aooiaty*
a^r wihat is ithe tpHneipal defeaoe against dark
and dangerous conspiracies of tbii nature ?-*-
Xhe jaamnsyaihich men entertain of their aa*
aoaiatas, Mui the dsead they fcel .of being 'be-
iaayed V 'them. But onoe establish as a
fMiiuiiplf <ihat the eiridenae of an aaeomplioe is
|a>he Amigfwda4» and you lose the atroogast
and Aioat affactiml ebeok against the enter-
pnnss.uf ndelMd and .desperate mea. They
will cae^ion their idaaigna asithout fear and
arilboot iiMtmint, iwhan thay know that they
aae sacuae against the consequences of tba
oowaidioe or tieacfaary of their associates in
guilt. It would be impoasible, therefore, vrith*
out las^UngaothemcKtdangeronaoonaeqMences,
3M
S99]
1 GEORG£ IV.
Triti of Arthur ThMtmood
{0Ot>
to exclude the testimony of a penon in this
situation : but when a witness comes before a
jury who are to decide upon his evidence,
whether he be an accomplice or stand in a
less unfavourable light, you are still to consider
from all the circumstances in the case what
degree of credit is due to his testimony : For
I know of no rule of law that applies to an
accomplice that does not apply to eveiy other
witness who eomee into a court of justice.
That you will and ought to examine his evi-
dence with more care and jealousy I am ready
to admit. But still the question comes at last
to this : What is the degree of credit to which,
under all circumstances, he appears to be en-
titled ? Let us then consider for a moment,
and see what are the tests by which the evi-
dence of a person standing in this situation is
to be tried'. It is of course most material to
inquire into his previous character. If a man
whose former \\h has been correct, lapses in a
single instance into crime, and afterwards re-
penting of his conduct, or aliihrmed at the
danger to which he has brought himself, be-
comes a witness for the Grown — ^his previous
character is a most important subject of con-
sideration and inquiry. — If you find that to
have been base and infamous, you will of
course add that circumstance as an ingredient
against him, and will be disposed to place less
reliance on his testimony. Again, you will
ask yourselves what interest the witness has in
the story which he is telling. I can under-
stand that if an accomplice in coming into a
court of justice is trying to redeem himself by
laying the whole weight of criminality on
others, that his evidence in this respect should
be listened to with great suspicion and caution:
but when you find the effect of his evidence is
to criminate himself as much as his associates,
YOU will ask what motive he can have to en-
hance the crime, and to alter its character ; and
thus to add to his other offences the deep and
infamous sin of perjury. Applying this test to
the evidence of Adams, I ask what motive can
be assigned that should induce him to give a
false account of this transaction.
There is another test to which I also request
your attention, because it is of infinite impor-
tance in this cause. If he is telling a story in
which he knows he may be contradicted — ^if he
states that, which if untrue may be proved to
be fake by witnesses in the power of the
prisoner, you will be disposed to place the
more reliance upon his testimony, particularly
if those witnesses who might be caUed are not
called to contradict him. Lastly, you will in-
quire to what extent and in what particulars
his evidence is confirmed by testimony, fh>m
gurie and unsuspected sources. And here I
eg leave to observe that I agree in the doc-
trine laid down by the counsel for the prisoner,
that confirmation in light, trivial and collateral
circumstances, may not materially suppott the
general testimony of the witness; but if you
shall find that confirmation extending itself
throughout the whole of his narrative---if you
shall find the witness cpnfirmed wherever, from
the nature of the case, it is possible he could
be confirmed, you will then be disposed to reljr
upon his veracity. When he is speaking -ot
facts in the knowledge only of himself and his
associates, and in which therefore there is no
possibility that he could be supported, I think
then when I come to direct your attention more
particulariy to the evidence of Adams and to
the tests to which I have adverted, you will be
satisfied of the truth of his statement.
First, with respect to his previous character.
I have already mentioned that many days (I
believe nearly three weeks) before the trial, a
list of the witnesses to be called on the part of
the prosecution was delivered to the prisoner.
I have stated the grounds of this reguUtion,
namely, to afford the prisoner a full opportonf-
ty of inquiring into the character of those per-
sons who were to give evidence on the part of
the Crown, and that he might be prepared with
witnesses, if the facts would admit it^ to ex-
pose and impeach their lives and conduct.
The name of Adams was of course in that list.
He had been long known to Brunt, one of the
prisoners ; he seems to have been acquainted
with him when in France ; therefore, if there
was any thing to impeach his former character^
that impeachment might be established by evi-
dence, oecause Brunt had the means of know-
ing it. With all these opportunities and ad-
vantages, then, has the prisoner been able to
adduce any evidence for tne purpose of shew<-
ing a single blot or blemish in the previous
history and character of this individual ? - You
will remember, perhaps, that an attempt was
made to insinuate that he had left this country;
and withdrawn himself to France,' in conse-
quence of some misconduct towards his em-
ployer. Upon further tnquiry, however, it
turned out, that there was not the slightest
ground for such a suggestion ; and if he had in
any way misconducted himself, that individual
might have been called to give evidence of the
fact, and his absence is a circumstance abso-
lutely decisive in favour of the witness. . It ap-
pears, that Adams, was by trade a shoe-maker.
He had been formerly in the army, and he
went therefore to France, for the purpose of
obtaining employment in his business, among
the English officers at that time stationed at
Cambray. The witness, therefore, comes into
-court free from every previous imputation or
stain upon his character ; not only nas no evi-
dence been adduced andnst him, but it is per-
fectly clear, from the racts which I have ad«
verted, that his character and conduct had been
such, that no such evidence could have .beeo
adduced.
I have already observed— and I beg now to
remind you of the observation-— that in con«
sidering what degree of reliance you can j^ace
upon his testimony, you will further inquire
what interest he has in the result of this trial.
He was one of the persons engaged in the con-
spiracy ; he was apprehended for the ofienoe,
and when.apprehended; he was admitted as a
901]
fw High T^aMn*
A. D. 1820.
[903
witness for the Crown. You all know that a
Serson so circamstanced, must, of course un-
erstaud, that if he conducts himself with pro-
priety, and tells the troth, he will receive a
pardon from the Crown. I would ask you then,
what motive he can possibly have to relate the
case otherwise, than as it really occurred f
What reason can there be why he should
charge himself and his associates, with a crime
of a different description, and of a blacker die
than that in which they were really engaged P
And will you suppose that a man without mo-
tive, without any reason that has been suggest-
ed or even hinted at by the counsel for the
prisoner, would add the guilt of peijury to his
other crimes, and that too for the purpose of
oonsigntng so many of his fellow-creatures to a
disgraceful and ignominious death P Is it pos-
sible that you can conceive any individual,
without at least some motive of interest to
himself, guilty of such base and complicated
wickedness ? Will you not, therefore, require
some very clear, distinct, and satisfactory evi-
dence, to lead you to the conclusion of his
httving falsified the facts of the case, when he
can derive no possible advantage from such
conduct , and no motive can be assigued for so
base and infamous a proceeding ?
But there is anotner observation, which I
beg leave to press strongly upon your atten-
tion. The witness has told you, that at the
various meetings to which he has spoken,
different individuals from time to time attend-
ed who were the associates of the prisoner at
the bar : he has mentioned, among others, a
person of the name of Hall, who is at this
moment within the reach of the prisoner ; he
has mentioned a person of the name of Potter,
the friend of Brunt (for yon recollect upon the
morning after Brant's return, when he was
engaged in' securing the baskets of ammuni-
tion, his apprentice Hale, was desired to carry
them to Potter*s house, in Snow's-fields); the
witness has told you, that both Hall and Pot^
ter were at the last meeting in Fox-court ; he
has told you Uiat Palin was at this meeting,
another of the prisoner's associates, and Harris
also has been mentioned, in whose house the
prisoner was apprehended.- All and each of
those persons might have been called for the ^
purpose of proving that Adams had given a
nlse account of vthaX passed at these meetings.
If his account were really untrae, as the coun-
sel on the other side have supposed, is it pos-
sible to give any satisfiau:tory answer to this
observation P Does it not carry conviction to
your minds ? Does it not prove to demonstra^
tion, that the account given by Adams, as to
vfhat passed- at those meetings, is, in every
Krticular correct ? If Hall were not present,
might, as stated by Adams, have been
called to prove the falsehood of the charge.
If, on the contrary, he did attend, he might
have been called to prove, that the account
which Adams has given of what passed upon
the occasion was &1se ; the same with respect
to Fahn; the same with respect to Potter; Uie I
same with' respect to Harris. My learned
friend has not ventured to touch upon this
circumstance, because his excellent judgment
assured him it was a fact so unmanageable and
decisive, that it was impossible to give to k
even a plausible explanation or answer.
Having then stated in what manner Adams
might have been contradicted, if the story
which he has related were untrue, let me now
direct your attention to tlie manner in which
his evidence has been confirmed, — ^not as has
been suggested, merely in trivial matters, or
from doubtful sources ; but in the most im-
portant particulars, and from the most unsus-
pected and unquestionable testimony, the
whole forming a body of corroborative evidence,
so strong and irresistible, that no person who
does not wilfully shut his eyes, and blind his
understanding, to the force of troth, can, for
a moment, entertain a doubt, as to the con-
clusion to which it inevitably leads.
You will remember that one of the first
witnesses called after Adams, was a person of
the name of Hale. He was apprentice to
Bront, connected with one of the prisoners, a
witness above all suspicion. No questions
were put to him on cross-examination, tending
to raise a doubt as to the truth of his story;
nothing was thrown out for <he purpose of
leading you to suppose, that there was any
impeachment of his character. Now, I beg
leave to request your attention — ^and long and
painful as this inquiry has been, I am sure
you will give it to me — ^while I recaH to your
recollection those marked circumstances of
confirmation, arising in the first instance out
of the testimony of Hale. He has told you .
that the room was hired by Ings and Brunt ;
that they looked at it together ; and that Brunt
said to Ings, " it will do, go and give her a
shilling.'' . Brant, therefore, was concerned in
hiring the room. But where there is guilt,
concealment is generally attempted. What
was the account Brant gave to Mrs. Rogers P
It appears she entertained some suspicion of
Ings. She asked Bront who he was. He
replied *' that he was a butcher by trade.'' *' I
know nothing of him," be said, " except see-
ing him accidentally at a public-house. ' He
gives the same account in ttie presence of the
Bow-street officer, Taunton. Is this then
correct or false ? Does it not appear, by the
testimony of Hale, that for good or for evil he
was at tne very time he was giving this ac-
count, most intimately and closely connected
with Ings P He tells you again, thai after ih^
room was taken, these parties continued to
meet there night after night, for the period of
five weeks. He- names the particular individu-
als who were in the habit of attending. Now
is it supposed, by my learned friend, that this
is inconsistent with the evidence of Mrs.
Rogers? When the question was put to Mrs.
Rogers, she said, " 1 saw Davidson and some
other men once. I cannot say that they met
often." But she immediately afterwards
explained the reason of this. She said ^* sha
903}
1 GEORQB IV.
TriaitfArthmt Thktmood
(0M
coidd ||iTf BO aecoviit of It, beewinr ihfr
seldom at home.'' Here Uieo is Hale^ an
unsuspected wHnesSy the apprentice of one of
the parties, statinf upon his oath, that these
meetings were held CTciy night, and attended
by the prisoners. Does not tins then confirm>
in a Duost important point, th» endeae^ of
Adams? For what purpose did ittsj meetf
Was these any object of bosiness er amnso
meat in whseh they were engaged, to aceawit
for this evcttflistancr? Has any attempt been
made to explaio it by eTidenoe, or eren by
stafemestP Up to* this momea* has any
motire, consistent with the inlmcenee of the
nrisoneis, bee* assigaed for these meetidgs?
It was sen nnfovnished room, eontainiatf
nothing but a single chair, Ings baring stated
at the time when be hired it, that he sboakd
bring in fiimitnf e, but which he n^er attempted
to do. I repeat it then^ do not theM eircani;«
stances spoken to by Hale, confirm ia this
strongest manner dw testhnony of Adams }
Mark another foet. Adams tells yon, that
arms were from time to tiam collected in this
room, and afterwards carried to the d^pftl;
he particulariy speaks to a number of pdte«
staves brought there for the jrarpoee of hariag
ferrules put on them. This h the aeeenat
given by Adams ; and here I beg yon will tfh
collect that Adams is in custody, and has had
no opportunity of communicating with Hale.
He is at large, no cbarm hti been prefetrvd,
or was ever thought of being pseferred against
him. He teUs tov, that oae day tha door
being aecidentalfy open, he olwerted a irambef
of these pike-Staves, to tha amount of aboat
twenty in the eetner of the rooak How doM
he describe their appearance? They wtPS like
branches recently cnt ftom ifrea».-^Yoii have
seen fbem ooTtespondinn with the deicriptioft
which he has given. Hide conilttos Adams;
and die fact ia establiBhed,that this was oae d
the places made use of fef ooHasthig anM.
There is another eircumstanee conaecM with
these pike-staves, to which I beg to dhreet
Smr attentioA. It was stated by Adams, that
radburn was employed to put en the fusiaits,
and that it Was aone in the room< -Whet ia
this respect m the testimony of Hale ? He says,
** about the time I observed the pike-staves, i
heani a hammeriag mid sawing repeatedly in
the evening.'' Co^ Adams have anticipated
this? These cireMibsunees^ at fifst view appa*
rently trifling, bi^«ome of ininite impoftaaeey
hi considering the credit due to the aaitative
of Adams; for it is impossible that they coald
have been invented or arranged for the oce*-
eion.
But there are other drcamstances of t dia«
racter still more marked and deciiiire. Yo«
remember thtt Adams stated, that on the
Saturday, these parties had become impatient*
It had been oiiginally intended to make ho
attack upon the house of oae of the miidscersy
when the cabinet were all eseeaMed at
dinner. The death of die king had interhipted
these eMtrteiaiaeati* Ibiii was &# opyti
tanity of cartyiag ISA pro^ ibtaeflbct; aadk
Brant afierwaids stated, in the peesenoe of em^
of the witiBSS8e»<Monnment), that the deadi
of die king had aiteied their plans. Mow, t»
advert to die testinmny of Adesne. Ois thm
Satufldayr havinf become impatieat, die pii«f
soaev smd^ ^ wa mast have ameeting la»i
— <
row ; we joiust form a eoannittee, and
what can \m deoe." This
pwfiuas to the- 9ttid etf Wtibnmrf^ Yea wm
toid by AdaaiSy that a oomndttcm was aecoid
iagly fomted on the Saodi^ aaii uiug 9 that id
consisted of inoie dam tba osaat namber aC
persons^ tnd sat fot a censidesahla tiaaa ha
deUberatioD apea dba pnrieot wkech tliey htA
in view. What ietim evidence of Hak> Bw
abw tetts yea thai these tras a meecii
Sanday momiag^ aad that it waaaf i^
character liN>m die pserveas meetii^p. It
attended by a larpftv auasber of penoi% aiA
they appeared ta ba moOe eleeely oagagad im
censahatkm togedihr^ i do iMt reai the ovi«
denceaeigaalaag^ Iwieh asmachaipceai-
ble to reliava yea kam unaeeeseary repetitiaa %
but if yoa will hehr aad attaad ta thesacib-*
setvations, and bear them ia miad whaa llw
evideaog is reoapitalaledby the learned jadgs^
I will pledge myscM^ that yea will not, ia aa^
iastaaee, ted them budt upoa any mia-repse«
seatatioa or mie-atatemaat. flhovldj hawavtr^
any earor occur, I am pemnadad, thai you, tlM^
ensonar at the bar, and idi who bear mey tftti
e satisfied, thtt ia a etas af this daeoti|p-
tioni it most, te my part be wiottyaaiaietu
tlonal.
Noddaa forthot ducats ia the teetimoaf af
Hale, nntd the day wbea the profect was tab«
executed. Adams tidle yoa, that aboatlbar
orflfa>a^ddekoathatdmF) be was in Bnmt^
ream ; that fttraaga and aaatber man, wlMa*
be did mit knew, caeoe in and ttted tiMtina^
ftrs or she pistelt ; and thAt Btaal beiag apii>
proheusive that thsy were overtoalted by nm^
soasoa the appoiite side ol thewayi ilewiidl
them to go unmadialcty into the Mh tauoL
Hals states the iamafoctsahnostia the
terms* In thia paMtaaksr also ha
the testimdny that has been given by
It is suggested ta are that samethiaf ao*
catted*— btrt perhaps I aiH a filtle eat of ooaia^
ia advertiag to it dow-t*4ii the adjainhig raoa
when Dwyerwa* then; aad that it w«s oo»»
tended by dse esoasel fee the pthwaar^ thai
Adams did aat agree vrith Dwysria his ae-
count of that part of drettaasactioa. Batyaa
will raoolleet that Adams told you hedid oot
SI re tha rooM on the tsid of Febtttary> till
te in dw dhy^till thiae or foar o^dook la tire
aftofaoon, and yoa remeadier Dwyet foitted
the loom by oae> sa that it vrae kaposeibla
Uiat what was laid in the presenee of Dfsyer
ooaM have been heafd by Adhms. ^
Bat to revaif to the ovideiMe af Bale, yo^
will aa doabt reooilaec another reterekaMa
olreaaiitMMa of eanflnnatNa ta watea 1 afli
aboat re direct yonr tttstrtiw.
olavmriHrA
90ftl
ftft Hig^ rr^iiM.
A. 0* I«fi0.
rsoe
ft pToAnAftlion to b* posted, at »y lewKd
finesd sttppoMS ok ube boiiwa tint wcvt
to be Mt on fiie, bot to be pnt up dmot
the firet, is order tbat it might be read
by tbe people^ He aaked for peser;
no paper adapted to the porpoaa coula be
uoGured ; sonietluii^ waa aaid about prooor-
iDg inch paper as is usaaUy eaiployed for
nefPspapers^ Dot Adam tells yoQ he suggested
that eartiidge jraper wonld answer better.
Meoey vas atcerdiwgly given hgr Tbistlewoed
to pcocwre it, andBraaAiienieiit and directed
hie mpceatice te bnqr >>' sheets* Hut was
stated bjrAdasst He las had no opportuBtty
ol apesluog with Oale upon tht siiiaeot; he
bat had no Bieant of atraijptghit evidence in
ooncert with him ; bat this ia the aeeoniil
irHnch he girts i The paper wat pwditstd,
and the procinTttiian written. Hale in his
emdenct teUs yen that Bnual came nnt and
desaved bias to pnrduse some eartiidge paper,
•ad that he aooordiBgly bovght A (meels^
which were taken into theroenvat Adaawhad
slated. In this important cimHBtttnot then
Adtms is eoofirmea by Hale^ at far as it it
npssibk thai he ooaid be eonirmedi fo
Ualt was not adnstled into the room, and
of eovne eaa gire BO aeoouat of the purpose
t» wlnefa this paper was applied.
LBtva look at the eate a little further^ The
paitiM set oat ibr the place of rendcvron^ and
Brantameiig thereat is stated byAdeat to
have faetn in CakHstreet^ and to have been an
attivepartictpaAor in every thing that oococted
at that spot* He iras not apprehended at the
tiase^hafiag saceeeded in efeeting hit ttem^
What then is the aeeoant givnn hj^Hale t^^He
sagrs hia matter rttuxned henm about nine
o^cloch in A* evening, eenfimed and ittigaed ;
hiM eeat splashed, hit boots covered with arad.
laaniediately upon his anival^ ndJieming hie
wofh, ha said, '< it wat idl over; a nnmbet ef
oflben bad come— -that he had saved his ]if!i,
and that was idL'' Does not this thea mott
evidently point to the transaolsen in Cato^
stnet? Does it not ooalirm, beyond the pos-
MbiUty of doubt, the testimoi^ of Adams as
to Brnnt having been one of those vrhe were
engaged in that tranaaetion?
There is a remarkable dromnstance to whidi
I now wish to beg jreur attention^ because it
relates to the ulterior projects vrhich the pari-
ties had in view* You will remember Adams
stated that the plan they had fonaed was^ to
atnke a grand blow, by attacking the ministen
ns they wen assembled in Groevenor-squave;
but tlus was only a part of their crindoal de«
•sign. There was another body, uotconsisling
of tlm same mdividualt ns the eomitel fcr the
pntoner has auppoeed, but ef the fnenda of
Fslin, at to vrhom he had asked Thittlewood at
one of ttie meetings whether he migfat not com-
mnnicate to them dm portioalaa of the phut.
Ibeie was ate ethitd party under the mee*
tionof Ooek, dtttined to another entsrpiise;
Isr the twenty^five perstnt assamblsd in Oato*
tmetJbitsed en^ a small part of
tngaged in this conspiracy*
Hnvmg reetlled these etreamstaneea toyonr
atfentioD, let me remiiid you ef what wat said
by Brunt. A person came ia, endently ont
of those who had been in Cato-street ; Bmnt,;
after some conversation, mddenly eaclwmed
** It is not all over yet; le| us go and seewlmt
they are about;" and they immediately went
out together. Brunt resftainsd absent till nsnr
elevea o'clock. For what purpose 4e jnm
suppose they went out ?-— the obfcct ii eiridatt s
it wat intended thait other opccaiions ahould
take place in diSnrent parte ot tbe metiupelH!^
and finding thsy weiudetetad M the west ead
of thetow% Bmot e9ielaMned> ^It it not ali
over yet/' and went to inmieintoi the lesuM
of the ether movementsw Th» dcned the ps**
ceedinga of that day, eontanii^K, froaa tot t»
luty the testiiDwmy of Adams. What tether
takeaplacel He bad deswred hit appisntion
to ciean hit boott early in the memvagy iqp]nn»
hensive that they mi|^t excite atteniiott) b»
rose eaily himself and went into the batk
rooopir<'«iato that room with whisi^ when Tann-*
ton came up, he said he had nothini^ to do»
He tbsre opened a eupbeardpaivi took out ikm
remnina off the ammnnition and o^er artickni
whicb were there depeeited-»«end gfeimisn
(net hand^grcntdet to be used at Imd Han-
rowby^for those weae carried to Cato-ttTCtt)^
fire baUs,and cartridgss for the artilleo^ madn
in flannel bets.. These were taken eisl of tfem
cupboard and put into two badcets i one of
them he covered with an apron ef his wifi*i^ *
which had been used es a blind in that very
irbicb he affected tn have n<^ ceit*
In a few moments afterwwd% Tktimen
the officer came m>, he seised thebeekels^and
addressing hijnself to Brant, asked what wan
in them : he said they were net his, he knew
nothing about them ; upon which he wat isn*
mediately taken into custody. Upon thetn
tets it would be idle to make any oemaMnt.
They am deeitive at to the guHt of tbe partiett
and confirm in the ttronfStt manner tht test»«
mcoy of Adams.
Passing firem the evidence of Hale, tel tat
direct vow attsntion to another fiKt. Yen all
remember what wat stated by AdaoM^ that tbe
arsM uFcre broogbt sucesssively to the room in
f OS-court, and that they were earned tan
tbttice to a place that was called tbe d^t,et
Tidd's house; aad that Thittiewood, the pai«
soner, was [always amdout for their removai.
You find Taunton the effiosr, immfdiately after
he bad seafched tiie )pr^t>utes tin Fo»«ourc,
proceeding to Tidd's housew He Acre iwsad
the arms that have been produced to yeiu
weepent of every descr^ytaon, net calcidntod
merely for an attack npen a sin^e houae in
which sixteen* or seventeen nsssont wure at"
sembled, but evidently and aeasonstr^ly 'mm
tended, ftem tbe natnie and sixe of die prepn*
ralioas, fist aasaa more extensive purpose. A
trank istisnnd, oesUaining l,tOO hsil cartridges^
liand-greaades^ ive-hnlls, ositridget Ibr Ihn
artittsry, ate etan diatoeersd. But lan haraed
ftindlntealftednwiaeas. fimthtMrnoatcf
907]
1 GEORO£ IV.
Trial of Atikur ThitOemood
[908
endeaToaring to explain thete drcumstances,
— ^the daughter of Tidd, who, of course, would
be disposed to give the most fovourable ex-
planation for her father. But what is the
amount of her evidence f She tells you that
the trunk containing the ball cartridges had
been carried to the apartment, three or four
days before the 33rd or February. It had been
decided, that the project should be carried into
eflfect on the Wednesday ; and the box^ widi
die cartridges, Vas evidently sent to the d^pdt
with that view. It remained there ready for use
during the whole time, and was left untouched
in consequence of the failure of the plan, till
the officer Taunton took it into his possession.
But it is said by the vritness, that some person
took away a part of the arms on the 2Mif and
returned them on the following morning. If
tibis be true, it corresponds exactly widi the
facts of the case. When the prisoners deter-
mined to cany their enterprise into effect on
the Wednesday, of course the persons engaged
in it armed themselves from the magaxtne at
Tidd's, and after the attempt had been defeated,
they were then naturally carried l)ack to the
place from whence they had been taken. The
evidence of this voung woman then, so far
from impeaching the case on the part of the
prosecution, tends most directljf and distinctly
to confirm it. Her account coincides with the
particulars stated by Adams, and proves most
clearly that the story he has told is, in these
particulars, correct.
I hope I am not fatiguing ^our patience with
this detail ; but when the life or a man is at
stake, I am sure you will readily devote to me
all that attention which may be necMsanr to
the investigation of the truth. You will, I am
persuaded, submit without reluctance to the
sacrifice, from a sense of the importance of
that duty which is cast upon you : I beg then
to request your attention to another striking
circumstance. You will recollect, that some
oonversation took place in the room with re-
spect to a communication made by Hobbs, the
landlord of the White-hart public-house.
Adams has stated to you, that in consequence
of that communication much agitation pre-
vailed in the meeting, and that Brunt proposed
a particular measure of precaution, to which I
shall presently advert. I beg leave previously,
however, to observe, that if the fact as to the
communication made by Hobbs were untrue,
Hobbs himself might have been called by the
prisoner for the purpose of contradicting the
testimony of Adams. There was ample time
to have obtained his attendance; a whole day
elapsed after Adams had been examined.
Hobbs is easily accessible, and might have
been called ; but he does not make his ap-
pearance. Can vou therefore doubt the truth
of this part of the evidence of Adams ; and
that it is as correct as his statement of tiie
other foots to which I have called your atten-
tion ? But to return to the course of observ»>
tion which I was pursuing : — In consequence
of the itpprehentton .and alann which seemed
to prevail in the meeting. Brunt proposed, by
way of security, to set a watch upon lord Uar-
rowby*s house. This proposition originated
with Brunt ; it was immediately adopted, and
Davidson with another person was directed to
commence the watch on Tuesday evening, at
six o'clock ; they were to be relieved at nine
by two others who were to continue at their
station till twelve. The whole of this arrange-
ment was purely accidenlal : observe, then, in
how extraordinary a manner this purt of the
narrative of Adams is confirmed. We called
the watchman, who said, ** I observed some
persons lurking about the square that evening,
and among them a black man, or man oi
colour, who attracted m^ particular attention.'^
But the confirmation is still more striking.
Adams has told you that he and Brant relieved
Davidson and his companion, and that they
went into a public-house, at the corner of the
Mews in Charles-street, where a young man
challenged Brunt to play at dominos. £q-
quiry was made in the neighbourhood, for the
purpose of ascertaining the truth of this state-
ment, and it turned out to be perfectly correct.
Gillan, the witness whom you have heard, was
the person to whom Adams alluded. ' He re-
collected the person of Brunt, and confirmed,
in every particular, the testimony of Adams.
In every step that we take, you perceive in
.how remarkable a manner his evidence corres-
ponds with the accounts given from quarters
where no suspicion can by possibility attach.
Another witness, to whose evidence I be^
leave to request your particular attention is
Monument He is undoubtedly, to a consider-
able extentj implicated in the guilt of the pri-
soners. It is supposed, or suggested, by my
learned friend, that the assassination of his
majesty's ministers was to be effected solely
wiUi a view to plunder. Was it so 7 Attend
to the language of Thistlewood upon his first
visit to Monument: ''Great events,'' he ob-
serves, *' are at hand. The people are every
where anxious for a change. 1 have been
deceived," he proceeds to say, ** by many per-
sons^ but I have now got some men who will
stand by me." Is it possible to misunderstand
this language T What was the change that be
contemplated T What are the great events to
which he referred } Murdering the ministers
for the purpose of plundering London I Is it
possible to suppose that this could have been
the design, or that any man could have ent^^
tained a thought of commencing a system oC
plunder, by so extraordinary and atrocious an
enterprise ? In what way would the murder
of his majesty's ministers have facilitated .this
object? When he says, ** great events are at -
hand — the people are every where anxious for
a change — I have been deceived by many peo^
pie, but I have now got some men who will
stand by me ;" what could he possibly be ud->
derstood to mean, but that he ¥Pa8 engaged in
some political and revolutionary enterprise of
a dangerous nature, and had got men who
would jtaod by and oo-opemte with him ui>
9091
Jbt High Treason.
A. t). 1820*
[910
his endeaTOon Urckrryit into effect? And
80 it was eTidently nndierstood by Monament.
It is'impossiblenot to call to one*s recolleo*
tion in this inquiry, the fonner station in life
of the prisoner Thistlewood. He has been an
officer^ I beliere, in his majesty's service ; he
has moved in the situation and rank of a ^n-
tieman ; and yet you find him with his previous
habits descending so low as to become the
intimate companion and associate of journey-
men mechanics, and of others in the humblest
condition of society, associating with them
daily, holding consultations with them in a
small unfurnished back-room, ia an obscure
court, inhabited by the most obscure indivi-
duals. Is there not some extraordinary mys-
tery in this association? Would he have
stooped to this indignity, unless he had had
some great object in view, which he was de-
sirous of accomplishing, and which he could
t>nly accomplish by their means ? Is not this
conduct on the part of the prisoner a circum-
stance that must weigh greatly in your deliber-
ations upon this case, and the nature of the
enterprise in which he was engaged f
But to return to the evidence of Monument.
He proceeds to Cat(^street, and upon his
arrival there the whole plan is developed to
him. But it is suggested by the counsel for
the prisoner, that as far as relates to Cato-
street, there is some discrepancy between the
evidence of Adams and Monument Tlie
former stated the number in the room to be
twenty; and when Monument was there
Thistlewood observed, that the number was
twenty-five. But how does this upon a little
inquiry turn out? When Adams arrived,
all the party had not assembled ; Tidd and
Monument, and probably some others, came
in afterwards ; and it is further to be ol»erved,
that the men were not actually counted, there
being nothine but the mere declaration of
Thistlewood that they amounted to twenty-five.
These then are the supposed contradictions,
which,' for want of better matter, are relied
upon for the purpose of endeavouring to per-
suade you that the evidence of Adams, or
Monument, or of both of them, is not worthy
of credit
Some other differences of a trivial nature
have also 'been insisted upon, between the
account given by Adams and the statement of
the officers, as to what passed after the latter
had arrived at the stable. But can you sup-
pose for a mpment, fh>m this circumstance,
that Adams was not present at that meeting?
Who does not know, that in a scene of contu-
sion of this description, when the mind is agi-
tated, and every thing is in a state of disorder
and tumult, the account given-by those who
are present^ and eye-witnesses of the facts,
will always be at variance in some particulars
from eacn other? One man recollects one
circumstance, and another person will observe
and recollect another; and it is a common
obeervacion in courts of justice, — and I refer
to it, because obffBirvatioiis would not be re«
peated until they become trite and hacknied,
unless they were founded in truth,— that when
two men describe the same transaction, if
they describe it precisely in the same way, it
leads to a suspicion of .their veracity, and of
previous arrangement and concert; for it is
inconsistent with the nature of the human
mind, that they should, in a confused and
complicated transaction, agree in all the minute
particulars of their story. And I therefore
repeat, that not the slightest inference can be
raised in favour of the prisoner from any sup-
posed difference between the statement of the
officers and that of Adams, as to what took
place at the moment of ascending the ladder,
kuthven, the first who mounted the ladder,
did not hear any person call out from bel6w ;
Adams, on the contrary, said, somebody called
out, ** Look above there," as the officers ap-
proached ; Ruthven did not remember this,
nor Ellis — ^therefore my learned friend says,
there is some contradiction, and you ought not
to believe that Adams was present. But you
will recollect, that Westcoatt said he heard
these expressions used; and I mention this
circumstance to confirm ray position, and to
show, that honest men, acting with the best
possible intentions, when giving an account of
the same transaction, will often, in many par-
ticulars, differ from each other. Ruthven tells
you that he called out, '* Seize their arms, we
are officers ! *' now whether he said any thing
about a warrant or not, I will not take upon
myself to assert; but another officer says, the
word warrant was used. Really, when such
circumstances are relied on by my learned
friend, you must, out of respect to his judg-
ment and talents, feel that he is under the
necessity of resorting to them, and of catching
even at straws, because he has nothing more
substantial upon which to rest his defence.
I beg leave now to advert to a witness of
considerable importance in this case, I mean
Dwyer. Some attempt has been made to im^
J>each his credit Dwyer told you, he had
ived thirteen years with the same roaster, Mr.
Smith. That account is not contradicted. A
person of whom you knew nothing, of whose
credit you have no means of judging, comes
here for the purpose of telling you, that the
conduct of Dwyer, upon some former occasion,
about two months ago, was infamous; and
that therefore he would not believe him upon
his oath. Dwyer denies the fact alleged
against him. Who is this witness that pre-
sents himself before you ? A labouring me-
chanic: we know nothing further of him.
Can any reason be assigned, why jrou should
place more reliance upon his testimony than
on Dwyer himself, who has lived and worked
for thirteen years with the same master. But
observe the conduct of this witness, who comes
to impeach the credit of another. He tells
you that a base and infamous proposition was
made to him by Dwyer, and he acceded to it*
It is true, that according to his own statement
he afterwards withdrew, but he still continued
907]
1 GEORO£ IV.
Trial of Arthur
C908
endeayoaring to explain thete drcumsUnces,
— ^the daughter of Tidd, who, of course, would
be disposed to give the most favourable ex-
planation for her father. But what is the
amount of her oTidence f She tells you that
the trunk containing the ball cartridges had
been carried to the apartment, three or four
days before the 23rd or February. It had been
decided, diat the project should be carried into
effect on the Wednesday ; and the box, widi
die cartridges, Vas evidently sent to the d^pdt
with that view. It remained there ready for use
during the whole time, and was left untouched
in consequence of the failure of the plan, till
the officer Taunton took it into hb possession.
But it is said by the witness, that some person
took away a part of the arms on the 23ra, and
returned them on the following morning. If
&is be true, it corresponds exactly with the
facts of the case. When the prisoners deter-
mined to cany their enterprise into effect on
the Wednesday, of course the persons engaged
in it armed themselves from the magazine at
Tidd's, and after the attempt had been defeated,
they were then naturally carried l)ack to the
place from whence they had been taken. The
evidence of this voung woman then, so far
from impeaching the case on the part of the
prosecution, tends most directly ana distinctly
to confirm it. Her account coincides with the
particulars stated by Adams, and proves most
clearly that the story he has told is, in these
particulars, correct.
I hope I am not fatiguing ^our patience with
this detail ; but when the life or a man is at
stake, I am sure you will readily devote to me
all that attention which may be necMsanr to
the investigation of the truth. You will, I am
persuaded, submit without reluctance to the
sacrifice, from a sense of the importance of
^t duty which is cast upon you : I beg then
to request your attention to another striking
circumstance. You will recollect, that some
conversation took place in the room with re-
spect to a communication made by Hobbs, the
landlord of the White-hart public-house.
Adams has stated to you, that in consequence
of that communication much agitation pre-
vailed in the meeting, and that Brunt proposed
a particular measure of precaution, to which I
shall presently advert. I beg leave previously,
however, to observe, that if the fact as to the
communication made by Hobbs were untrue,
Hobbs himself might have been called by the
prisoner for the purpose of contradicting the
testimony of Adams. There was ample time
to have obtained his attendance; a whole day
elapsed after Adams had been examined.
Hoobs is easily accessible, and might have
been called ; but he does not make his ap-
pearance. Can von therefore doubt the truth
of this part of the evidence of Adams ; and
that it is as correct as his statement of die
other facts to which I have called your atten-
tion ? But to return to the course of observ»>
tion which I was pursuing : — In consequence
of the apprehension .and alann which seemed
to prevail in the meeting, Brunt proposed, by
way of security, to set a watch upon lord Har-
rowby*s house. This proposition originated
with Brunt ; it was immediately adopted, and
Davidson with another person was directed to
commence the watch on Tuesday evening, at
six o'clock ; they were to be relieved at nine
by two others who were to continue at their
station till twelve. The whole of this arrange-
ment was purely accidental : observe, then, in
how extraordinaiy a manner this put of the
narrative of Adams is confirmed. We called
the watchman, who said, '*I observed some
persons lurking about the square that evening,
and among them a black man, or man of
colour, who attracted m^ particular attention.''
But the confirmation is still more striking.
Adams has told you that he and Brunt roliev^
Davidson and his companion, and thattbey
went into a public-house, at the comer of tibe
Mews in Charies-street, where a young man
challenged Brunt to play at dominos. ^-
quiry was made in the neighbourhood, for the
purpose of ascertaining the truth of this state-
ment, and it turned out to be perfectly coirect.
Gillan, the witness whom you have beard, was
the person to whom Adams alluded. ' He re-
collected the person of Brunt, and confirmed,
in eveiy particular, the testimony of Adama*
In every step that we take, you perceive in
.how remarkable a manner his evidence corres-
ponds with the accounts given from quartsrs
where no suspicion can by possibility attach.
Another vntness, to whose evidence I beg
leave to request your particular attention is
Monument He is undoubtedly, to a consider-
able extent, implicated in the guilt of the pri-
soners. It is supposed, or suggested, by my
learned friend, tluit the assassination of h»
majesty's ministers was to be effected solely
widi a view to plunder. Was it so 7 Attend
to the language of Thisdewood upon his first
visit to Monument: '^ Great events," he ob-
serves, *' are at hand. The people are every
where anxious for a change. 1 have been
deceived,'* he proceeds to say, *^ by many per-
sons, but I have now got some men who will
stand by me.** Is it possible to misunderstand
this language ? What was die change that he
contemplated ? What are the great events to
which he referred i Murdering the ministers
for the purpose of plundering London I Is St
possible to suppose that this could have been
the design, or that any man could have enter*
tained a thought of commencing a system of
plunder, by so extraordinary and atrocious an
enterprise ? In what way would the murder
of his majesty's ministers have facilitated .this
object ? When he says, ** great events are at
hand-— the people are every where anxious far
a change — I have been deceived by many peo-
ple, but I have now got some men who will
stand by me f what could he possibly be un->
derstood to mean, but that he ¥Pa8 engaged in
some political and revoludonary enterprise of
a dangerous nature, and had got men who
would Jtand by and oo-operate with him ift
90dl
Jhf High Trtaam.
A. D. 1820.
roio
his endeaTOOrs tcr dmy it into efifect ? And
80 it was eTidenUy understood by Monament.
It is'impotisible not to call to one's recoUfto*
tion in this inquiry, the former station in life
of the prisoner Thistlewood. He has been an
officer, I believe, in his majesty's service ; he
has moved in the sitnation and rank of a gen-
tleman ; and yet you find him with his previous
habits descending so low as to become the
intimate companion and associate of journey-
men mechanics, and of others in the humblest
condition of society, associating with them
daily, holding considtations with them in a
small unfurnished back-room, ia an obscure
court, inhabited by the most obscure indivi-
duals. Is there not some extraordinary mys«
tery in this association? Would he have
stooped to this indignity, unless he had had
some great object in view, which he was de-
sirous of accomplishing, and which he could
x>nly accomplish by their means \ Is not this
conduct on the part of the prisoner a circum-
stance that must weigh greatly in your deliber-
ations upon this case, and the nature of the
enterprise in which he was engaged ?
But to return to the evidence of Monument.
He proceeds to Cat(^street, and upon his
arrival there the whole plan is developed to
him. But it is suggested by the counsel for
the prisoner, that as far as relates to Cato-
street, there is some discrepancy between the
evidence of Adams and Monument Tlie
former stated the number in the room to be
twenty; and when Monument was there
Thistlewood observed, that the number was
twenty-five. But how does this upon a little
inquiry turn out? When Adams arrived,
all the party had not assembled; Tidd and
Monument, and probably some others, came
in afterwards ; and it is further to be observed,
that the men were not actually counted, there
being nothing but the mere declaration of
Thistlewood that they amounted to twenty-five.
These then are the supposed contradictions,
which,' for want of better matter, are relied
upon for the purpose of endeavouring to per-
suade you that the evidence of Adams, or
Monument, or of both of them, is not worthy
of credit
Some other differences of a trivial nature
have also 'been insisted upon, between the
account given by Adams and the statement of
the officers, as to what passed after the latter
had arrived at the stable. But can you sup-
pose for a mpment, from this circumstance,
that Adams was not present at that meeting?
Who does not know, that in a scene of conra-
slon of this description, when the mind is agi-
tated, and every thing is in a state of disorder
and tumult, the account given -by those who
are present^ and eye-witnesses of the foots,
will alwavs be at variance in some particulars
from each other? One man recollects one
circumstance, and another person will observe
and recollect another; and it is a common
obaervation in courts of justice, — and I refer
to it, becliase obsorvations would not be re«
peated until they become trite and hacknied,
unldss they were founded in truth,— that when
two men describe the same transaction, if
they describe it preciselv in the same way, it
leads to a suspicion of ^their veracity, and of
previous arrangement and concert; for it is
inconsistent with the nature of the human
mind, that they should, in a confused and
complicated transaction, agree in all the minute
particulars of their story. And I therefore
repeat, that not the slightest inference can be
raised in favour of the prisoner from any sup-
posed difference between the statement of the
officers and that of Adams, as to what took
place at the moment of ascending the ladder.
Ruthven, the first who mounted the ladder,
did not hear any person call out from bel6w ;
Adams, on the contrary, said, somebody called
out, ^' Look above there,'' as the officers ap-
proached ; Ruth?en did not remember this,
nor Ellis — ^therefore my learned friend says^
there is some contradiction, and you ought not
to believe that Adams was present. But yon
will recollect, that Westcoatt said he heard
these expressions used; and I mention this
circumstance to confirm ray position, and to
show, that honest men, acting with the best
possible intentions, when giving an account of
the same transaction, will often, in many par-
ticulars, differ from each other. Ruthven tells
you that he called out, '^ Seize their arms, we
are officers I" now whether he said any tiling
about a warrant or not, I will not take upon
myself to assert; but another officer says, the
word warrant was used. Really, when such
circumstances are relied on by my learned
friend, you must, out of respect to his judg-
ment and talents, feel that he is under the
necessity of resorting to them, and of catching
even at straws, because he has nothing more
substantial upon which to rest his defence.
I beg leave now to advert to a witness of
considerable importance in this case, I mean
Dwyer. Some attempt has been made to im-
peach his credit Dwyer told you, he had
lived thirteen years with the same roaster, Mr.
Smith. That account is not contradicted. A
person of whom you knew nothing, of whose
credit you have no means of judging, comes
here for the purpose of telling you, that the
conduct of Dwyer, upon some former occasion,
about two months ago, was infamous; and
that therefore he would not believe him upon
his oath. Dwyer denies the fact alleged
against him. Who is this witness that pre-
sents himself before you ? A labouring me-
chanic: we know nothing further of him.
Can any reason be assigned, why jrou should
place more reliance upon his testimony than
on Dwyer hiniself, who has lived and worked
for thirteen years with the same master. But
observe the conduct of this witness, who comes
to impeach the credit of another. He tells
you that a base and infamous proposition was
made to him by Dwyer, and he acceded to it.
It is true, that according to his own statement
he afterwords withdrew, but he stiilcontinued
907]
1 GEORO£ IV.
TrM of Arthur TkMemoad
[908
endeafoaring to explain these ciicomstaiioes,
— ^the daughter of Tidd» who, of coune, would
be disposed to give the most faToorable ex-
planation for her father. But what is the
amount of her evidence f She tells you that
the trunk containing the ball cartridges had
been carried to the apartment^ three or four
days before the 23rd or February. It had been
decided, that the project should be carried into
effect on the Wednesday ; and the box, widi
the cartridges, Vas evidently sent to the d^pdt
with that view. It remained there ready for use
diiriug the whole time, and was left untouched
in consequence of the failure of the plan, till
the officer Taunton took it into his pMsession.
But it is said by the witness, that some person
took away a part of the arms on the 23ra, and
returned them on the following morning. If
this be true, it corresponds exactly with the
facts of the case. When the prisoners deteri-
mined to cany their enterprise into effect on
the Wednesday, of course the persons engaged
in it armed themselves from the magaxine at
Tidd's, and after the attempt had been defeated,
they were then naturally carried l)ack to the
place from whence they had been taken. The
evidence of this voung woman then, so far
from impeaching the case on the part of the
prosecution, tends most directly and distinctly
to confirm it. Her account coincides with the
particulars stated by Adams, and proves most
dearly that the story he has told is, in these
particulars, correct.
I hope I am not fatiguing ^our patience with
this detail ; but when the hfe of a man is at
stake, I am sure you will readily devote to me
all that attention which may be necMsaij to
the investigation of the truth. You will, I am
persuaded, submit without reluctance to the
sacrifice, from a sense of the importance of
that duty which is cast upon you : I beg then
to request your attention to another striking
circumstance. You will recollect, that some
conversation took place in the room with re-
spect to a commumcation made by Hobbs, the
landlord of the White-hart public-house.
Adams has stated to jou, that in consequence
of that communication much agitation pre-
vailed in the meeting, and that Brunt proposed
a particular measure of precaution, to which I
shall presently advert. I beg leave previously,
however, to observe, that if the fact as to the
communication made by Hobbs were untrue,
Hobbs himself might have been called by the
prisoner for the purpose of contradicting the
testimony of Adams. There was ample time
to have obtained his attendance; a whole day
elapsed after Adams had been examined.
Hoobs is easily accessible, and might have
been called ; but he does not make his ap-
pearance. Can yon therefore doubt the truth
of this part of the evidence of Adams ; and
that it is as correct as his statement of tibie
other focts to which I have called your atten-
tion ? But to return to the course of observ»>
tion which I was pursuing : — In consequence
of the apprehension .and alann which seemed
to prevail in the meeting, Brunt proposed, by
way of security, to set a watch upon lord Har-
rowby*s house. This proposition originated
with Brunt ; it was immediately adopted, and
Davidson with another person was directed to
commence the watch on Tuesday evening, at
six o'clock ; they were to be relieved at nine
by two others who were to continue at their
station till twelve. The whole of this arrange-
ment was purely accidental : observe, then, in
how ^traordinaiy a manner this part of the
narrative of Adams is confirmed. We called
the watchman, who said, '* I observed some
persons lurking about the square that evening,
and among them a black man, or man of
colour, who attracted m^ particular attention."
But the confirmation is still more striking.
Adams has told you that he and Brunt relieved
Davidson and his companion, and that they
went into apublic-house, at the comer of the
Mews in Charles-street, where a young man
challenged Brunt to play at dominos. En-
quiry was made in the neighbourhood, for the
purpose of ascertaining l^e truth of this state-
ment, and it turned out to be perfectly conect.
Gillan, the witness whom you have heard, was
the person to whom Adams alluded. ' He re-
collected the person of Brunt, and confirmed,
in every particular, the testimony of Adams.
In every step that we take, you perceive in
.how remarkable a manner his evidence corres-
ponds with the accounts given from quarters
where no suspicion can by possibility attach.
Another witness, to whose evidence I beg
leave to request your particular attention is
Monument He is undoubtedly, to a consider-
able extentj implicated in the guilt of the pri-
soners. It is supposed, or suggested, by my
learned friend, that the assassination of his
majesty's ministers was to be effected solely
wiUi a view to plunder. Was it so ? Attend
to the language of Thistlewood upon his first
visit to Monument: <^ Great events,'' he ob-
serves, '^ are at hand. The people are every
where anxious for a change. 1 have been
deceived,'' he proceeds to say, " by many per-
sons, but I have now got some men wfao will
stand by me." Is it possible to misunderstand
this language ? What was the change that he
contemplated ? What are the great events to
which he referred ? Murdering the ministers
for the purpose of plundering Loudon ! Is it
possible to suppose that this could have been
the design, or that any man could have enter-
tained a thought of commencing a system of
plunder, by so extraordinary and atrocious an
enterprise ? In what way would the murder
of his majesty's ministers have facilitated .this
object? When he says, ^^ great events are at
hand — the people are every where anxious for
a change — I have been deceived by many peo-
ple, but I have now got some men who will
stand by me ;" what could he possibly be un->
derstood to mean, but that he was engaged in
some political and revolutionary enterprise of
a dangerous nature, and had got men who
wodd stand by and oo-operaie with him ia-
9091
Jbr High Treason.
A. t). 1820.
[910
his endesTonrs tcrckrryit into effect? And
80 it was eridently understood by Monament.
It is'impottsiblenot to call to one's recollect
tion in this inquiry, the former station in life
of the prisoner Thistlewood. He has been an
oflicer, I believe, in his majesty's service ; he
has moved in the situation and rank of a gen-
tleman ; and yet you find him with his previous
habits descending so low as to become the
intimate companion and associate of journey-
men mechanics, and of others in the humblest
condition of society, associating with them
daily, holding consultations with them in a
small unfurnished back-room, ia an obscure
court, inhabited by the most obteure indivi-
duals. Is there not some extraordinary mys-
tery in this association? Would he have
stooped to this indignity, unless he had had
some great object in view, which he was de-
sirous of accomplishing, and which he could
t>nly accomplish by their means ? Is not this
conduct on the part of the prisoner a circum-
stance that must weigh greatly in your deliber-
ations upon this case, and the nature of the
enterprise in which he was engaged f
But to return to the evidence of Monument.
He proceeds to Cato-street, and upon his
arrival there the whole plan is developed to
him. But it is suggested by the counsel for
the prisoner, that as far as relates to Cato-
street, there is some discrepancy between the
evidence of Adams and Monument Tlie
former stated the number in the room to be
twenty; and when Monument was there
Thistlewood observed, that the number was
twenty-five. But how does this upon a little
inquiry turn outP When Adams arrived,
all the party had not assembled; Tidd and
Monument, and probably some others, came
in afterwards ; and it is further to be observedy
that the men were not actually counted, there
being nothing but the mere declaration of
Thistlewood that they amounted to twenty-five.
These then are the supposed contradictions,
iidiich,- for want of better matter, are relied
upon for the purpose of endeavouring to per-
suade you that the evidence of Adams, or
Monument, or of both of them, is not worthy
of credit.
Some other differences of a trivial nature
have also 'been insisted upon, between the
account -given by Adams add the statement of
the oflBoers, as to what passed after the latter
had arrived at the stable. But can you sup-
pose for a moment, from this circumstance^
diat Adams was not present at that meetinff ?
Who does not know, that in a scene of contu-
sion of this description, when the mind is agi-
tated, and every thing is in a state of disorder
and tumult, the account given by those who
are present^ and eye-witnesses of the facts,
will alwavs be at variance in some particulars
from each other? One man recollects one
circumstance, and another person will observe
and recollect another; and it is a common
obeervation in courts of justice, — and I refer
to it, becliuse obvamttioos would not be
peated until they become trite and hacknied,
unless they were founded in truth,—- that when
two men describe the same transaction, if
they describe it precisely in the same way, it
leads to a suspicion of .their veracity, and of
previous arrangement and concert; for it is
inconsistent with the nature of the human
mind, that they should, in a confiised and
complicated transaction, agree in all the minute
particulars of their story. And I therefore
repeat, that not the slightest inference can be
raised in favour of the prisoner from any sup-
posed difference between the statement of the
oflScers and that of Adams, as to what took
place at the moment of ascending the! ladder.
Ruthven, the first who mounted the ladder,
did not hear any person call out from bel6w ;
Adams, on the contrary, said, somebody called
out, " Look above there,'' as the officers ap-
proached ; Ruthven did not remember this,
nor Ellis — ^therefore my learned friend says,
there is some contradiction, and you ought not
to believe that Adams was present. But you
will recoUect, that Westcoatt said he helird
these expressions used; and I mention this
circumstance to confirm ray position, and to
show, that honest men, acting with the best
possible intentions, when giving an account of
the same transaction, will often, in many par-
ticulars, differ from each other. Ruthven tells
you that he called out, '* Seize their arms, we
are officers !*' now whether he said any thing
about a warrant or not, I will not take upon
myself to assert; but another officer says, the
word warrant was used. Really, when such
circumstances are relied on by my learned
friend, you must, out of respect to his judg-
ment and talents, feel that he is under the
necessity of resorting to them, and of catching
even at straws, because he has nothing more
substantial upon wliich to rest his defence.
I beg leave now to advert to a witness of
considerable importance in this case, I mean
Bwyer. Some attempt has been made to im^
peach his credit. I)wyer told you, he had
lived thirteen years with the same roaster, Mr.
Smith. That account is not contradicted. A
person of whom you knew nothing, of whose
credit you have no means of judging, comes
here for the purpose of telling you, that the
conduct of Dwyer, upon some former occasion,
about two months ago, was infamous; and
that therefore he would not believe him upon
his oath. Dwyer denies the fact alleged
against him. Who is thifl witness that pre-
sents himself before you ? A labouring me-
chanic: we know nothing further of him.
Can any reason be assigned, why jrou should
place more reliance upon his testimony than
on Dwyer himself, who has lived and worked
for thirteen years with the same master. But
observe the conduct of this witness, who comes
to impeach the credit of another. He tells
you that a base and infamous proposition was
made to him by Dwyer, and he acceded to it.
It is true, that according to his own statement
he aftertnvds withdrew, but he still continued
011]
1 GBOaOE IV.
TiidtfAHhw TMOkmood
ma
to ha^ cttupaoj and RaBonatr '«ith Dw^ec
Such is the account 'which the witness gtvm
of hij own duiracter and conduct Wouid aa
honest man, eatitled to credit in a court of
Ittstice, have acted as he describes himself to
bave acted upon this occasion? and when a
man 'thus stigmatizes himself what seliance
can yoa place on his testimony, when lie is
called for the puipose of UaCkenug the cha-
ncter of another? He tells you furthei^ -that
bt made no chaige before « magistrate, huA
continued to associate with this indivJdiul a^
befoce. But there is another important &ct,
which speaks for itselC^ -and cannot deceive
you, and which is directly at raziance with the
aceouat given by this witness. He says,
Dwyer was very flush of money ; he «as throw-
iqg about iiis notes ; and that circumstance led
to the x»c|>osition to which I have adverted.
So fan uom this being the casc^ ^ou remember
tfhat Dwyer is a marned man, with a ftymily df
^ihjree children, and was ob%ed to apply for
assistanre lo Ibe parish of Jdary4e4>one, and
thsU thc^ put him to work at the ■aili where
they employ persons in that situation. This
was at the vsary pedod when the witness sm
be was so tfiush of money, about two months
m§g9. Such is the natuie and ihe value of the
attack that bas been made i^pon the testimony
i]f Dwyer.
J9ow let us coandec what is the atoiy which
Dwyer .xelates, who must, I am pecsaaded^
notwithstanding the Attempt made by the*other
side, atandin ivour sudisment as an uninmeacb-
able ^dtness. He tells you iXaiadaon £ame to
him, and said ^' that be bad some proposition
to communicifte^ that it must be communicated
OM the Tuesday evening, but that he could not
can, heraBM be was going to ata&d aentryT'
What a xenarkable oiicumatance is tbii^ comb-
ing out too by mere accident. Where was
Davidson goings? He was going to wabch at
lord Hacrowl^s on 4be l^iesdav, of which
Dwyer could ^ve Jiiad *no knowledge. But to
pussue the ACoouBt^vfin by Dwyer.; beitays
that Harrison in 4»Bse|t«ence -of this interview
oalleft imon bio^ and on the Wednesday mouv-
iag for tne first time introduced him to Poz^
court. While be was there jrome of the other
parties came in, JVhisllewood among ibe rest,
and the parucnlars of 4his scheme were jon-
lolded to him* He was requested to Join in
the enterprise. He wu supposed io ^possess
eonsiderable influence vover many of bux^un-
tiymen -living in Qee*8*conft And .the neigh-
bourhood of that plaAO. I^^y «ndeavouted»
theBefore, tooress bim,ii&to their aerrice^ they
stood in neediof assistanoe, and jeemed to have
thoqght that at this late 4i(hi^ wiben.tbe acheme
was jopt for asecutioi^ Jthen was oot .much
risk in. making anchA'CommunicatioBu JUaU
events, when men att embajdud in demerate
designs of (hisnatuEe, something must lie put
to bazaid, something 'oaai be trusted 4x> their
agents and instiuments.; th^ must put them-
selves in some degree in the .power of othec^
■ad sely upoa their genentoi^ or, fidelity isai
this is genemlly done in the last atage of pn6p>
paratioi^ fom a hope that before ^.any thinff
can escape or be revealed* the objeet itseff
may be accomplished. Tbe outline of ihm
plai^ therefore, precisely as stated by Adams
u his evidence, was communicated to Dwyex.
He tells you, that the ministers fi^ere to ha
assassinated by one paJty, another party
to Aet Bre to the metropolis at various potal^
and a third body was to take possession of the
artUlery . These particulaw were stated to bLn
by Harrison and the other persons assembled
in Pox-court. Mark the other cifcumstaaces
of the case. Does not the preparation aoooid
with this ? Do not the mateiials that were at
that interview exhibited to him, eii^pport Ibe
rest of the atatement ? For what purpose were
&e^ie-balls prepared? For what purpose were
the band-grenaaes provided.? But above all^
lor what puipose were ihe rflannel bt^gs of gun-
powder to be ttsed P evidently ibr the artiUeiy,
tor which they were intended as cartridges*
We have beard muchicom the counsel for the
psisoner about the wildoess and extrax^gaooe
of this scheme; And J 4o think ii wasjuoat
vrild, extnuri^an^ and jviaionary. But Assume
only jone fact, one 4:ipinion that prevailed iw
the mind of the prisonei^iAAd it<ceases at once
to >have that cbaraotec The prisoner bed gq&-
ceived that the great mass4)f ibe peqple of this
country. And particularly «f the metropolii^
weie aisafiected to Ibe government j tbtt ibey
were tired of the constitution, and Af that Ay»>
tem of laws under whidi the nation bad ae
loEig floniished; thattbe g>ecyple, to useliis pwa
langug^^ were eveiy v^ve anxious for a
change;; and that th^ would be ready at twee
to joio m iwertuming the coastitutioiv And
establishing a new scheme orgovemment. He
hoped» ihereforci, thai by sti^ng e gmat and
stuofting blov^y in the aasaasination <if Jtbe
ministers of the Crowq, by causing fires to te
lighted in diflerent fATts of the metcc^list And
creatii^ that confusion and terror wbiob wonld
necessarily result from these AXtraordinaqr
events every tie would he ioo«ened,iobediAaoe
and order would ceas<^, the.i^irit of hatred (and
disa&ction to the government would >eveqr
where display itself, and that the whole p^yaical
fome of -tne metropolis migiNt ibe brought ieto
action, and empkiyed to auhArert the iews and
oonatitution of the empire. This was 4be
nature and character of the design^; not Ae wild
and visionaiy as my learned .friend .auppnw^
if the prisoner was^cosrect intbe .estimate arbicb
he baa formed of the qpinions .and foeliap Af
thegreat b^lk of ,the people. But int&a i
trust andimowthat hewAsmJatakenj for whal^
ererdiacontent and jdisaatisfJMrtion miyrjprevaU
from teamorary And amdental eaiwM^ wbat*
everm^lnethe vioIenoD'Of pasty feeUogaaad
party Animosity, I never «an b^vetbat Ae
people Af this fymAtnr Are not sinoendy And
warmly attached to the oonatitution oTthek
ibseiathera^ aiid to that Admirable .and equal
^tem of .la.w;^ % whigb.thair. pypenfe j£ietc
1ms, Aad^hMiiB MB «P wigHamlyiwDiected,
9id}
Jmr Hi^ 7Wato>i<
A. D. 1820.
r9i^
Had ftn eiplonoii taken pkce^ And manf per*
•onty which is by no mean* impossible, joined
in it^ destruction and devastauon to a great
extent might certainly bare been produced ;
but I never can believe that it would have been
attended with any real danger to this coustitu-
Iton and empire. But such was not the opinion
that prevailed in the mind of the prisoner ; far
other were his notions ; he considered that the
great mass of the people was tainted with re-
Tolntionary principles, and that if the functions
of government could but for a moment be sus-
pended, the whole of their power would be
Draught into action, and the destruetion of the
present system would be accomplished. I do
aot, therefore, feel the weight of that part of
my learned friend's argument, in which he
woold lead you to believe, that the plan could
not have been entertained by the prisoner, be-
eaiise it was wild and visionary : this would be
to belie all history, and to betray a deplorable
ignorance of the human character, and of the
heart and mind of man. My learned friend
has himself recalled to your recollection an
inetance, not of a person comparatively in a
humble station of life, but of an individual of
bigh rank, of great fortune, of considerable
talent and experience in the affairs of the
world, the earl of Essex, engaging in a scheme
maeh more extravagant, much more visionary
and frantic, than that imputed to the prisoner
at the bar ; and for which his life was sacrificed
to the violated laws of his country. Nay, look-
ing around at what is now passing before us
in other parts of this empire, I would ask,
whether the schemes entertained and pursued
by those to whom I am alluding, are not to
tiie full as wild and visionary as fiiose ascribed
to the prisoner and his associates. And within
our own time I remember an unhappy person
standing in the same situation as the prisoner
at the bar^ an officer of high rank in his ma-
jesty's service, of great and distinguished
bravery, of adcnowledged talent and experi-
ence,— ^I allnde to colonel Despard*— charged
%ridi a traasonaUe conspiracy, which, in its
Mject and the means hj which it was to be
•oeomplished, was infinitdy more wild, ez-
timvaganty and frantic^ than the atrocious
tdieme which you aje now considering : and
yet no doubt has ever bean entertained by any
reasonable man of the truth of that plot, or of
the propriety and justice of the vmict pro-
nooncea against him. And, therefore, without
oontrasting the absurdity of my learned friend's
mppoeition, that this was a scheme of assassi-
nation merely with a view to plunder,— -with-
out oontrastinjg thia supposition with the revo-
kitionary project spoken to by the witnesses,
tnd which is supposed to be so wild and irra-
tional,—*bot taking the question plainly and
•iniply, the extravagance of the project affords
no reasonable argument against tne guilt of the
prisoner. The only question will be, has the
fret been proved ? is the case established in
• 7 How. Mod. St. Tr. p. S45.
VOL. xxxm.
evidence? does the proof satisfy your minds,
not whether the project itself was absurd and
senseless, not whether it was such a scheme a»
reasonable men would have entertained, but
whether it was in reality formed ?
I have been insensibly led from the obser-^
vations I was making on the testimony of
\ Dwyer. Immediately aftei the communication
I was made to him, he left the house ; this waa
about one o'clock. He teUs you he was glad
I to get away ; while he was deliberating witb
himself what course he should pursue, he ac-*
cidentally met major James, and told him all
that had passed. Major James sent him to
the Secretary of State. In all this he might
have been contradicted, if what he has stated
was untrue ; for major James was present, and
might have been called on the part of the pri-
soner. What is there then to lead you to
doubt the evidence of Dwyer P to lead you to
believe that he is a man capable of coming
into court and, disregarding the sacred obliga-
tion of his oath, and ever^ other feeKng that
sways the heart of man, to invent and fabricate
a story, which is to consign to an ignominious
death, the prisoner at the bar and his asso-
ciates. Before you can come to this conclu-
sion, you must, without evidence, believe him
the most base, in&mous, and merciless of
mankind.
Then, when my learned friend says, thi»
case rests so entirely on the testimony of
Adams, that if you get rid of that, you have
nothing else upon which to come to the con-
clusion of guilt against the prisoner, he has
either forgotten, or intentionally passed over,
the testimony of Dwyer, and which confirms
in the strongest manner the leading particulars
of the plan, as communicated by Adams.
It is further objected, that none of these
witnesses were together, they were never pre-
sent at the same time- I thank my learned
friend for the observation :— if they were not
present at the same time, if they had no con-i
nexion with each other ; — if Adams and Dwyer
were present at different periods, when differ-
ent communications were made ; — ^the corres-
pondence between their evidence is more re-
markable, and the more convincing. It shewa
there is no concert between them. They tell
that of which they were themselves witnesses ;
and what passed at one period was in exact
unison and correspondence with what took
place at another.
There is another witness, a person of the
name of Hiden, whom my learned friends on
the other side have not attempted in the
slightest degree to impeach, either by evidence
or by cross-examination, and whose conduct
bas throughout been perfectly correct. The
same communication was made to Hiden which
was afterwards made to Dwyer. The precise '
day of the communication he did not recollect.
He was struck with horror at the proposal, and
commnnicated it to lord Harrowby. So anx-^
ious was he to give the information, that he
intercepted lord Harrowby as .he was coming
3N
915] 1 GEORGE IV.
out of the 9mkf and delmr«d to him a Ml0r
iddretsed to lord Caitlereagh, oontainiog th*
kitelligenee which he-had received. My leern*
ed friend wis desiroiw to throw this hack to a
distant period. The witnen did not recollect
the pieciee day, whether it was one^ or two,
or three days, before the iotended meeting;
he had not taken pains to prepare his endence
for the occaoon. Lord lurrowby is called ;
he tells you it was on the Tuesday, about two
•'dock, some hoars after Hie andr had been
decided npon in Fox-court, in consequence of
Ate jNodttction of the aew8pq>er.
Now that I have meationM the newanaper^
I must obserre, that mv learned friend snjH
nosed this account of the intended dinner to
be all a fabrication; that Edwards was the
aothov and inventot of it^ for the purpose of
hiTolTiDg the prisoner and his associates in the
gnih of high treason. I am sure every thing
that rests merehjr upon assertion, every thing
that is not proved in the cause, all that ie sar<«
mised about spies, and ether topics of a similar
nature^ resting upon no proof, will be rejected
from your consideration; but was it, as my
leaned friend has hinted, an ideal dinner?
The cards had been sent out on the Friday, or
Saturday, and it was announced in the usual
way in one of tiie ministerial papers. But
some doubt was entertained upon this point ;
a gentleman was called^ representing himself
to be the court reporter ; he said, the comma-'
sicatioii did not proceed firom him; but a
person from the New Times office, in which
paper the article appeared, produced the ma«
auscript^ which contained several other an«
nouneements of a simihurnaiture^ and they were
all proved to be in the hand*wriung of another
court reporter of the name of Lavenu. Snch
are the extraordinary surmises and suspicions,
^vrfaich have been introduced into this case. It
was supposed, that no dinner was intended ;
that the whole was a fiction ; that some person
behind the scenes, ^ho possessed great influ-
ence over the prisoner, and could move him
Uke a poppet, had for his own purposes in-
setted this article in the paper;. but when the
afihir comes to be investigated^ the cloud is at
once dispelled. The faot is, that a proper and
decent interval having elapsed since the fune*
lal of the king, the cabinet dinners were re-
sumed, the cards were issued, and on the
IViesday it appeared in the usoal form in the
newspaper.
But to return to the evidenoe of Hiden. He
says that Wilson, one of the prisoners, cem-
monieated to him aU the particoiam' of the
plot, and his statement oovrespoods precisely
with the acoount given by Adams, by Dwyer,
and by.^fowment ; that few parties werete
be formed ; that-the town was to be sete»fi»e
in- varioue places ; that; afttaoka were to be
made in dimrant quarters;' and that for that
pnrpoe^ tfttecaanott were te be seised, and all
tWs was to be consequent on the attack at
lord Harrowby's. Wilson further stated, diat
Oee'a^oart where-D^tfyer lived were all in it,
r JlUsltewood [§10
for DwvarhBd given them reaeoo to mppos^
he would embark in the transaotioDw He tel^
yea that he felt it aecessaiy to do se, for hie
own personal security. Tkna is at oeee a am^
irmatioB of the tnitk of the statements both of
Dwyer and Hidem They have had no com*
BMnicatiee together; Dwyer had given the
prisonen reason to ftuppese they would be
joined by the people at Uee's-conrt ; and Wil-
soB eomnuMioatea that circnmstaaee to Hiden,
whidi oonfitms, in a remaxkaUe manner^ the
evidence of Dvvyer.
Now, gentlemen, I will arit yo« with eoo^
fidence, what becooMs of the observation thef
this case rests entirely on the teetimony off
Adams ? Am I not justified in saying, that
if Adams were the most infomoos of witnesses^
and yon were even to blot his evidence firaaa
voor notes, there is abundantly sufficient te
bring home the case to the prisoner at the
bar?
Passing from this evidence, letnscemete
the events of Cato^treet/— 4e foots wfaieh caiH
not be contradicted or disputed, which speak
for themselves, and speak so stiengly, tiwt m^
learned friends have been compeltod to admil
that there was at least an intention to assasi*
sinate his majestjF's ministers. But, I coneetee
that if yoa shaU be of opinion that such an
intention was entertaineo,— en intention le
assassinate not merely this or that indtvid«al
in the government, but by one great and
sweeping blow to destroy tiie whole oabinet^-^
tins will go a great wey indeed te satisfy yee,
that there were further objects in eontempl*-
tion ; because I cannot suppose that from any
motives of enmity or rsveage directed a|;aliiBl
individuals of whom the prisonees ooahl have
no personal knowledge, they would have ene*
banced in a design so dangerous aiid> so wid^«
ed. If they formed the design- of mmdeiieg
the ministers oF the Crown, it is impessible te
suppose that this was intended to be effiectei
with any other than an insurrectionaiy view*
I think, therefore, that in this eoneession ea^
. feorted from my, learned friends by the ferae off
the evidenoe, they have abandoned the caseef
the prisoner; for, with all< their ingenaitfytlMy
could not even shape a plae4blh> oaseia sem*
port of their snppositien'tfaat smcha^blaweoew
have been inteneed with anyothev'
to form the basis of an* insurreelion^ in
it was hoped and espeoted that thegieat>bod)^
of the people would ittstaady jein« Aetts^he
triflina mcensof thepaities^ thnD cansidaseii
tion, ia the view I have* tahen>ol the oas% hi
no objection against thereai^ o|) tl» damtt«
AU that they oonoeived te> W neeenavy Ihe
the attainment off their olijedt waa toetrike^eotf
mat bfewr-^te exhibit an* appeannae' ef
fosee; andt Ihef eraAdeatiy^ eipeatedt tMff
woeld' be followed- by^a^ geoml' MTolt' thegp
might lead aed coiid«ic9 at' their pUasMsah
Without entering inte details of whattooH
place in Cato-street, I beg-leavetodireot ytMt
attention for a moment to the nature of the
prepamt|ons« If the conspiracy was merely
0171
Jot ^^ Trtutnt
A* D. 1B20.
lOlt
vtth 4 VMW tapkmder, wbjr prapttxe iMrteiials
fer loading cannon ? — whj prepare io large a
quantity of ammunitioa? My learned friend
has attempted some explanation of the motives
of that part of the design which related to the
netting fin to the metropolis. If he thought
•ttcfa explanation necessary, and endeavoured
to show how it agreed with the auppoeed de*
sign ^ plunder, it was «quaUy incumbent on
him to give a stnnlar explanation as to the
olhcr ciBciunstanoes of preparation aade by
the piisoners : bat be has not attempted to do
Ihia. And, tnirvth, the materials odleoted
were inconsistent with any other view of the
fiaee than that which I have stated ; and they
ttonfirm beyesd the possibility of doubt the
atory told 1^ Adams, Monument, and Hiden ;
the latter •f whom was so anxious immediately
Io give iafoiusation, for the pntpoaeof coun*
Itncting this most in&moiis plol.
But it is objected tliat we have not caUed
other witnesses who might have been woduced
-^that there is a person of the name of JBdwatds
whom we have not examined. The fact is, we
have called two persons who were engaged in
the conspiracy with the prisoners.; and if we
iiad called ethers, it woukl only have had the
effirat of lemiing fte a still more copious torrent
of invective firaaa the other side. We have
called two witnesses, and we faavm oesiknned
their testimonT bayood the possibility of dis«
Cite. But when my learned friends say we
venot ceiled certain other pemens to sup»
pert the case of tbe prceecutaon, how maik,
laore strongly does the observation apply
Ugainst the priaoner who hae wMnesses in his
power to produce, his own friends and asso»
oiete»^Potter, Palin, Hvlis, and Hidl, and
others vrfao were present on the same eeossion^
eiko have been asentioned, and who might
kave heen catted te Aow that the ecoount given
by the witnesses lor the Gievn is islae and
ahricatad; end yet not one of Uiett has vp*
pearsd to oofttradiet the statement made on
the part ef the preaecntion.
■ But this plot, it is contended, had no politic*
•al object in view. Observe the language and
eenduct of die peisoner. The numbers at
GalD^treet were not so many as he expected ;
o-xthey amounted only to twenty^ve. lie was
nlatmed;— he waa apprehensive the^ might
deaert hinu He endeavenred to inspire theaa
vith oonidenoai He waooed them of the
danger of retseating.— It would prove, he said,
noother Despard's job. Why that aUnsion,
bothccanse his enteiprise was of a sinuhw
chaneter1«*-Gan it be exphdned on any other
jprineiple ? Does it not show what was neasing
v hie mind at the time, and evince toe true
antore of the enterprise more satisfiustetily
tken evidence of anv other descri^on ! But
ID puaoe this ttiU nvther : — Davidson is ap»
pnriieoded, and immediately exclaims, ^let
Ihaae he daaancd who will not die in liberty's
eansei" and he sings a line ef die admisaUe
Wlad of the peat Biums^ • Seou wha' ha' with
Wiaitaae faled^ Does not ins speak foe itself
I
in terms too distinct to be misenderatoodl
Does it not unfold his heart and mind to our
observation, and show what was passing there
at the time ; what was the object of the crimi-
I aal enterprise in which he had embarked ^-what
it was for which he was then a prisoner?--*
Assassination to be followed by plunder ?-—
No, but assassination to be followed by revo«
lution, and the establishment of that which he
miscalled libertv« And here it is impossible
not to deplore me selMelusion of these mis-
guided men who, engi^ed in an atrociouir
design agmnst the laws and constitution of
their countiy, and which was to commence by
the sacrifice of some of the best blood of the
nation, by the murder, among others, of that
distinguished individuid who had led our armies
to victory, and exalted among the nations of
the earth the name and character of English*
men, coidd suppose that they were treading in
the steps of the great Socfttiah chieftain, who,
vrith the spirit ana the energies of a real patriot,
laboured to free his country from a foreign
y<dce; and with inadetpnte means and re*,
sonrees, but animated by an uneonqnerafole
spirit, kept at bay the power of England, per-
forming d!eeds of the most heroic valour, tiU he
fell at last a victim to the basest and most de*
gradmg troadiery.
I have gone throudi this cattse< I feel my-
self exhausted, and I am afraid I have worn
out vour patience. My omissions will be aap«
Shed by my lord. Let no suggestions maae
y my learned friend operate on year mind%
except ao for as thcae suggestions arise cot of,
and are snpporled by the evidenee. It is easy
to acatter insioaattons, and to imprte blame;
hnt you, I am sure, will not oonsider aceuai^
tion, st^l leas dark and indistinct aurndses^ ai
proof. Yoa ace tald that the prisoner ia eon«^
tending with the passer of the Crawn, but he ii
contending before a Britiah iuiy, wbe^ if tb^
were to incline to either side, it woetd be in
fovour of the accused : and I am sure, knowing
as I do those who are associated with me upon
this oeoasion, there is no wish or disposition,
onHhe part of the prosecution, to press against
the prisoner any point beyond what justice re-
quires* We have no other duty, and can have
no other desire than to lay the case fiurly be-
fore you. It vrill be for you, then, reoeivittg
the law from hia lesdriiip, who is bound by the
same obiigatioa as yourselves, to say whether,
upon the evidence which has been laid before
you, you are satisfied that the prisoner is guilty
of the crime with which he is charged. Every
assistanoe whidi extensive talent and long or*
perience, and knowledge of the law eould af-
ford te a person in Ids situation, he baa re-
ceived. Nothing Ihhi been wasting to his de*
Before I cooelade, I beg leave to repeat
what has been said by my learned friend^ the
oounael fat the priaoner, that if yon entertala
a raaaonable doubt on the aubjMt ^ hia guilt,
it will be your duty to acquit him : but, on the
other haaid, as the guasdiaas of the pubiie
919]
1 GEORGE If.
Trial vfArikur nitOeaiood
t930
peace, actin;; under the sacred obligation of
the oath which you have taken, if you are
satisfied that the case is proved against him,
you will discharge your duty, without looking
to the consequences, with that firmness, impar-
tiality, and integrity which have ever been the
distinguishing characteristics of an Englidi
jtfry.
SUUMXNG'TJP.
Lord Chief Jutike AbhotL — Gentlemen of
the Jury;^-This is an indictment against
Arthur Thistlewood, the prisoner now at the
bar, and several other persons, who, in the
progress of this triali have also appeared at
the bar in order that they might be identified
by some of the witnesses, charging them with
the crime of high treason, 'fhat crime has
been truly stated to you to be the greatest
known to the law : it is so, because it com-
prises not only individual and private e? il as
most others, but a great and extensive public
evil also. A charge so serious, requires at the
hands of an English jury, and will, I am sure,
from what 1 have already seen, receive from
you the most grave and mature consideration.
The charge upon the record is divided into
several heads : — the first is, tliat of compassing
and imagining to depose the king — ^the second,
that of compassing and imagining to put the
king to death— the third, that of compassing
and imagining to levy war against the king, in
order to compel him to change his measures
and councils-*-and the fourth, that of actually
levying war against the king. Two of these
eharges, namely, the compassinfg and imagin-
ing the death of his majesty, axid the actually
levying war against him, were declared to be
treasons by a statute passed as long ago as the
reign of king Edward the third, in the con-
struction of that ancient statute it had been held,
not only in many cases passing in judgment in
our Courts, but also by the opinion delivered
to us ,by grave and learned writers upon the
law on that subject, that all conspiracies and
attempts to depose his majesty, and all con-
spiracies and attempts to levy war against him,
were overt acts of a treasonable intention to
take away his life, because, as experience
shews us, the death of 4he sovereign generally
follows his deposition. In order, however, to
remove any mistake that persons might fall
t|)to, a statute was passed in the reign of his
late majesty, similar in substance, and nearly so
in language, to several statutes which had been
formerly passed, bat which operated for a
season only, by which the compassing or
imagining to depose his majesty, or the com-
passing and imagining to levy war against him,
or to compel him to change his measures and
councils, were each declared to be a substan«
tive treason. And as the evidence in this case
points more directly to the compassing to de«
pose and to levy war against him, than to the
actual intention to take >away his life, the most
simple way of presenting this case to you, is,
U> diirect your minds io those pacts of this in-
dictment, whi<A charge the compassing and
imagining to depose the king, and to lewj
war against the king in order to compel him t»
change his measures and councils.
You will observe, that the substance of tho
charge is anade to consist in the intention — in
the compassing, imagining, and intending, and
not in tne actual deposition of his majesty, or
in the actual levying war;— such intentioB,
however, must be muiifested and followed up
by certain acts of the parties, which acts mutt
be (as they are in this case) stated on the re-
cord, and proved to the satisfiictionof the jury,
as evidencing Uie traitorous intention.
Now the acts charged on the indictment are,
as applied to each count, the same ; — they are
first, the meeting, conspiring, and consulting
amongst themselves to destroy the government
of this realm as by law established-— meetings
and consultations to levy war against the kii^,
to subvert the constitution and government as
by law established — ^meeting and conspiring to
assassinate and murder divers of the privy
eouncil of the king — ^maliciously and traitor-
ously providing large quantities of arms and
weapons, in order to arm themselves and
others, for the purpose of raising and levying
war against the king^-meeting and consfurtBg
to seise divers cannon, warlike weapons, anna,
and ammunition, in order to arm themselves
and others, for the purpose of raising and
levying war against the king--meeting and
conspiring to bum and destroy divers bouses
and ooHdings in and near London, and divers
barracks used for the reception and residenee
of the soldiers, troops, and forces of the king,
and to prepare combustibles for the purpose
of burning and destroying the said houses,
buildings, and barracks — ^nd further, the
actual assembling in arms with intent to
assassinate, kill, uid murde rdvrers of the privy
eouncil of the king employed in the adminis-
tration of the afiairs and government of this
kingdom, and to levy war against the king.
These, gentlemen, are the foots charged in
the indictment as (in technical language) the
overt acts, that is, as the evidence of the in»
tention, and the steps and measures adopted
in order -to carry that intention into effect; to
these acts therefore the evidence that has been
laid before you has been directed, and if these
acts are proved to your satisfaction, or any
important part of them, it will then be for you
to consider, whether the criminal and traitorous
intention charged— to depose the king, or to
levy war against him — ^is satisfactorily proved,
and if so, as each is treason, it is not mateaal
to distinguish between them.
You have heard in this evidence, of a Tery
extraordinary (I may say for the present) pro*
ject, alleged to have been entertained by this
person now at the bar, and others associating
with him ; a protect, as it is said, to takn
away the Jives <» all the persons most con-
fidentially employed in the Administration of
the government of this realm by his migesty,
whsn they shofdd hs sssamUed at a diBiier, aiii
d2tl
jP^ m^TrioMu
A. t>. ttSOi
t03S^
that soma of Hm eoniptnton wera to proceed
At the same time, and others immediately after*
wards, to set on fire buildings in Tarious jMirts
of the town, to seize some pieces of artillery^
to tako possession of the Mansion-house, and
to declare that a new government was estab-
lished ; thereby to oT^throw tiie eiisting go-
vernment and the subsisting order of tlungs,
and to substitute something else in its place.
This is the general nature of the project im-
puted to the prisoner ut the bar; it is im*
portant for you to consider whether that pro-
ject is to your satisfection proved. Tbe ques-
tion iSf not whether it was likely to be suo-
tessfnl, but whether it was intended by these
persons, and whether steps were taken to carry
It into effect. The improbability of the success
of sucJh a scheme is fit matter for your consider-
ation in weighing the evidence that is laid
before you, in order to prove that the scheme
did exist ; but your inquiry is, did that sdieme
exist or did it not? and is it proved to your
satisftiction by the evidence that has been laid
before you.
A very large body of e^enoe has been laid
before you, in order to prove, that such a pro-
ject, however wild and visionary, was in fact
contrived, and that steps were taken by the
Snsoner and others to cany it into effect*
ome vritnesses have given you minute details
of various conversations taking place at various
times; and in weighing the effect of that
testimonv, it seems to me that you will do well
to consider, rather the general substance and
import, than the precise accuracy of eveiy
particular expression that may have fidlen from
any one witness : a long detail vrill hardly ever
be free from some occasional error or mistake ;
the question properly, is not whether there be
any trifling error «r misuse, but whether the
suDstance and body of the testimony laid be-
fore you be or be not in your judgment true.
Some of the persons who have been called
before you to give evidence upon this occasion
are truly represented to be persons who ac-
knowledge themselves to be accomplices in this
most traitorous design — that observation,
however, does not apply to all who have given
evidence; and much observation has been
made upon the credit that ought to be riven
to persons in that situation. Upon that subject
' I will only say, that by the law of this, and I
believe of every other country, accomplices
are witnesses competent to be heard: the
credit that is to be given to them, is matter,
in this country, for the consideration of gentle-
men in your situation ; and that credit must
depend, in a neat degree, on the probability
of the story they tell, or on the confirmation
that may be given to tiiem from other and pure
sources, so for as what they mr » capable of
coofiimatioii, and Qpon the absence of that
contradiction which may be adduced if Ae
story related be not true.— Tbere is no rule of
law which says that the testimony of 4icoom-
plices mutt be credited ;«-4hen is no rule of
law, or of practice, that Jmi said it «mift be
rejected t— to say it must be, woidd offer tho
greatest possible latitude to crimes ; because,
as was truly observed by one of the learned
counsel for the prosecution, if bad men once
are given to nnaerstand they are in no danger
of being brought to justice from disclosures
made b^ those who participate in their crime,
they will trust to tnis and proceed in their
widLed designs ; whereas we know bad men
entertain great distrust of each other, which
often prevents the perpetration of those offences
which cannot ■ be committed vrithout the con*
currence of several persons.
Having made these general observations in
Older to direct your attention, in the best vray
that I am able, to the evidence that has been
laid before you, I will now, as it is some houn
since the evidence was distinctly heard by you,
proceed to re^d a great part, if not the whole
evidence ; so much as occurs to me as neces*
sary to submit to your consideration, and moro
if you desire it.
llie first vritness called vras Robert Adams,
on whom so much remark has been made by
the learned counsel on one side and the other.
According to his account, he must be con-
sidered as an accomplice in the treasonable
conspiracy, if any treasenable conspiracy ex-
ist^, because he acknowledges that he attend*
ed many meetings, and vras one of those who
were assembled to carry it into efi^t. The
account he gives of himself is, that he is a shoe-
maker; that he formeriy belonged to Uie
royal regiment of Horse uuards ; that he has
left that service eighteen TJBan ; that he first
became acquainted vrith Brunt, one of the
persons indicted, about the year 1816, at
Cambray, in France ; that his first introduc-
tion to the prisoner Thistlewood, vras on the
13th of Januaiy, at his ovm lodgings in Stan-
hope-street, Clare-market. He says, ** I vras
introduced by Brunt, who, in going into the
room, said to Thistlewood, this is Uie man I
vras speaking to yon about; Thistlewood said,
* You vrere once in the life-guards,^ I said no,
I had belonged to the Blues ; he said, * I sup-
pose you are a good soldier,' I replied that I
could use a sword to defend myself, but I vras
not so dever as I had been, not having been
in the habit of using arms for some time.''
Then he says ikax Mr. Thistlewood began to
allude to the genteel people of the countiy,
endeavouring to make tnem appear mean and
contemptible; saying, that there vras not one
of them who vras worth so small a sum as ten
pounds, that was worth any thing for the good
of his oountry : as to the shopkeepera of
London, he sand they were a set of aristocrats,
and were all woridng under one system of
JDveroment ; that he shoidd glory to see the
ay that all Uie shops were shut up and
plundered; that Mr. Hunt vras a damned
covrard and no friend to the people, and he had
no doubt acted as a spy for government ; that
Mr. Cdbbett, with all his vrritiags, was of no
good to the conntiy, and he had no doubt that
he toowaa«.qyyaa well 4b Mr. Hunt. Ho
H»J
1 O^BGS lY.
Trud^Afikm Tkktkmo^
[«94
W^Mves ti^Al Apisbed tb« 4is«ottnew He wvj%f
be was ffienvar ds opnfined for debt Im White*
ciossi-itrfie^ pnson ; timt he mw Mr. Thiatle*
wood QB% Sunday eJt the White Han ia
Brook'sHnarJcety a bouse Ibmt by a peraoo of
the name of Hobbs ; besides ThistJewoody Ingit
Brunt, and a pecson of the miae of HaU (who
is net one of those indicted) wf re fthei^ end
Tidd» wtie is one of the p^nooe indicted,
fwne in; ^*we met in a room in ths baek
yard." The witness aaya, that he eapne eiit of
pfisoa on the aotb of Januaiy, thai on the 31st
he saw Thistlewood the firisenar in a back
lipQqs on the sane floor where Brunt Ured,
whi/ch i# in Fox-court, Gmy's<4n»4ajie ; Brant»
IngSt and Hall who is pot indicted, and
Pi^idsoa who is, were present ; nothing parti*
oalar took place on that night ; that he net
thep again on the Wednesday ereaing;
XUstlewood, Bmnty David9on, Harrison, and
% Derson of the name of Edwards, who is not
indicted, were present; nothing particular
passed on that oceasion, only that iia saw a
number of pike staves; Inistlewoed was
a^ous to hare then ferruled, and expressed
hinwelf rather surpriaed that Bradbum, who i«
9ae of the persons indicted, was not oome ;
and DaTidson in parta»laiv expseseed hinself
dissatisfied ; he slid that BradbQin bad been
fupplied with money to buv fenulee ibr those
etares,fHidh9 was dissattified that thegr were ml
done: he sayi, ^ the staves were quite green,
and appeared a« if they bad Just beep eut."
tlie stetes Have been prodaeed to you, and
£rom the eppeamiee af them yen will probably
be able to judge, i;4ieAer at that time they
^iiould or would not hare ^ q>paaraooe
described.
He does not know that aay thing elae pasa*
«d at that meeting; but the meelingp eon*
tinned to be held twiee a day in thet laam, up
to the aard of Februaiy : he says that he heard
^iDttt s^y that ha bad hised a roem for Ji^;
there was no iundture ia the room. Ha saya»
^^ One evening afterwards» about tan daya bei*
lore the funeral qf his Ute majesty, I went up
into the ioa«i« Thistlewood and Harriee^
vase sittii^ before the ire; they made room
€ar ne, aad I sat down batweea then, Har*^
risoa told Thistlewood he had met one of tha
life-guards, who told him that as many of the
boraa aad loot as could be spared would be at
'^ miiiea^'a funeral ; that this wQuld be a ia-
vourable opportunity to kick up a row, and aea
<^at they oeuld do that nighty which ouita
met with the pdsonet'a approbatioa, and be
^ugbt it would be a good opp<Klunity, end
■be had no doubt if they eould take tha two
pmoee of eaaaon firom Qfaya^anrUna, and lAia
ai» piee ea from the artillery gmmd^ they vaaldy
'Ware moraing, be able to put theBMelyea
in passassion4)f Loadaa : that it aay annmnaii
^ataock went to Windear, the tiaopa would ba
aa tired» when they got to London, Ihey wioidd
baabla-ta da nothing. Ike prisqawsaidy hm
Hmwffhi it night be aa imaged, that tlmf
Windsor; thatit mould also be ^aoeeeaiy to
gat possession of the teHegraph over the wamr,
to prevent any inielligaaee beiag conveyed to
Woolwich; that by this time they should ba
able to Ibna a provisional govameeent, who
weie to send to the sea ports ta prevent any
gentleman from leaving this country without a
passport from this pravisioaal govemmeat.
Me spoke of Dover, Biighton, BHmngatc, and
Margate, especially of Briditoa, not that ha
thought the aew king would be able to be there
or even at the faneial of his &ther, on aoooant
of his then illness. He said it was of no use
for the new king, q>eekiag of his present
miyesty by that name^ to think of wearing tha
Crown; that the present fi^mily had inlumted
the Crown \ao% enough. Brunt and lags af-
terwards easse into the room, and Thistlewood
oommuoieated to them what had beeneaid.
Brant and Ings heeid him, but positively da-
dared that there was nothing short of the as-
sassination which they had io ?iew would sa*
tiefy them.'' Fiom this it must be inferred, if
what this witness says is true, that the convaiw
satioa between diese pemoas was about amas-
sinatioa; and it vi further to be observed, that
if what this witnuM states is tiu^ it is dear
that that had been talked of at a former meet-
ing. He says, Brunt had told me theee wera
two or three of them who had dmwn out the
plan with a view to assaniaate the aMaastera
at tiie first cabinet dinner which they had i they
scarcely ever met but this was the sol^eot of
eoBvaraation. ^ On Saturday, tha tOth of Feb-
raaiy,'' he says, '' I went again to the room in
Foi«OMurt, about eleven or twelve o'dock ii|
the fbnsnoon ; I saw Tbiatlewood, Pavidson,
Harrison, Ings, Brunt, and Hell there, aa my
going into the room I they were all set rowicl
die room ia a deep stedy ; in about a minula
they all got up, turned round, and said, well
thea it is agreed, — ^we are come to tha detei^
minaliea that if aothiag oaeurs between thia
Mid Wedneeday night, oa the next Wednea*
day night we wiU go to work: it was said
th^ were all so poor they aould wait no
longer. Thistlopwood proposed that the eoai-
nittea ahoald meet amrt naming at aiaa
o'clock, 10 draw ant a plan to go by, aad ba
said to Brant, you had better go saaad thn
afteraeon aad acqaaiat what man yea can
bring forward, in oider to bong them to tha
eoBwaittee room tomorrow morning. Brasit
laid he hfti some work Io do» and he thoimihe
be aboald ]|ot have tima» bat be woiM gat up
ia the momoQg aod aaqaaiot a lew; but tb«i
they did not wmit a gitat many to be ia tha
fooik Bcoat wee Abevt ta loMe the foasa
when the wiaaae»eaUed la him, and eaid, i4
would be higUy aecemevgr tbat aH who attattd*
^^^a ajn^ ^W^P^^^w^^^^i^p^^ wgw^ ^^^^Wv i^^^awflP*wP^j n^^apaaa— •
biiag anae witb then ia aiae apy ettcesa
ahauld ooma op, aad Brunt said, if any offiaer
was to caom into tha team he woald itia hioa
thiOBgh.'* Tbsa be pioeeeds. ia aay» ^Osi
Suads^ nomiag I went « little afier eleven 3
^Madpiaient any ardei^ Waving LmlaA £»• it nu etf dnfc^tem Hie fiegandtbe snaw^
MSI
Jbr H^ Tr^aton^
that I did iM»t w» m\» ma ttMte til! TIdd
0poke to me ; ttiete were Tbistlewood, Brent,
IngSy HaU, DcindsoD, HanrisoD, Cook, Brad-
Iraro, Edwards, Wilson, and myself there. I
ftmnd they had not entered on the business
upon whieh they had met. The prisoner, on
looking at the nmnber of heads, said, I think
in is time to begin the business ; counting the
heads, and seeing twelve, he said i thiidc ^t
it qafite enough to form a committee. Ttdd-
wtts proposed to take^e chair, by Thistlewood.
Tldd took the chair, and sat down with a pike
in his hand. Thistlewood was oir his right,
imd' Brant on his left hand. Thistlewood be*
gad^ and said, gentlemen, I presume you all
kuow what you are met here tor, and turning
to the door, said, the west^nd job. Brunt said^
mention' their names, what signifies ; but was
eaHed to order by the chairman. Tliisthswood
sand, gentlemen, we are come to this determi-
nation, as we are all of us tired of waiting sb
lonff,to do-lftiisjob. As we find there is no
proiHibility of the ministers meeting all together
between this and Wednesday night, we are
eome to tt determination to- take (fiem sepa^
futeiy, at their own houses ; we shall not have
m opportunity of destrt^ng so many as if they
were to dine «dl together, if we take them sepa-
rately ; but we must content ourselTes with getk>
ting two or three, or four, as we can get them. I
anppciseit will take as many as forty or fifty mciif
to do ihe west-end job; and I propose, at the
same time, that the two pieces or cannon in
Gfay's^nn4ane^ attd the six pieces of camion at
Ihe Artillery-ground, shaH be taken. Cook pro-
posed to take the lead> and «o take the command
at tiie taking of those cannon : he proposed', aftef
fObBae were taken, to take the Mansion-house as
rseal for the pi^sional goremment.'' He
says, then diey were to make an attempt upon
the Banlb of Bngland : he says. Cook proposed
further, that Palin should be the man intrusted
to set fire to die buildings in different parts of
London. This was all that passed on thai
subject; but Thistlewood said there wu time
enough, between- iSkalt aadf Wednesday* nighti
to settle and improt^e it; bet he would (hop
i§t& suBjett feir the' present, as Brtmt had a
^moshion to make': upon thi^r, Ue saTs^
• Bronte eamtf forward tO' state his pita; Vut
Msllewood sdd, *Sto{>^ niy pn^position bad
bMier be nnt 'pot fitottf ttte'Cmdi^;' itwas' put
Htm the* dbair, anAi carried' tmdiniiaiously.
ttvAt now came forward and^posedthatthey
ifiouM asMM^iiafta'as maaf&f the iMnistet% as
ibey eoidd, on- Wedtiesday night, if no oppor^
tonltyof their diniiig tog Aier 'ocetarted' heme
Ihattime; tbeH he fortber^noposed^, diatthe
tteii wlio iSiottld flo for'tfie'issaasiuatiou of the
■raristers should be divided into sepanitto lots^
smd that one msen was to be selected oat of
Melvlot to give the blow, and whatever man
it foil 'Upon shoulft be bound' to do it or be
ttiirdertd' himself; FpotI Aislasked' Brunt
if be eupposed it' war not possible for a matt to
attempt such a things and ftil in it; and if be
did fail, should he be run- through upoir thd
A. IX 1890. [d30
spot? He said ito, certainYy not, unless theiv
was the least sign of cowardice : if he failed in
doing it, and was tlvoueht a good man, he
should not be run through. Brunt here ended
his discourse. It was put by the cbarrman in
the same manner as Thistlewood's measure^
and agreed to. About two minutes afterwards-,
before any thing else occurred, Palin, Potter,
and Strange came in.'^ Palin and Potter' ttri
not persons indicted, nor is Cook, who is owfi
Cf the persons spoken- of by this witness a$
being present. Uook, Potter, Palin, and Half,
four persons now named, are not included in
the indictment. Strange came in also. ^ They
were asked to^ sit down, and Thistlewood' told
them of plans that had been proposed : they
agreed to them the same as the rest had donel
After this Palin got op and said, that agr^eid^
as he Ad to the plaas^ which had been pro^
posed, ther^ was one thing which he wanted
to know : there were mai^ objects proposed,
and to corrr all' at one time, if it could be
done, would be a great acquisition. ^ You
talk,*** he says, ** of takin^^ from forty to fifty
men to the west-end job; now, I want to
know where* the men are to come ftom that
are to( tsfce iheier cannon' itt GrayVinn-lane^
attd those at the Artillery-grotind : fio* doubt
yotr Itoow better than me what strength
yov faanr got." He says; " I! catinot sty at
present ^^Hmt niDnofber I can* bring forward . 1
want to ktlow atto,*^ sitid he, '< in calling npAoik
the men I intend to go to, if P can tell themv
in fact, Tth« i^' to be done.** Hie WltuM
says, ''T7pon*thib the chairmah said, that ift>
doubt Mr. Palin knew the men he had^ to de-
pendf* upon*. B* was' agreed' that Palin sftofila
make* such- cottimunidations as^ hie might thitdt
prudent, and Pirlin was satisfied. There was
nothing tr^msactM rejgpilbrly in the chair afte^
that ; but they begaii to think of going home'tt^
get dieir dinners, in order, in the aflefnoon*,
to go to their men f and die prisonei' said to*
Brunt, *'Gh, well thought of; now, Mr. Piliik
is here, I would' advise you to tdce him'tothe
spot close by, and see whether it is praetlcalde-
or not.-" TRat w«U, to go to the new PurrtinflV
inn^boilding, itf Hblbonr, to seewltfgtlMrif tln^
pra!cticablb tiyfiVe'it^ they went; and^retiMdl
in- about t^ minutes; y^^ Ptalii sttid^ it
wibi'a y^ ^tAif' jo/tt; attd- it Would' liiake *
dathueQ^ good fte^ ; Htt^ they*be^aii tb dtptctt^
No^ mudr observation way ntttde to yoti
tfpon the titter incredibility of dds; blscatriNf^
being a new building, it couldnot easily be
set on fire ; according to the appelaranc^ itk
the stteet it is so, but whether it is completad
or not inside^ I do not know. This, howtfreiV
ik most importknt ; it was observed that if
it was untrue Palin is a competent witnes^
and the prisoner might have called him, and
Cook is another who has not been indicted?
both of whom are competent witnesses for the
prisoner. Neither of them could the Crown
compel to giv6 evidence, but' they might be
called by the prisoner, because they would not
Aea be catted' to criminate themselves; and
9271
1 GEORGE IT.
Trid^Artkwr TUdkmm*
[»2»
tbey ni^ hare dcaitd, if mitifwrty vitk
tntk ikif could hare denied, eoy eonremtioo
like that wliic^ tliis man apoks to. He taji,
''The prisoner said» before thej left the room,
be thoogfat it woohi be neceaiary to get the
nen together and give them a treat. Brant
turned roond, and laid with an oath, althoogh
be had not got much wori^ he had a pound note
which he would appl^ to that porDoce; and
the prisoner then inquired whether uej might
be taken to the Whiu Hart; that was a place
wbere they had formerly met, bat Brant said
be did not much like to go there after what
bad been said ; he said his own room would
do, if ha could send his boy and apprentice
out of the way. Thistlewood then talked of bis
own booscy but on giring it a second thought,
be said that will not do, as an officer Utcs op-
posite, and if he should perceive men coming
Mdiwaids and forwards it would give suspi-
cion.'' He says, ** I believe that finishes the
Sunday-morning business.'* He says, ^ On the
Sunday evening I went lo the White Hart, and
bad some convemtion with Hobbs. On Mood ay
noraiog I went again lo the room about ten
o'dodL ; Thistlewood . Brunt, Harrison, Hall, and
Ings were there, and others I do not reooUect.
I said, I had sometbinc to communicate to
them, and told them that Hobbs, the landlord of
the White Hart, had told me that two officers
had been there, and that they asked whether
there was not a radical meeting at his house ;
from wl^ch he inferred that there was informa-
tion given at lord Sidmouth's-office, that there
waa a meeting of that description held there.
'^ Upon this Harrison" (to use the expression of
the witness) ^ turaed round to me like a bull
dog, and said^ Adams, yon have acted vrrong,
for if yon had heard any thing it was your
l>nsiness to come to me or Mr. Thistle-
;wood« I said I did not conceive that 1 had
any right to withhold it from any one ; that I
thought it my duty to communicate it to all,
as it conceraed all. They swore at me again,
and said I had no business to communicate it
to any, but to them.'' He sayi^ ^ I argued
witn tiiem that I had acted right m oommuni-
cating to them what I had hmd. They then
proposed breaking up to call upon their men,
and also to attend at a meeting ^led the Mary-
le*bone Union : before we parted, I was ap»
pointed to oome again to wunt'a room, that
evening, to tell anjr person who came^ that
there was no meeting" they baring deter-
mined to go themselves, according to the
testimony of the witness, to the Umon Club.
He says, '' I went to Brant's room, and Potter
soon joined me. We went to the White
Hart, and Palin and Bradbura came there to
us* . On the Tuesday morninff," he says, ''I
went to the room again: there were then
£ resent. Brunt, Thistlewood, logs. Hall,
^aridson, Harnson, Wilson, Palin, Potter,
and Bradbura. While there, Edwaids came
in and went up to Thistlewood and told him
there was to be a cabinet dinner next night.
Thistlewood said I don't think that it troe* A
wood, it oootained an acooont that
were to dine ateariHarrowby's^in
square, on Wednesday evening." Then
relates that very terrible
hf Brant, which I need not repeat to yon.
He says, "Thistlewood proposed then dmt n
committee should sit directly to form a fredb
plan regarding the Tsisinition. X intea-
rapted him, tod called to their reeoIlcctioK
what Hobbs had said to me : upon this Hani*
son walked badiwaids and forwards, and said
if any man attempted to threw cold water
on the conoera, he would run that man thraogj^
with a sword. I was put out of the chair and
Tidd was put in. Tnistlewood wanted to
rroceed in the business^ when Palin said, slap^
want to be satisfied about what haraeaad
yesterday before we proceed any nuther.
Upon this " he says, ** after soase cercaMmy,
Brant proposed tint there should be a wat^
put upon the eari of Harrowby's that night."
They seem to have considered that if thiqf
kept watch there, and saw no police offioeis
or military, or any preparationa to prevent
their design, they mi^t fairly oondude their
design was unknown, if what the witness saj»
is correct. Then he says, " The piiaoaer,
Thistlewood, said he hoped every body
would be satisfied if no police officers or soC
diers went into the house ; and that they would
do what they had talked of to-morrow even-i
iog; the plan of the Sunday-moraing wns
altered as respected the assassination. Thistle*
wood then proposed that there should be forty
men allowed, and more if they could be got ;
he said there would be fourteen or sixteen of
the ministers which would be a rare hanl U^
murder them all. I propose, he said, goine
to the door with a note to present to enn
Harrowby : when the door is opened, for the
men to rash in and seiie the servants, and
present a pistol to them, and directly threate»
them with death if they offer to make the
least resistauce or noise. This bang done, »
party Were to rush forwards to take the com*
mand of the staircase; two men were tobeplacod
at the stairs leading to die upper part of the
house^ one was to have fire-arms, to ba protected
by another with a hand-grenade in his hand ; m
couple of men were to take the head of tte
stain leading to the lower part of the hoone^
they were to be anned the same as the othei»
at the upper stairs ; if any servants attempted
to make any retreat from the lower part oC
the house, or from the upper part of the house^
these men vrith the hand-grenades were ta
clap fire to them and fling them in amongat
them ; two men at the same time were to b^
placed at the area^ one with a blunderbu8s,i
and another vrith hand-grenade ; if any body
attempted to make their retreat from the
lower part of the house that w«^, they
were to have a hand-grenade thrown in
amongst them there; at the same time all
these objects were to be accomplished by se-^
euring the house, those mea who were to co^
9391
far High Trmuan.
A. D. 18%.
1930
in for the assassination were to rush in di-
rectly after, where their lordships were, and to
murder all they found in the room good or
bad ; he said if there were any good ones they
would murder them for keeping bad company.
Then the witness says, ** Ings " who is repre-
sented to be a butcher, ** volunteered to enter
the room first with a brace of pistols, a cutlass,
and his' knife in his pocket, with a determina^
tion, after the two swordsmen, that were ap-
pointed to follow him, had despatched them,
to cut every head off that was in the room,
and the heads of lords Castlereagh and Sid-
mouth he would bring away in a bag, he
would provide for the purpose two bags.** —
A circumstance worthy of your notice, because
you will beaTin mind that there were two
empty bags found on the person of Ings when
he was taken into custody. He says " he said
he intended, when he got into the room, to say
^'well, my lords, T have got as good men here
as the Manchester Yeomanry, enter citizens,
and do your duty.' Upon Uiis word of com-
mand from Ings the two swordsmen were to
enter, to be rollowed by the rest of the men
with pikes, pistols, cutlasses, or whatever it
' might be, and to Ml to work immediately in
murdering them as fast as they could ;*' he
says, ** Harrison, who has been a soldier, and
I, myself, were picked out, being the only men
amongst them used to the sword, and men of
the greatest strength and power. Harrison
had been a soldier in the life-guards. On
Harrison being proposed to go into the room,
Dustlewood asked me if I would go in ;" he
says ** I considered my life in danger" (there
had been considerable threatening language
if he is to be believed), '^ and I agreed to go."
After-the execution was done in the house,
they were to leave the house as quickly as
possible: Harrison was the man that was
appointed*to go to King-street Horse-barracks,
and to take one of those fire-balls and throw
it amongst straw to set fire to the premises ;
alter they left Orosvenor-square, Harrison,
Wilson, and the rest of the party were to pro-
ceed to OrayVinn-lane to the City Light-
Horse barracks, for the purpose of meeting a
party of men that were intended to be planted
there, and in case those men found themselves
not sufficiently strong to take the two pieces
of cannon at the Light-Horse bamicks, they
#ere to wait their arrival and would assist
them; they were to proceed from thence
to the Artillery-ground, ythOte Cook was
to be appointed; in order to lend him a
hand in case he had foond himself not snffi-
iHently strong to take the six cannon there.
Cook was to wait there for the arrival of This-
tlewood if he did not like to proceed ; he was
to bring the cannon fh>m the ground into the
street, and to load them' in order to be ready
to fire on any persons that might interrupt
Blim : bdt if he found Ids strength sufficient to
enable him to proceed, he was to advance
from there to the Mansion-house, if he found
himself capable of advancing to the Mansion*
VOL. XXXIIL
house he was to divide the six cannon into
two divisions, and take three' on' one side and
three on the other ; then he was to demand f
the Mansion-house, and on a refusal he was
to fire at it on both sides, it was thought on
doing that they would soon give it up— the
provisioned goverikment was to sit there : after
the Mansion-house was taken the Bank of
England was to he the next place to be at.
tacked, they were to plunder it of all they
could get, but not to destroy the bck)ks if they
could help it, for they thought by keeping pos-
session 01 the books, that would enable them
to see further into the villainy that had, be
said, been practised in the country for some
years past ; the regulation of the further pro-
ceedings was to be left till Wednesday ; Pa-
lin's plan was determined on, but the time was
not then settled. After the chair was left^
Harrison proposed that there should be a
counter-sign to be communicated to all their
friends, the countersign was Button; the
man that came up was to say, 6, ti, t, the
other man - was to say, t, o, n, these put
together were to produce Button, this was a
token by which they were to know each other.
He says, ** it was proposed that a man should
stand at the end ot Oxford-road to communi-
cate to any man that came up to htm the
room where they were to meet the next night.
In the afternoon I went to the house again ;
in going up stairs, I perceived a strange smell,
on going in I found Edwards, Ings, and Hall
there ; Edwards was making fuses to put -to
the hand-grenades; Ings ¥ras dipping some
rope yam, picked for the purpose, into stuff to
make, what they termed, illumination balb for
Palin ; Hall was dipping those into an iron
pot and putting sheets of paper on the floor to
receive these, af^er they came from the pot
they were wrapped up in it to prevent their
sticking to the hands. I stoppea only a- few
minutes. On the same Tuesday evening, I
went again, and then found two strange men
r had never seen — one I found to be Harris,
but I do not know the name of the other ;
Brunt and Thistlewood were there, Davidson
went to keep watch at six o'clock ; Tidd and
Brunt went off to relieve him at nine o'clock,
they started about half past eight, but Brunt
returned in about five minutes, as Tidd had
met with a man who was likely to be-of gr«iat
consequence and could not go. On looking
round the room he asked me to go; as we
went we' met Edwards, I asked him if any
thing particular bad been seen, he said, what-
ever had been seen he should communicate
to Mr. Thistlewood; Brunt and I went to
.Grosvcfnor-square, we 'saw Davidson in the
square and another man that I did not
know.'^ He says, **I told Brunt I was tired,
and we went to a public-house at the comer
of the mews where we had some porter, and
where Brunt played at dominos with a youB|f
man, and we staid there till eleven o'clock,
and then we went out and walked till twelve
o'clock, and then we went home. On Wed<«
30
081}
I GpORGE IV.
TriiU (^Afikmr ninlauood
(1889
Deeday, the next day, I went again to Fox*
court and I (Mind Brunt in his own room;
Strange came in alone, and soon after two
more persons; I turned my head and saw
some pistols upon the drawers. Strange an4
the men that came in tried the flints ; Brunt
then invited them into the back room; on
going there, I saw several cutlasses, a blun-
derbuss, the pistols were brought in and the
strangeiB began to put flints into them ; they
bad not been long there before Thistlewood,
Ings, and Hall came in ; Thistlewood k>oked
found and said, ' well, my lads, this now looks
•omething like, as if there was something
ymng to be done.' I complained of be-
ing in low spirits, and Brunt sent .out (or
some gin and some beer ; idiile the beer was
being fetched, Thistlewood said be wanted
some paper to write some bills on, such as
•ewspapers were printed on, I said, I thought
tartridge paper would do as well, and be, ^t
is Thistlewood, then said who wil^ fetch it ?
Brunt said my boy, or i43prentice, shall fetch
iit; Thistlewood save Brunt a shilling to send
(sr the paper, half a doaen sheets were brought
and Thistlewood sat down at a table to write
three bills to stick up against the buildings
that might be set on fire/' the words, as the
witness reocUects them, were these: ''Your
^rrants ara destroyed, the friends of liberty
are called upon to. come forward, as the
proTiaioDal government is now sitting. J ames
Ings, Secretary, 33rd February, 1820. In
wiitiag the last bill, I perceived Mr. Thistle-
wood to be extremely agitated, so much so
that he could hardly write, he said he was yery
tired, and did not know what was the matter
with bin, but he could^not write any more ;
he then proposed that Hall should take the
pea, but liall objected, another person, a
atrsttger, aflerwanls took the pen and sat
down to write what Thistlewood dictated to
bim :** what became of the papers he does not
know.
The witness was then questioned as to what^
was oontained in that paper; some doubt
being entertained on the part of the jud|^
whether it was proper evidence to be received
under the particular circumstance of not hay«
ing been seen in the hands of the prisoner, the
Sc^citor-general said, very properly, he should
not press the contents of that paper, and there-
fi»e we have no account of it. The witness
says, ^ while this paper was writing, Ings was
preparing himself in the manner he was to
enter the room at lord Hanowby's ; he put a
black belt round his waist for a brace of pia-
tols, and another black belt across his shouloer ;
after this there was a bag hung to each
shoulder, in the form of a soldier's hayersack ;
he then placed a brace of pistols one on each
side, and a cutlass ; he yiewed himself and
said with an oath, I am not complete now^ I
have forgot my steel and pulled out a large
knife, and brandished it about as if he were in
the act of cutting off the heads he intended*
Ue said he intended to cut off two^ and bring
them away, togeHier with one hand of a^y loid
Castlereagh, which might at a future daiy be
thought a good deal of; — these expressions he
had used many times.'' The witness describ*
ed the knife ; it was a large-bladed knife from
ten to twelye inches long; the handle was
bound with waxrcnd* Such a knife yon will
bear in mind waa afterwards seiaed ia tba
stable from one of the persons there who vj^
pears to have been Ings. He says, ''wluU
this waa passing, the others were arming thea»»
selyes. The first persona who left the room
went about four or five. Palin came ia about
an hour before X left, and Thistlewood and
Bmnt on some business left the room, and theo
Palin said, gentlemen, I hope all that have
met here this afternoon, are well acq^aaintad
with what you are goins upon; iu tlie fiat
place you ought to think, within yourseLveS)
whether you are going to ^ your country %
service or not; yeu ought to think whether
this assassination wiU be countenaoced by
your country. IS you conceive that the assa»-
siaation will be countenanced by your coun-
try, and that the people of the country, altar
you have done it, will turn of your side ; eyecy
man that flinches firom his duty, or turns out a
coward, ought to be buu through: unless you
come to this deietisination it is impossible to
do any good.'' He s^, " then a man, whosa
nam« I do not know, interrupted him. Thisi*
tlewood and Brunt l»d not then come in ; the
tall man said, you seem to speak as if eyery
man were ija possession of what we are going
upon ; if we turn out with a yiew to serve owr
country, I am not afraid of my life, and he
who is aft'aid of his life, ought to have nothing
to do with an affair like this. Brunt came im
after this, and perceiving an alteration in tiit
countenance of the meeting, he wished iM^
know the cause ; he was. told these were some
ia iha room who wished to know further of tha
plan. Upon this Brunt said, this is not the
place to teli them that; the^ should go wi^
him to the room in Edgware road» ai^ thoBa
every one sfiould be apprised of what they i»*
tended to do." He says» '^ Ileft the loom firsts
and Strange and three or four othecs,, thai I
do not know, went out afterwards* It wae
agreed they should walk two and two, im
order to avoid suspickm." Then be. giyes aa
account of his going up Holbom, and that he
waa tapped on the shouldec. He says, **uk
this room these was a cupboard, in which there
were swords, hand-grenades, and flannel bage
for cartridges for the cannon — alltheamman^
tion was not at Bnint'sii but what they called
the d^p6t, which was at Tidd'a house, who
lived in the next room to n^yself« When I set
off from Brunt's, I had a blunderbuss under my
great coat, and Bmul gavce ma a broomstick^
which was prepared to reeeiive a bayonet, ta
carry. Among other ansa at the d4p6t were
some pikes, some o£ them oki files, and soma
of them old bayonet points.; he sajps, thai %
man. came up and tola him to slacken his papci,
as Brunt was gcpe^ck for ayactbiefe; hedui
99Sf\
Jar High Treastm.
A. D. 1820.
[934
M Md weal <Mi to tbe «nd of Oxfotd-^treet t **
Tk teems Im did tiot kncyir this room to Cato-
slreet, he nvee tired of ste^in^;, end w«ft on hSs
iMy ^ck and be met Bruot, then he retarned
hook with Bnmt «im1 weot along the Edcware-
toid «?kii him until they met Thistlewool, v^
took them to Cato«etreet: he ftayt^ ** when I
got to the 9lablo*door HarHson came op and
told me to go io^ and I did so, I then saw
Davidson sitting down and Wilson standing as
if tft«y were doing something to the pikes ; I
oanaot say the number of persons there then ;
b«t at tihe conclusion there were^ aeeordiog to
Thitttewood's aocount, eighteen above and two
below; there was a carpenter's bend) with
amiB of diffsrent descriptions on it, and there
WW a ehest by the window where I plaeed
ayeelf ; when 1 went in they were handling the
d^iM«ot things, Tidd came in and proposed
ffoing to the sqnare to see whether the minis*
tors were getting together; Tliistlewood was
irtwent for some time, and when he came back
I heard, below stairs, a great deal of talkinr.
in consequence of that I went down where I
fiHiDd Thistlewood, Brunt, Davidson, Harrison,
«tt4 Wilson ; on seeing me they said the car*
liages are getting tiiere as fast as they can, no
leat than sis or seten are already there : Bhmt
timied round and said, what a hanl we shall
have among them. After this I went up stairs.
Thietlewood was much agitated, and Tidd
OMaein very litde afterwards. Ings turned
VMmd and said, do not think of dropping it
iwws if TOO do, I shall hang myself; it was
said Tidd would not come ; Thistlewood said
ha would forfeit his existence if Tidd did
not oome ; afterwards he came. Thistlewood
hoped they would not give up what they
had begun ; if they did, it would torn out
aDother Despard's job;^ allodintr to the ease
df a perseo of that name, of which you
hafve heard ; he says, '^ Thistlewood Aen be-
gan to count the mmber of men that were
theie, and said altogeffaer there were twenty,
and that that was plenty ; he said fourteen
iMfdd be saflfcient to go into the room, and
the other six would be sufficient to take care
of the servants; on this, fourteen men were
pMiLed out, and Brunt produced a bottle of
gin which was handed round. Thistlewood
said the number is sufficient ; supposing lord
Marrowby should have sixteen servants, they
are not prepared, we are. We can do what
we have to do in ten minutes. Almost di-
rectly afterwards we heard a noise at the bot-
tom of the ladder leading up to the loft.'' He
says, ^ Thistlewood upon this took the candle,
and looked towards the bottom of the bench."
He says, ^ He' turned round and put the can-
dle at the bottom of the bench quite conftised ;
aa thb instant the officers ascended the ladder,
and took command of the room ; two stood
aft the top of the ladder and presented two
piatoiff, and said, — Holloa 1 is any body in the
room? here is a pretty nest of you. We have
got a warrant to arrest you all, and as such
fit hope yott witt go peaceably— One of the
officers wbo was then upon the ladder said,
Make way, let me come forward-^a group
then got into the inuer room, and I saw an
arm rush suddenly forward, and at the same
time I saw a pistol ftred ; as soon as the pistol
Was fired, the candle was put out, and it was
impossible for me to see what passed. On
this it was eiven out that one of the officers
was murdered, and I got away and went home.
I was apprehended on the Friday fcklowing,
and have been in custody ever since.'' He
was desired to look at the persons at the bar,
many of whom he recognised. The person of
Strange he did not recollect; whether any
alteration of dress prevented it, I am not able
to say. An observation has been made upon
what the witness 'says were the words used by
the officers, namely, ^ we have got a warrant
to arrest you, and we hope you will go peace-
ably ;'' and it is said, that Ibe officers did not
say that they said that they had a warrant, but
they observed that they were officers, and de-
sired that the arms might be seized, or that
they shoidd surrender; the expressions have
certainly much the same import, but which is
the correct one it is impossible to say.
The witness was then cross-examined, and
was asked what had carried him to this meeting;
and he made use of an expression which was
very improper, and ought not to have been
used in this place, he answered, <' My legs.^
He says farCher, ^ I went there under the pre-
tension of assassinating his majesty's ministers
to every outward appearance, but my inwud
intention was entirely against it, I had at-
tended many meetings at which this plan was
debated, and was chairman of one. Fear,''
he says ''kept me to it. After leaving the
army I went to Cambray, to follow my trade
as a shoemaker, and there became acquainted
with Tidd. I carried between thirty and forty
potttHls with me, it was my own. Brunt in-
troduced me to Tbistlewood(, for the purpose
of assassinating the ministers; — this waspro-
posed to me by Brunt, before I ever saw lliis-
tlewood ; and I consented to be introduced to
Thistlewood for that purpose. The first ac-
count I ever gave of wnat had passed was on
the Saturday after; I did not give it under
any understanding that I was to become a
witness— my conscience accused me, I had
acted vrrong, and I made a vow that if God
would spare me, I would make a disclosure
of an I knew." Then he is asked, whether it
was not because he would not like to be hang-
ed that he disclosed this ? to which his answer
is, '' I do not know who would^" He says,
'' I had some of these feelings before I entered
the room in Cato-street; but after I entered
the room, and after the murder of Smithers
was committed, I was worse." Now, gentle-
men, you will iudge whether die picture which
this witness exhibits of himself, is not the na-
tural picture of the mind of a bad man en-
gaged, as he was, in a very wicked design,
fesaful of his own accomplicfts, afraid to go
oDy and aftaid to recede, equally apprehensive
935]
I GEORGE IV.
Trial (^Arikm HkitOmoni
rsM
of both, inrofiolnte and undeterndned whether
he should make any disclosure till he was in
custody ; at which time it watt necessary
instantly to make a disclosure, which he says
he did, without any promise of any reward.
He says, '' The greatest number of persons
tha^ I ever saw assembled together was on the
20th of February, in the morning ; there were
about fifteen, all poor men for what I know.''
The prisoner, he says, gave money to Hall to
fetch the newspaper. *' The largest sum of
money I ever saw was six shillings produced
hy Thistlewood to Brunt. I do not Jmow
where the men were to come from that were
to do all this mischief.'* Then he was asked,
you provided powder for the cannon, but you
had no balls. Upon which he sajrs, it was
proposed to take a sledge hammer along with
them, and knock off the tops of the iron rail-
ings, and that they would ao greater mischief
than cannon-ball. — He says that the prisoner
said this. He says, '' I do not know what is
become of Edwards ; I haTe not seen him since
the 22nd of February. I have seen him as
active as the rest of them.'' Then some ques-
tions were put to him as if importing that his
was the hand that held the sword by which
Smithers died. He says, *' I was at the end
of the room, under the Bench next Cato-stree^
four or five feet off ; I saw the arm that ex-
tended from the door.**
Upon re-examination he says, ^Tbe army
wa^ at Cambray when I was there, and I was
carrying on my trade with the English soldiers
there."
This, gentlemen, is the whole of the testi-
mony given to you by this witness, Adams;
and if this be true in substance and general
effect, it does prove, not merely an intention
to assassinate the several persons engaged in
the government of the country, but shews also
ttiat that was only a part of a further and more
extensive plan ; — of a plan to seixe the cannon,
take possession of the Mansion-house, and
establish a provisional government there, upon
the vain expectation that if once such a blow
could be struck, there were many people in
the metropolis ready to join the standard of
rebellion ; — this hope will, I trust, always be
disappointed, whoever shall at any time en-
tertain it; — ^it however seems to nave been
entertained, if we are to believe this witness.
It is observed, that he mentions, several times,
a person of the name of Edwards, whose name
is in the list of witnesses : why he is not called
it is not for me te^say ; those who conduct the
prosecution probably have their reasons for
not laying before you further or other evidence
than they have laid before you. Whether he
is willing 'to be examined we do not know ;
probably he is; can you then condude be-
cause he is not examined, that all that is said
by Adams is untrue ? It is for you to judge.
Tne observation on the absence of witnesses,
I am soriy to say, presses with greater force
on the prisoner ; because'there are three or four
persons present at conversations mentioned by
this witness, cither of whom would be a con^
petent witness to contradict Adams. With
respect to the character of Adams, except so
£Eur as he implicates himself-^except by his
ovm account, no other objection is made4o
him — no witness is called to say any thing
against him, either as to his former life or cqih
rersation ; nothing appears against him bcfi»»
you, except the part be took in this transac-
tion.
Another witness who speaks to the designs
of these persons is Hiden, who certainly is of
a vezy different character and deseription from
Uie witness Adams; he is not to be considered
as an accomplice, nay, according to the aeeomil
he has given, — the truth of which it seems is
admitted, — ^there is no doubt he does not labour-
under any imputation; because he disclosed
what he knew early enough to have prevented
the accomplishment of the object.
I will now read to you the evidence of
Thomas Hiden. He says, ^I have been a
cow-keeper, I had seen Wilson formeriy at a
shoemaker's dub ; a few days before the 23id
of February I met him in the street, and he
asked me if I would be one of a party to de»
stroy his majesty's ministers at a cabmet dinney ;
that all things were ready— that they had such
thines as hand-grenades. He said di^ de-
pended on my being made one of them, and
that Mr. ThisUewood would be glad to see me ;
he told me the hand-grenades were to be lighted
with fiises, and to be put under the table, and
all that escaped the explosion were to die by
the edge of tne sword, or some other weapon.'*
Then be says, *' Wilson told him that they
were to light up some fires by way of keeping
the town in confusion for a few days ; and it
would become a general thing." He mention-
ed several houses, as some tlmt they meant -to
set fire to. He says, '^ I told him tbat I would
do it. I believe this was fonr or five days be-
fore the discovery at Cato-street. I went to
lord Harrowby's the day before the discovery;
I followed his lordship to the Paik and gave-
him a note with information. I saw WUson
, again, between fonr and five in the aftemooo^
in Manchester-street, Manchester-equare ; he
called me, and told me there was to be a ca-
binet dinner that night at lord Harrowby's in
Grosvenor-square. He told me I was to go
up to Cato-street, to a public-house by the sign
ot the Horse and Groom, and there I was to
go in — it is the comer of Cato-street — or I -was
to stop at the comer till I was shoved into a
stable dose by ; I asked at what time, and4ie
said by six o clock. I asked him how many
there were to be there, and he said about
twenty or thirty. I asked him whether there
were going to oe any others in other places P
and he said there was to be another party in
the Borough ; another in Gray?s-inn-lane ; one
in Gee's-court, or in the dty ; I cannot be
certaifi which. He; said that all Gee's-coiut
were in it, but they would not act unless the
English were in it first; because they had been
deceived so often. I niMlerstood they
037J
>•
TrtaiOH*
Irish people wlio U?ed inOee'i^oiirt ; it is in
Oxford-street, opposite St. George's- market.
He said) a geatleman's serrant had heen sup-
porting some of the party, and would give them
more moaey if thev would act upon the subject.
He asked me if I had a pin, and I told him I
had a rubbishing one ; that the lock was at a
gun^smith's to repair : he said they would pro-
vide me with a gun and something to work it
with." Then he goes on to say, <' Wilson
further told me there were two pieces of can-
•on in Giav's-inn-lane that they could set at
Tery easily by breaking in some small doors ;
that there were four pieces of cannon at some
Ajtillery-grouad, which they could easily p^t
by killing a sentinel." He says, '' After doine
the grand thing in the Square, Wilson said
they were to retreat and meet somewhere in
the neighbourhood of the Mansion-house : he
told me to be sure and come to my time, or
else the grand thing would be done before I
came.'* Upon this he says, " I went to John-
street about seven o'clock ; when I got to the
gateway into Cato-etreet, at the comer of the
Horse and Groom, I saw Wilson, and David-
son the man of colour* Davidson said, I was
behind my time : he asked me if I would go
ia, that Mr. Ihistlewood was there. . I tdd
him I could not go in, as I had to go for some
epsam. I asked him what time they should
leave there ; he said about eic^t o'clock. He
told, me if I was not there before they were
gone, I was to follow them to Grosvenor-sauare,
and 1 should find them at the fdtarth house
from the comer of Grosvenoi^square, on the
bottom side next Chnrdi-street.''
On his cross-examination, he says it was lour
or five da^ before the 23rd of February, that
he had this first conversation with Wilson : he
had known him seven or eight months before.
He 88TS he cannot say from his memory on
what aay he gave the note to lord Harrowby.
He says, ** When Wilson told me of the plan,
it was as we walked up and down Manchester-
street." Then a letter is shewn to the witness,
addressed to lord Castlereagh, which he says
is his writing ; it is the letter he gave to lord
Harrowby, as he could not see lord Castlereagh
to whom it was addressed, informing him of a
plot to destroy his m^esty's ministers.
Now, gentlemen, this witness, Hiden, you
see, is entirely free firom all impeachment either
by any testimony against him, or his own con-
duct ; and his own conduct, so far from iai<'
peaehing him, is highly creditable* He says
Wilson informed him of taking these cannon
io Gray's-inn^lane, going to the Arallery-ground,
and then to the Mansion-house, mentioning
those matters shorter than Adams did. . What*
ever is said by any one person upon the subject
of a conspiracy in whicn they are satisfactorily
.^abewn to have been all engaged, is to .be re«
oeived not only against the person who utters
Up but against all who have been concerned in
it; you will consider, therefore, the- effect of
this evidence, and whether this is not a strong
QDnfir^iation of the more detailed stoiy that
has been gtvea by Adams,
A. D. 1820. [83ft
The next witness called to gfve an aceounC
of their designs, is Monument, who is certainly
an accomplice, not of so long standing as
Adams, Imt he must be taken to have con-
sented to the scheme so far as related to the'
assassination of his majesty's ministers. He
says, " I am a shoemaker, and Uved in Garden-
court, Bald¥nn's»gardens, near firook's-market.
I am now a prisoner in the Tower. * I remem^
her meeting Thistlewood, at a person's of the
name of Ford, a few days before the meeting
in Finsbury-market ; that is about two nionths
before the 23rd of February ; he afterwards'
called on me with Brant; and he said,- after a'
few minutes, that he wished to speak to me,
and I went outside the door with him, and be'
said to me great events are at hand, the people-
are every where anxious for a change ; I have
been promised support bv a great many meo'
who have deceived me, but now I have got*
meu' who will stand .by me.* He then asked -
me whether I had any arms; I said no, I had
not. He said evenr man ought to be armed
now : he said all of them had got some aims ;
some had got a sabre, some had got a pike,
and some a pistol : he said I might miy a-
Eistol for four or five shillings ; I told him I
ad no money to buy pistols, I was too poor
to do any thing of the kind : he said he wotdd
see what could be done ; he says about two or
three days afrer this Bnmt called on him, but'
nothin|^ particular passed. Brunt said, he waa-
rather in a hurrv. Then he says, on Tuesday,-
the 32nd of Febraary, Brant called again, ao«
oompanied bv Tidd, he told me, in explaining
tiie cause of his absence, that die kin^s death
had made an ai^teration in their plan necessary :
wlmt ti^ey were I should know at the meeting*
thAt was to be held the night after, at Tyburo-
tumpike; that if I saw any people about them,
I was to go to them and say &, «, t, and if they
were friends they would answer, /, o, n, that
he should call on me the following monung'
and tell me more particulars. The next day,
Wednesday, Brant called again, between four
and five oxlock in the afternoon, and asked
me whether I was ready to go with him ; I
told him my work would not be done before
six o'dodL: he then said, I must go to the
person whom he had brought with him the
day before, whose name was Tidd, and that
he lived in Hole-in-the-wall Passage, BrookV
market. I went there, about half past six-
o'dodc, and found Tidd at home : he said that
several men that had promised to come, had
not been so ^ood as their word, and that he
should not wait longer than seven o^doek. At
seven o'dock he went to. a comer of the room,
and todc out of a trank a large pistol, and put-
it in a belt- he had round his Dody : he then*
took about six or eig^t pikes, about a foot long,-
which he wrapped in brown paper; and he
took a staff about four feet long, with a hole
in one end of it. We went through Brook-,
street -into Holbom, from thence up Oxford-
street.' While I was4n the room, I asked him
whne we were going to : he said to a room in-
99ti
1 GEOBGB IV.
Trial ^AfUhmr Thkiknood
[940
tht — wft t> JotMi fAnmtf MgnwiMtidi As
V0 wtft ooiiig along he fpKre me die p&reNguJF:
I aiked oia iviMtW ve were fouig to the
Honee ef Commoae : he flud ao, there weoe
t0O mmxf aeUien about there, i then ailDed
him nhen it was we w«re goiag to, and at
iMt he said Gf€8veBor.oi»au«; that there was
% oahbiet di«ttr Aere uet eveoiag; he did
■ot eay at whose hoaee. We went on to Cato*
^reet, in the Bdgwane eoad ; when we get
thtre, vnderneafli m% aaehway leading to it, I
Miw two flwn whom Tidd seemed to know; he
was a little hefoij^ and spoke to theas. After
stopping with them a lew moments in the
street, we went into the stable ; we went vp
the atepSy where we fenndy 1 think, abont
twentgr-mvr or twenty-fire men ; b«t I had not
heen there i^ve two or <hine mimtes, when
eeaae petaon asked how many them wer^ msd
proposed to eount them ; but Mr. Ihistlewood
aai^ these was no oeoasioa, for there wese
flFa»on44weaty. These was a tall thin man,
with a hsotm great ooat, sitting on one side of
a curpnatw'i bensh, wsih two belts oa, and I
think a swoed by his side, who was speaking
of the iaquropriety of going with so small a
nimber as five land twcmly men to lord Har-
rowby's* Upon this Thisliewoody Ike piisoner,
said, die nnmberwas^to enou^, for he only
wanted fourteen men to go into Ike room, and
lord Hamwby had siaeleen «aon eeiw
,, etiM that miiriher was euttoietc The
in ifte br0wn ooat said, after the haanom
ie done^ ond am ossne out, moet likely these
laHl be a erewd round the door, how am we to
mslBeottr osoapef Upon which Thisdswood
aaid^pea know the targost body is aliaady gone,
this is the emsilleet part; apoo wtuok Duridsoa
sssd to this amn it was not right in him to
throw oeld walar aaoa their |[iroceediqgs ; if he
altaid of his lifo he might go, aad they
Id do witheot hiai. Biwrt smd, sooner
thaa disy woald gsreap the basiaem W wieold
einto the house akme and Wow them ap, if
penshodeioagwidithem; aad he esid, lor
yen kaow, we haee got that aideh eaa do it,
or aweds to dial eftd. Then the amn ia the
brown oaal said, that thoagh he did not thkk
it tight to ffo himself, miU asthsv wamall for
it, he would not he againalit ; and he proposed
that an the asea ia the room shoidd pat thees-
aelaea imder the ordem of lir. Tbwtlewood
upon vhich Mr. Thistlewood aaUi, that every
one engaged in that faaainem would hare the
eaase henanr as himself ; and he propeeed thai
the iiartiin men who Aoald <voluBteer to go
iato the seon^ should rangg thomselTos on die
olher sida of dm room, vAere the firing allei>
waale eaase fiomwhen the oflkers easse^-*
sihoattorelTO or thirteen did so in the eoatse
of a law aMuatoe. 1^, adm was oae of the
foarteea, was epming out to ase to my I nnght
ohoese my eitaadon^iphen Mr. Thistlewood pot
him back, and eaid, you aH know yoar piaees.
AAer dns Thiedowood was abseat for a fow
Btoments; when he vataNied^ be eaid they had
moiled MtoUigeMa that die ihike of Weittng-
ton and lord Sidmoadi were aitived at Ml
Hatrowby's,'' That is all he recollects until
the ofleen oaaM up, and he was taken into
eastody.
UpoB orosa-emmination he says. ^ I never
siKAe to Tkietlewood till I saw him at Mr.
Ford's, at Lambeth. I attended the meeting
at Finsbory-asarkot, but did not take much
notioe of what passed. I had no particalar
acipmintanco with the prisoner at tnat time.
I norer kaew Brunt till Thistlewood brought
him to my house. I do not know Edwards at.
aU. Three or four men were in the stable
below, and the room was pretty fell ; the man
in the brown ooat was not Adams ; Ihave seen
Adams at Hicke'ei>haU and here. I hare no
mooUeetion at all of seeing ham before that.
I remember eeeiag Straage in the room ; he
is rather shoit, and was staading by the side
of mo. I oan tell nothing about Adams ; I
did not hear any person make ai^ obsoiraden
exorpt die man in the brown eoat. I wee
taken into ooilody in the room. I made no
resistanoe. I had no arms."
Upon ra-eoamination be says, * The room
was neaily fall alien I casse ; I had been there
abovt a garter of an hour before the odlccis
coBM. I kaew ao oao theta except Tidd,
Bmnt, Thtfdewood, aad Davidson.'' Yea
rsooHoct AdaaM said there was greaA uneeei-
nem at this meedag, on aoeount of Tidd not
aniring till a Iato boar ; Monument confiiaw
baa by etatiag diat he and TMd did not leara
Tidd*s hease dll eeran o^elock. lie saye,
^ Ibew was a eandle ia the room, I canaot say
if there was more thaaesm. There was a great
oaaatity 9i eworda and pistols, and two or
msee bhmdeibumee npon die
beneh. Strange wan appreheaded at the
taoM with aw; them ^mm foar in the
aplma the eoldiers eame ia and took as aiinto
CQstedy.* lliea he ie oKaaiined findier aboat
Sdwerds, and he ss^a^ '^I was with Mr.
Thisdewaod at Whitehall, beiag hand^mibd
to him. He told me when I itao exandnod
before the priry ooaneil, I should eay Mr.
Xdwafds brought aw to the meedag. I asked
how I eeald ted saoh a foAsehoed, when he
knew I had imrareeea the ssan; be tanghcd
and said, that was of ao eoasequenee, for if I
wao asked what sort of a peieon he was» I was'
to say he was a man not madi taller than I
was, of a sallow eompleaicia and dressed ia a
brown coat.'' It Moaw that lEhistleweod then
gaspo him a deeeriptien of fidwsrdsb This
Sdwasds, gentlemsn» atteaded at several of the
mssday, bat it doss aei appear that he was
the piapoeer of aay of dm plana that were
agitoted. Thea, m imeati to a aery proper
qassdea put by oao of you, gentlesaea, he
says, ** 1 been aot,.smoe my a^rebeasioa, had
aay eonvorsatioa sihisitmiai wini a man of the
naase of Adaam, easept speaking a word or
two to him, but none eooeemiag thie basiaosa.
We hare been s^amtely confined, aad I
nsear saw him eaoept ifdien I was taken np-
ae a witneoa to Hickye-hidl^ and when I wan
Ml]
^ High Tnamit,
A. D. leacK
m»
broagUt op heie to-day*'' Thay were iMth in
Ciwtodv, aad kefpt separate, I suppose. This
man also gives you aa account that the scheme
wax not confined to the dreadftil crime of
assassinatioa^ bat was to extend farther ; the
CMunencesient of the conversation wsth
Thiatlewood shews it,— -'^ Great events are at
hand ; the people are every where aaxioos for
a change j I have been promised support by
a great many men who have deceived ae;
biU now I have got men who will standby me*."
This is the testimony of that witness. His
Wotber Tbomas» is afterwards called, but I
shall not mention hi» testimony to yovatpre-
shO, but prooeed iP that of D^ei^ who speaks
livrther to the desisns of these persons.
Tbomaa Dwyer, of No. 15, Gee's^conrt, Os-
loid-stnset, si^^ ^ before the 23rd of February,
I betame acquainted with. Davidson, I saw
bus twice ; on one of those oceasioDs I became
acqoaiotod with Thistlevroed ; we went
together to a public-house, at the end of
MoiineauiFetzeet, near Gato-street; tbatwas
about the 9th, 10th, or 11th of Febiuaiy,
either Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday; he
said nothing particular to me at that time, he
said he was in five or six different revolutions^
and that Iieland vn» in a disturbed state at
that time ; I am an Iriahmony and ho said be
bad a good many of my countrymen. I saw
Banridsoa on the afternoon, of the 23nd of
Februaiy } the next meming ^ person called
OB me and I went with bin lo Bosrcourt
Gray'sp-inn-lane ; he had a bundle wrapped un
in paper; art Fo«-coiut wo vrent into the back
loom : I think he got the key ficom a woman
in the front room, there was an old chaie in
the room;" he says afterwuds, '^some balls
wrapped up with rope yam were taken out of
a cupboard, Harrison said it was a grenade.
Thistlewood, Davidson, and a. few more came
in subsequently ; Davidson had a Uunderbuss,
a pair ol pistols,, and a baronet in Us side
pocket ; one ox tiro mere came in afterwards,
among whom, was Brunt:. After Davidson had
shewn the pistols, he said that he had given
twelve shillings for Ihem^ Bront said that be
would go out and buy a pair ; Thistlewood said
that some of the grenades were to be thsown
into the Horsshbarracks, and some more of
ahem into lord Harrowby's to set fiie te the
boose and blow it up; lliistlewood asked me
bow many of mv ceuotrjrmen I could muster
for bal£-past eight that evening^ I told bim six
or seven and twenty, he told me thev were to
assemble at the Home and GrQom> out I was
ao be at six o^clock at the Pomftet^^astle, at
the end of Bacratt'svceurt, leading into Wig^
more-street, CaveDdish^square ; that is a bouse
frefluented by Insbniea; I was> to- take a few
of toe best of them aod go* to the Found£n^
hospital^ knock at the Porter'a-lodgie„ put a
pistol to hia breast^ turn down sound the rig)sb
oand and there were five or six aod twenty
stand of arms at the next lodge ; I was to seize
them. At the same time another party were
to seize two pieoei olcaanon that weoe at the
City VolttBleers' Riding-school, in day Vino-
lane ; he said that there were men (hat would
make a breach in Finsbury, he said that there
was to be a cabinet dinner at lord Harrowby's
that day, and that they were to make an
attack upon them there ; after thia I saw a
bundle taken out of the cupboard,, it was
planted on the 6oot and a pint pot produced,
the bundle contained gunpowder, which was
measured with, a tin measure into several
woollen bags :^ Harrison did this<i ASCet that
Thistlewood said there was a dosen of pike
handles to be taken to Mary-Ie-bone ; the re^
maindes were to go to Finsbury ; I was asked
to take some but I refused^ i had not seen
them ; I saw the has of powder that was mea-
sured and the grenades were put in it ; Harrison
directed apezw>n to op to Aeliorse and Groom
in Gato-street witb the pike haudles ; Harrison
went away witb those thinga In the bag, the
powder in the flannel bags and I think the
grenades also. He s^s, *^ I got home again
about twelve o^cIock, I told major James that
day, and in consequence of what he said to me
I went to the Secretaiy of Stale'* about one or
half past one.**
Upon crQSfr«auniaatiooy' he says,. ''I am
a bricklayer by trade. Davidson introduoed
me to Thistlewood first on the 4th of February,
I knew none of the party before, they never
having knonm me before os I them,, they
opened to me their secrets; I do not know
wnat there was in my character to induce them
to trust me^ except that I had been in t£^
parish for nfteen years. WEea I was asked
DOW many men I couU get,. I said it was a
hard thing to inveigle a parcel of innoeent
men, and I did not know that I. could ttt
them,, but I agreed to bring Uie menJ' m
says, ** I was rather frightened while I was'in
the room. I was ordered to go to the Found*
ling Hospital for some arms, but I did not
intend to do so» I wanted to ofiX out of the
place ;. X do not know a man of the name of
Hucklestone, I was onoe in thi» Court*on the
trial of a woman who had robbed a inan of
7/.. but on no other occasion ; I wasiin Ireland
at the time of the rebellion,.X was then quite a
boy." This is the whole of his evidence; if
you think his evidence to be correct, here again
Thistlewood announces his further plan about
seizing the cannon in Gray's-inn-Iane and
Finsbury and the general seheme^ and he dis*
covered a great part of those arms, afterwards
produced on the table before yea. According
to the witness's account, he was asked by
Hazrisoa te gp to this meeting at Fox-couct»
not knowinff what waa proposed ; when he
came there,, he agreed to do it» though he had
no intention to do so, ftut he did agree. A
witness is called afttfwards to impeach, bia
testimony. There are. Sour witnesses to e]b»
plain to you the deaigus. of these persons^ two
of them are accosai^ices, and, in genesal, none
but accomplices, will be intimately acquainted
.with such dark designs; two others cannot be
considered accomplice^ but tbqi must be mea
043]
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial qf Arthur tkuthmod
C9a
whom the others supposed to be fit and ready
to join in their project, and- to whom, there-
fore^ they made a communication, if that com-
munication was made with so little reserre, as
it seems to ha? e been done ; but still, if you
believe the witnesses, the communication was.
made, and, therefore, they thought they were
talking to men who were ready to join them.
A great many other witnesses ha?e been
called, to confirm the testimony given by
these, but if tibese witnesses, without further
examination of other -persons, or any further
testimony produced before you, shall be con-
sidered as having related the truth, the treason
is undoubtedly proved ; for their testimony
has proved the meetings, consultations, and
preparations of arms and ammunition for the
avowed purpose of assassinating the king*s
ministers, and to bring about a change in the
government of this country ; nothing less than
that can be the fair import of any of the dis*
cussions deposed to by any one of these four
witnesses.
However, by the way of confirmation, they
call Eleanor Walker, a servant to Henry Rogers,
at No. 4, Fox-court, Gray's-inn-lane, who
proves that Brunt hired a lodging for Ings,
which Adams told you was the case.
Then Mrs. Rogers says Brunt took the
room for Ings ; he said he hoped he would
pay though he knew nothing of him, except
seeing him at a public-house. Now, that cer-
tainly is not correct, because, according to all
the testimony, it is clear he had seen and
known Ings, if not before that room was taken
for him, yet he saw him afterwards.
Then another more important witness is
called, who is an apprentice of Brunt: he
says, " I remember a person taking the back
room two pair of stairs, in Fox-court, Gra/s-
inn-lane ; that person was Ings ; Brunt and he
looked at the room together. When they
came out of the room, 1 heard Brunt say to
logs, it will do, go down, and give them a
shilling. After that Ings used to come to the
room ; he left the key of the room always at
Brunt's when he went out : eve^ evemng a
number of visitors used to come to tnem, among
them constantly were Thistlewood, Tidd, Brad-
bum, Edwards, Hall, Potter, Strange, Adams,
and Davidson, the man of colour; and more
used to come whose names I do not know :" he
says, '^ I saw no furniture, they used to take
chairs out of Brunt's room to sit on $ they
used to call Thistlewood sometimes T. and
sometimes Arthur; when the door has been
open, I have seen long poles like rough
branches of trees ; about twenty of them were
in the room :" he saysf ^ I have neard hammer-
ing and sawing. Brunt," he sap, ** was taken
up on Thursday the 24th of February. On
the Sunday morning before that, there was a
meeting of a larger number than I had seen
come before ;" all those he before named were
there ; " after the meeting broke up. Strange
remained in my master's room ; there was a
meeting on the Monday evening, and on
Tuesday several persons were in and out in
the course of that day. On Wednesday, some
came into the workshop," — ^that woula be the
workshop of his master — ''they had got' some
pistols, and were putting new flints into them ;
there were five or six pistols. One of tfie
men said, there were people overlooking them,
and Brunt told them to go into the badL'room.
Strange and a man whom I did not Imow
were putting in the flints," — that is a circum-
stance mentioned to you by Adams, their be-
ginning to put these flints in, and retiring into
the back room. — ** In the course of the afteis>
noon, Thistlewood asked me for a piece of
writing-paper, and took it into the back-room,
after that my master came out, and ordered
me to get six sheets of cartridge paper, and
gave me six pence. I went aiki bought it, and
gave it to my master, who took it into the
back-room." — ^Adams telb you there was this
conversation, and money was given in order
to procure cartridge-paper for waiting these
bills upon. — He says, '' this was between four
and five o'clock in the afternoon ; my master
went away about six ; a man went away with
him who was a stranger. I handed a table
from my mistress's room into the baek-room
on that day;" — ^which it seems had never been
done before, and why that should be done on
tl^at day, except for the purpose, of writing, is
not disclosed ;— '' when my mistress was going
to hiSLf we wanted the table ; I knocked at the
door of the back room to get it; a man of the
name of Potter opened it, and gave it to me ;
by the opening of the door, I could tee who
were in toe room : I saw four or five persons
in the room : I saw Tidd after my master was
gone : at between seven and eight o'clock
Mrs. Brunt called him, and he came into her
room; she took him to the cupboard, and
shewed him a pike head and a sword, and
asked him what she should do with them ; he
took them out of the room, and, I believe,
into the back room. Tidd soon af^ went
away, and left word that, if any body called
soon, they were to make haste and follow to
the White Hart piri)lic-house. Potter and
some others cvude, and went on there. My
master came home about nine o'clock the same
night, his dress was dirty, and he seemed con-
fused ; he said to his wife, it is all up, and
that where he had been a great many officers
came in, that he had saved his life, and that
was aU." He says, *' Just at this part of his
conversation, another man came in, and shook
hands with Brunt, and asked him if he knew
who had informed ; the man said. No : he said
he had bad a dreadfal blow on the side, and
was knocked down. Brunt said, there is some-
thing more to be done, and he and the man
went out together." An observation has bee&
made on that expression, ''there is some-
thing more to be done yet," as if Brunt knew
that this scheme of assassination was not the
only thing to be don^ ; you will judge whether
that expressiion has that import. Then he says,
" after they were gone, Mrs. Brunt and I went
94«]
fdt Bigh Tf^oion.
A. D. 1820.
[046
iDtoUiebMk Toom'i vthtte we (bund one of
the pioles I Imd seen before, and in the cup*
board were sereial rolb of brown paper with
tar in them, some paper twisted up, and some
things as big as my two fists, and strings rolled
round them, aod an iron pot that Brunt had
had for some time before. At eleven o'clock
my master again returned home ; and said he
should waut me to get up as early in the
morning as I could, to clean his boots ; they
were very dirty ; he called me next morning
at half past six, and asked me if I knew the
Boroughy wfaidi I did, but not Snow's-fields ;
then we went into the back room, where I
took two baskets by his direction, and we put
the things out of the cupboard into them ; he
told me they were going to Potter's in Snow^s-
fields ; one of the baskets was tied in a blue
apron, which had been put up as a curtain in
that room that he called Ings's room :" then he
says, ** I went into Brunt's room to look for
something to tie the other basket in, and two
officers came up and took my master into
custody ; thev searched the room and took the
baskets. Tiod lived in Hole-in-the-wall Pas-
sage, Brook's-market, and Adams next door
to fainu I have been at the lodgings of both."
On cross-examination, he says '' Brunt was
a journeyman shoemaker, but not in very poor
circumstances, he had one child ; Tidd was a
shoemaker living near us, he has a wife, and I
believe children ; I don't know if he is a poor
man ; Adams is a shoemaker also ; Ings had
the lodgings nearly five weeks. I believe
there were meetings every night during that
time, the greatest number I remember was on
the Sunday morning : about twenty men were
there then. I know some of the people I have
named; Strange is a bootmaker's shopman;
Edwards, who was there very often, is a
modeller, he was there oftener than Adams ;
Hall is a journeyman tailor, and the whole
were of that rank in life; the baskets spoken
of were rush baskets, and the materials filled
them ; there were about twenty branches of
trees in a green raw state ; I dont know how
they came there, there was but one left on the
Wednesday morning; there used to be a fire
in the room, I do not know if they burnt the
poles, but there was one left.'' This - witness,
yon see, proves beyond all question that this
room was taken by Brunt for Ings, and that it
was frequented in the evenings and on some
iBomings hv the persons Adams spoke of, and
there were band-grenades, pikes, and fire-arms
seen by him.
The next witness is Thomas Smart, who is
a watchman in the parish of Saint George,
Hanover-square. He says, he • was on the
watch on the south side of Grosvenor-square,
the 22nd of February last, his box nearly
faces lofd Harrowby's ; he went . on at eight
o'clock ; soon after he went on he saw four
snflpkious looking men walking about thesquare,
two tall, and two short, one was a black man,
or nearly so, ** it was after I called half-past
m^t ; I took particular notice of them, they
vol.xxxi5l I
were looking dolm the areas, and taking no-
tice of the areas." This was intended to con-^
firm what Adams said, that Davidson was on
the watch that night. Henry Gillan says, he was
at a public-house in Charles-street, Grosveoor-
square, at the comer of the Mews, on Tuesday,
the 22nd of February ; he says, '* I saw the short
man with a brown coat (Avnt) ; there was a
tall man along with him, they had bread and
cheese and porter ; we played at dominos. I
went away before ten and left them there :'*
that is another circumstance to confirm what
Adams said, that he and Brunt went that
evening on the watch, and that they were at
this house where they had bread and cheese,
and Brunt played at dominos.
Then John Hector Morison is examined,
who is a journeyman cutler to Mr. Underwood
in Drury-lane, he recollects a sword being
brought to him on Christmas Eve by a man
dressed like a butcher (he points out Ings to be
the man), he had the swoni under his smock
frock without a scabbard ; he desired to have
it well ground with a fine point, he said his
name was Eames, or Ings, the sword was
ground and he took it away in two or three
days : a few days after, he brought another
for the same purpose, it was a particularly
long one ; one of the swords afterwards seized,
at or near Cato-street, is afterwards identified
by him.
Edward Simpson is called, who is corporal-
major of the second regiment of life-guards,
and knew the prisoner Harrison, who was
discharged out ot that corps about six years
ago. ^ ' Harrison knew the Ki ng-street barracks,
^ye windows of which looked into Gloucester
Mews, but they were stopped up a few days
after the aflfeir in Cato-street" That is only
to shew that Harrison, the person who was
afterwards to proceed to the barracks to throw
the fire balls in, might reasonably be selected
for that purpose, as having been stationed
there.
John Aldous is called. He says he '* is a
pawnbroker in Berwick-street ; he knows the
prisoner Davidson from baring pledged things
at his shop ; on the 23rd of J'ebruary he came
there, ana took a brass-barrelled blunderbuss
out of pawn."
Then my lord Harrowby was called ; who
tells you that Hiden did come to him in the
Park, and did deliver to him a letter directed
to lord Castlereagh ; that he afterwards ap-
pointed to meet him in Hyde-park, and did
meet him there. He says, that he himself is
one of his majesty's pnvy council, and is the
president of the council ; and he did intend to
give a cabinet dinner on the 23rd of February.
At the cabinet dinners no persons but those
who compose what is called the cabinet are in«
vited ; the cabinet consisting of the principal
officers of state. The invitations were sent out
in the latter end of the preceding week. Then
he gives you the names of the persons who
compose the cabinet, and who were invited
upon that occasion ; namely, my lord Chan«
3P
mffi
I QSOaOE IV.
«aUQr4 Ikt «aEi jof ]ivefpMl>.4liil Usi of Hw
Drcanij ; Mr. Vamittart, chumlkr of tiM
fiKobequer; «he earl of fithiiiy Mcrelary of
£laAf lor the Colooiid ElepaitmeBt; lord CMlfo*
teagfa, secretary of Stale for tU Fonign D*«
factment; lord Sidaoutfa, aeoretaty of fiUte
for the Home Depaitmant; ^m caii af West-
BDonland, lord Privy Seal ; laid MelfiOt, fini
load of Uia Admindly ; tha didBe of Wdlia^tiM,
master general of the OnhiaiiGe ; Mr.Caaniiic^
firat oommiaBioiiar of the India BoMd ; Mr.
EohiosoD, preaideot of iha Boaad of Tiade ;
Mr. Batfaiirst, chaaceUor of the dwd&y of La»-
eaater; Mr. WellesUy Pole, master of tka
Mint; and the earlof MulgrmtaUofivhoak,
he says, are pnry councillorSyand penuMS em*
{di^ed in the most importaat offices in the
administration of the execnftife coTenHnent.
He says, thcnr are in oommon pailaooa called
his m^jesty^ ministers. He sm, '<Oa the
Tuasday before the Wedneadur of the intended
dinner, I was riding in the Faik, abool two
•'dock, prq>aratory to mj attending a council
at Carlton palace. I had no serrant with ae.
A person addressed me near 6rosTiaBor«gatey
and said he had a letter addressed to lord
Caatlereagby which he was desirous to ooan^
to him : it was of eonsideraUa importance, and
concerned both that noble lord and myselC
The letter ptoduoed is the letter. The man
(who was the last witness), at mv desire gave
me bis addresa on this card,'' which his iord-
ibip prodnced, ** He met me by appointment
on Wednesday morning in tbe ring amongst
the young pUntations in Hyda-park. A&r
tbis was communicated to me, I did not inform
my servants that the dinner was not to take
place, but X directed that the preparations
should go on as if the dinner was to take
place, until I wrote a note from the earl of
liverpool's, to my head servant, to say, that the
cabinet #ould not dine there, but that the pre-
paration should be going on as if it was intend-
ed thev should ; the party would have assem*
bled if the dinner had taken place, between
seven and half-past seven.'' He says further,
that he had some previous general knowledge,
and had some reason to expect, for some time
past, that there was some intention of this kind,
he does not know, nor has ever seen Edwards,
upon whom ao much obseiradoa has been
amde.
Then John Baker, the butler, ia called ; he
merely remembers a cabinet dinner being ii^
tended to be had at lord Harrowby's house on
the SSrd of February last ; the cabinet dinners
bad been suspended for some time. Cards of
invitetion were issued to the ministeKS on th^
leth or 19di, that is, the Friday or the Satnr**
d|<y; he says preparationa ware Bwda for
dinner on the Wednesday, as usual, and be"
did not receive .the intimation that lus mmes-
ty's ministers would not dine tbera that day,
until eight or ten mittutes after eiaht o'dook.
Then he mentions a ciroumstence wbieb serves
to account for what haa bean said, that th^
wipposed tha company had anirad, for ^
[MM
Hanowfay, and tbeaa wera caniagea at Mf
crace'a door about aia or aaven o'dackc an
ttmt persons wbo were watelung at a difilanat
augit aappose that these
ping at lord Hairowby's; peilmpa you
thiuL that may satisfaotorily acoouot €or what
was said at Cato-etieet, that some «f the
■unisters w«re ooma.
ThomM Monument says, that be ia Iba
brother of the witness, Jdm M«uumant, asrf
he confirms his brother aa Car as his imnwiedga
extends. He says, Ibat Thiatiewood naUad
upon bis bfotber ; be brongfat Bnaat with bun (
after they had cease aoto the room they alaid
ftve or ten miraites, when they went ont to*
gather and remained about two or thma rainutesy
and than returned.- Tbistlewood and Bmat
went away anin. Hp says, ^ on the Tuaaday
before this affiur, Tidd and Bnint called on my
brother ; my brother said, vrhy Bmnt I (houfli
I had lost you, as it is so long since I saw yen.
Brunt said that the king's death bad made n
Htde alteration in tbeir plans; my
asked what theae plans were, and Brunt
tbey had different objects in view. Bmnt dinn
asked my brother te meet him atiybum-tuni^
e'ke on the next evening ; my brother i^^reed ;
runt said to Tidd, suppeae we give them an
outline of the plan. Tidd made no anawer4
Brunt then told ua to be at TybunMamptte
at six o'clock on the Wednesday evening; they
gave us the pass^word — ft, ti, /, — and if aay en
Uieir party were there they would answer t^OyWu
I did not promise to go ; they did not pi
me to go, and I did not gn. Brunt called
about five for my brother, but we were busy,
and my brother could not go at diat tioM*
Brunt then told him to call upon Tidd, who
lives in the Hole-in-the^wall paaaage, I did not
see my brother after/'
This, ffentlemen, is the evidence that has
been laid before you, as oonfirmatoiy of tbe
account given you bytha witnesaea, Adama,
Hiden, Monument, and Dwyer : many of tbt
facts sworn by Adams are awom to by otbera;
the comanunications made as to the treaaooabla
purpose are such as no pavson not engaged ia
It conld be likely to be*aeqnaintad wi&.
Then tbey proceed to catt aeme peiaooa wbe
Srove Hainaon waa seen at this bnildi^ at
ato-street, that he said he bad takea k, and
waa going to dear it out and obtained soma
aaodles ; and then they call the several police
elBeers and au officer in the anny» iieatenant
Fitxclarence, to give an account of tbe arreat
and appvehensien of a«reral of tbe peoona
there assembled, and ^ stlzuscs tbera made
of arms and other things.
It does not appear, to me, niuaasary to fo
through, in detail, the testimony el fteae wii*
nesses, because it is not matnial fer yen to
consider by what partienlar individnal a pialol
was preaented : it b inpoitaBt to obaaive that
when the officers came to this plaoe to epprn*
bend the pecsoasy many of them made a moat
desperate reaiatance ; that is a drfumitanre
•m^
^ tSgk frtofON*
A. D. 1890.
(»«•
daMrnng vow cotosidcKtiOB ; but a minvt^'
detaii of noot tkb or that indiividiMilididy doea
not appear Bace»ar]r to be giTen to you now,
thaaga it war Beceaiary it shoald be laid be^
iN>6r yotk lA'tlie fiiat tmtancey hj tbe eiaauB-^
atioa* of the witnesses. Yoa find tiiem iaa;
slaible:- a mai^ was seen oa the spot, from'
Wh<H» a. swbid' war taken, and a butcher's'
Imile ;. that knife is the knife supposed to hkwti
been taken by Idj^ it answers the deiteiiptioa'
given of thatt kntfe^ Wright wasr not able tot
secure lags, and cannot say he was the person.
It is ftiBther proi«d, however, that when Ingv
was apprehended, he was found to have- a
haversack slung to each shoulder, a belt
hackled pound mm, and some cartridges, and
a knife case. The circnmstance of his having
these-' two ^ bags, is observ^i upon by the coun«-
asi for the prisoner; and it is suggested the^
are more ni for plunder than fer sndi- aa
abominable purpose as Adams descdbed: it
ii not Toify mat^ial what purpose they w^re
tdben ftiy because he might not ohoobetO'sa^
Ifaeo thatha meaar to take the plate,, and^mig^
ai^hetoofethebags for another purpose ^tbtil
Iha fedt'Of his hamng the bags is woh^'of
jlotar atteatiod'as^oonflroring Adams.
Yc«» next haa»-tbe acoonnt, byTaonftan^ of
the appffebcaaioti tif - Bwt at his lodgings^ and
of the- oonlents of the two ba^eta that were
feund,. and it ia- ioiportant for yon to attend
t» thali Tauatoa says^ ** I found Bruat in a
feODt idom UA twl^ pair of stairs, I searched
the mom' aaa foond' notfasng- material : in tfaa
back room I found two bastes, one tied up ia
an . apopoai Brunt ' was-then in the front room ;
S^asked^ibim'as to the badcets, and he said ha
hnew nathmg about them/' He chooses^*
tharafoife, to give an> untrue account in that
ias|>sct^,ferit is dearn by the testimony of the
apprentice, that he did kno^ about tbem, "^ he
#m the room did nbt b^ong to him : there
was a pik& staff in the room, and- an iron pot
witfa^ mashrof tarat the bottom of it. When I
fisnad' he denied the* apardnents I- sent for
ihm laaoBAdy^ Miei Rbgers, and asked her who
tAQe»«pal«nieols behmged to ? She said, that
Imt nseee^ 'Bleaaor Waikw, bad let than to «
nmm* she did' no^ know, ia the presence of
Bn»t.> I>asked^ Brunt who this man -was ; . ha
he 'had methim*in a public house^ what
■DOFwas ha: did not icnow. From this
I want to Tidd's in Hole-in-the-^^rir
nearOray's'inn-lane, where' I'fonnid
ar-noy large box^ thU of bdl cartridges^ 965^
arad' ai^reat qaamity of- gunpowder, and' in a
IfsrusBflk these weiia« 484 baUs^ 171 ball caiv
tsvdgas^and'^9 bsA caramflges^without powder,
fvilha ball' in eaah' cartridgo, about thtee
pBMadaRof ganpawderia apaper^ a<coaneca»*
a«S' be^'with ten< hand^grinad«l, and eleves
flannel bags of powder, one pound eadi, ten
inal bagreaqpty,- aamall bagwHh a powder
8nd:sisly«Mght baUs, fotnrfliiHa and
Mta'piha* handles.'' Tbeie ara tha
tMags.foarid a* TMd*^y widch Adattis trite
atBMmt^syTaunton says^contained nine PH*<(>v
widi rope yam and tar, and some steel alings^
four grenades^ three' paperii with rope yam and
tar, two flannel biigs of powder, one pound
each,, one paper with some powder in- it,- one
leather bag with sixty^three balls in it.
Oa cross-examination, he says '* I found all
tiiese tlungs-on the tMith of Febniaiy ; Bnlnt
was nr6Seat when I found tliem^ l went to
Tidd^ about half-past eight o'clock ia ditf
moning.'' Then another officer is called, and
tfa^ several things fonnd in' Cat'- .leet^ and
upon- the persons Who we.^ apprehended
there^ are produced before you. Yoa saw
them, a oonsideraUe number of large hand«
grenades, several pike-heads, carbines, mus^
ketsy pistols, blunderbusses, sticks, and many
othefr things which I need not enumerate.
Then ll£>rison' is called, who says ^ this ia
the > first s#ord I sharpened for lugs, I know it
by a- mark on the blaae."
Then Edwatd Hansbn, a Serjeant tn the
Royal Artill^ry^ was called,; who took to
pieces one of thoBcr things, whidi they call
htedftgretiades^. aadi explamed to you ttsna«
tar6 and effect, and described it, asituadoubt-
edly i$f as a^Wry destructive instrument. This
one bad tweM pieces of iron in different parts
of it, it was intended this should burst, and its
oontents fly about ioi all directions, to the
grekt annoyance and probable destruction of
diepersona near.
Tnts closed the evidenee on the part of the
C^own.
On the part of the piisoner, they called
Mary Baikef^ a daughter of Tidd, to whom n<l
questions were put in cross-examination, from
a*vefycommeiidaUe delicacy, as it appeared to
ma, on accc^nt of 1ier near relationsnip to one
of the prisoners ; but you will judge whether
ht^ testimdny does not confirm that of the
witnesses for the Crown* She says, on tha
24th of February, Uie poliee officers came to
her fether's, and found a box and other things ;
it was abost hatf-past eight in the morning ;
they/ took- awtty some- pike-staves ; they had
been broaghttfaat monung; but she does not
know by whom ; whether she was present to
see' them or not^ she does not recollect. — ^^I
know Adams^ I bad seen him at my fadier's
befoke( {'know £dwards» I had seen him thera
often. Tha things weiie brouflrht' that morningt
I* bad seta'simuar things there before that
time; I should have judged- them to be the
same. Edwards hadtdcen a part of them
away'; I do not know who took the rest :
Bdwwda^ took part away on Wednesday ; my
fiither taok'nona away. Bdwaids ^d not take
any bbx : the' box wais bnml^ht a day or two
beibia njf fkdicr was taken.^ There was a
box wfaicn you will reeollkt Taunton proved
bafbuod 'there, coslaining thi^ great qnantity
of uartridgel, powdar, and things of that kind :
sher'sayt, ** !• d6 not kaovr who brought tha
box." Aacoidiag^ thetefore, to the testis,
noay of-thle yomig i^onMuk this box had
be«&«t tei4ita« softM dl^ygbfoirthe dighl
951J
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of Arthur TkMemod
E952
"When they were apprehended, and ■ things
similar to those lying before her, she had seen at
a former time at that bouse; that certainly
seems rather to confirm than contradict the
testimony of the witnesses for the Crown.
Tiien, by way of beating down the credit of
the witness Dwyer, they call a person named
Edward Huckleston; he says he has known
Dwyer for some years intimately, and he says,
'< I do not think he is fit to be believed on his
oath/' Upon his cross-examination, he says,
*' I have seen him have money, and, knowing
that he was but a bricklayer, and had little or
no work, I was surprised. I was in distress ;
he told me he would put me in the way to
make plenty of money if I would go with him.
I agreed; and he proposed that we should
charge some gentleman with an unnatural of-
fence ; that he was to go up first, and then
that I was to join him. i left him, quite
shocked at the idea. This vras about three
months ago. He said he had got 70/. at a
time from one gentleman in St. James's-street,
by only catching him by the collar, and accus-
ing him. I met him next night at the Rodney's-
head, and he caHed me a coward. I told him
of the danger, and reminded him that his bro-
ther had been transported for the same thing.
He said his brother did not know so well how
to manage as he did : '^ he says, ^ from that
time 1 have avoided him. I am a shoemaker,
but am now articled to a cow-doctor, in
Newman-mews. I first communicated this to
my brother about a week ago. I did not men-
tion it before, lest I might be ill-treated, as I
Lad to go so much about among the cow-keepers.
Some of the Irishmen have gone away now, and
that induced me to summon up courage to
mention it to my brother. When Dwyer made
this proposal to me, it was two or three months
ago ; 1 did go part of the way with him, but
when he told me, I was horror-stmck, and got
back as soon as I could.''
Then Dwyer is called up again, who says
that all Huckleston has said is untrue : he says,
— *' I have seen the man, but did not know his
name was Huckleston. I have met him in
Oxford-road, not in a public-house. I never
proposed to him to charge any person with an
unnatural offence. In February last, I worked
in the parish mill, at Mary-le-bone, and got
three shiUiugs a day : I worked there twice in
different weeks ; I have a wife and children."
On his crosJs-examination, he says, he did
not recognize the last witness on his comine
into Court, . and say, 'f Oh, Huckleston ;" and
it seems that that was a mistake on the part of
the learned counsel who examined him; he
says, " I did not know his name at all. I have
seen him very often ; he resorted to the end of
James-street, and I lived in Gee's-court. I
never went to a public-house with him. I re-
sorted to the Rodnev's-head ; if I have seen
him. at the Rodneys-head, it must be some
time ago. I have not repeatedly met him in a
public-house. I don't' know that I can swear
J never. snw him at a pubUc-house. J will
swear I iiave not been wiUi him «t the Bod-
ney's-head within these three months. I am a
bricklayer by trade. I have worked' for a Mr.
Smith who lives at No. 22, Mortimer-street,
Cavendish-square, for thirteen years." Yon
have, therefore, this witness Huckleston called,
you see, to represent to you that Dwyer is not
a man entitled to your credit ;' all that is said
by him is contradicted : whidi of then tells
the truth it is for you to say. Yon are not
merely to reject the testimony of one person
because another comes forward and says some-
thing derogatory of him. You are to consider
whidi of the two is the person most entitled to
your credit. Dwyer, if he has told us the
truth, did make a communication. HuK^eston
admits, though this abominable scheme was
communicated to him, he never went to a ma-
gistrate ; but then, he says he was apprehensive
of being ill-treated, because there were many
Irish in the neighbourhood.
On the part of the prisoner, they next called
Joseph Doane, who sajrs he is called, couit
reporter ; he communicates to six nevFspapers
what passes at the court properly so caJled,
which ne picks up from time (6 time as he can.
He is shewn the New Times of the 22nd of
February, containing an announcement of this
dinner; he says he cannot speak to whedier he
wrote that at thb distance of time, but from
the wording of it, he rather thinks he did not
prepare the notice of that cabinet dinner, be-
cause it contains the word " grand," which he
would not have put in, as he knows the calmiet
dinners are always the same.
Then they call Andrew Mitchell, the printer
of the New Times ; he produces the manuscript
of that article ; he says, it did not oome firom
Mr. Doane. " I received it from Mr. Lavenn,
and this was the manuscript that was used
upon this occasion."
John Whitaker, who has seaidied sevetal
papers, says that the New Times is the only
paper which contained an account of the dinner
to be given at lord Harrowby's, and that was
in a paper of the 22nd February. How thai
announcement or advertisement or whatever it
may be, found its way into the nevrspaper, we
do not know, and it would be in vain, pinfaaps,
in this, as in many other cases, to endeavoar
to discover by what accident or means^a matter
of this nature finds its way into a newspaper.
What inference is to be drawn from this testi-
mony you must judge for yourselves. 1 confess
it does not, in my mind, lead to any satisfactory
conclusion one way or the other. The dinner
undoubtedly was intended ; that is staled fay
lord Harrowby and his servant ; whether any
body had heard of that dinner, and so tfaoiigfat
fit to add it to other articles of tiie saine de-
scription, or how it got into the peper^ "we do
not know.
This is the. whole of the evidence tbet has
been laid before .you, oti the part of the de-
fendant. ' Hiere are no-witnesses called to ise-
peaeh Adams, Monvment* or Hiden. The
impeachment jof Adams, and JMLommieiti .^flwet
9033
Jbr Hi^ 2Viii0ioii*
A. D. 1890.
E054
i^esi therafbra od the part they acknoivledge
themselves to have taken in this transaction ;
and it is for you to judge whether their state-
ment is true. If yon are to helieve one of
these persons, you will consider whether it
does not necessarily follow that wbat the
others have told you is suhstantiated, because
Hiden's account, thoueh more cautious, is to
the same import and effect as the others. You
have had exhibited here before -you upon the
table, and proved to have been found, a quan-
tity of arms, and other things to theextent that
has been mentioned. It seems almost to be
conceded, upon the evidence that has been
laid before you, that the conspiracy to assassi-
nate the king's ministers at that dinner was so
substantiated by proof, that it could not be
expected you should withhold your credit from
it. If you are to believe that there was that
wicked scheme and project intended, you will
further consider whether it is reasonable to
suppose that that was all that was intended ;
youwill consider what the probability is. These
persons are many of them unconnected, in most
respects, with each other, certainly unconnected
witn the persons who conduct the affairs of his
majesty's government ; therefore you will consi-
der whether it is not more naturalto suppose that
those who meditated this assassination, meditat-
ed it as part of a plan of a ffeneral simultaneous
insurrection, which they hoped would result
Irom it, than to suppose that they meditated
this and this alone — whiether it was intended
to gratify their thirst fw human blood, or whe-
ther it was a part of an ulterior plan. Upon
that question it i& fit you should attend to the
great quantity, as well as to the nature of the
weapons, and instruments of destruction which
have been produced before -you, which cer-
tainly are more in number -than could be re-
quired or used for the purpose merely of that
w>minable vi^it and attempt. that was to-be
made in the house of lord Harrowby. The
hand-grenades are of a description to be used
there : the fire balls do not seem at all appli-
cable. When you find all these materials col-
lected together in the custody of some of these
persons, some at one place, and some at ai^
oUier, you will take the whole into your serious
consideration. If, upon the whole of this evi-
dence, you shall feel satisfied that a conspiracy
to levy war against his majesty, or to depose
him, IS made out by the evidence laid before
you — ^if your consciences are satisfied of that,
you will discharge the painful du^ imposed
upon you by pronouncing the prisoner guilty.
I^ upon a due examination of all the circump-
stances, attending to the observations of the
• very eloquent counsel who have addressed you
on the part of the prisoners, your minds shall
not be satisfied that they £d entertain this
criminal project which has been mentioned to
you, you then will discharge a more pleasant
duty, and acquit the prisoner. You vrill con-
sider the case, and, I have no doubt, your ver-
dict will do justice between the public and
the piiioiier;
Fcrmm ^ <As Ji(f3f.-«-My lard| cai^ wt hive
a copy of the indictment P
lord Chief JuOke il&6o</.— Certainly. [It
wn handed to the Jury].
The Jury withdrew at a quarter before five,
and in five minutes returned into court to
request a copy of the act of- parliament of
the 36th Geo. 3rd.
Lord Chief JiMiee Ahbott-^OeuiH&nenf t^e
act of parliament shall be put into your hands
as you desire, but before I do so it is fit I
should mention to you,' that by its terms it is
made to continue during the natnial life of
our late most gracious sovereign,'and until the
end of the next session of parliament after a
demise of the Grown ; it had' not, therefore,
expired before the present indictment, but ly
a later act* it is made peripetual. I need not
give you that, because mis had not expired*
A Juryman. — ^If your lordship will read it, it
will be sufficient.
Lord Chief Jmtke ^(ftoff.— Certainly. The
act begins by reciting— ''We, your majesty's
dutiful andloval^subjects, the lords spiritual and
temporal, and commons of Great Britain, in this
present parliament assembled, duly consider-
ing the daring outrages offered to your majes-
ty's most sacred person, in your passage to and
from- your parliament at tne opening of this
present session; and also the continued at-
tempts of evil and wicked disposed persons to
disturb the tranquillity of this your majesty's
kingdom, particularly by the multitude of se-
ditious paiUpblets and speeches daily printed,
Sublished, and dispersea, with unremitted in-
ustry,aiidvrith a transcendent boldness, in con-
tempt of your majestv's royal person and dig-
nity, and tendinff to tne overthrow of the lavrs,
government^ and happy constitution of these
realms, have judged that it is become necessaiy
to provide a farther remedy against all 'suchtrea-
sonable and seditious practices and attempts.
We, therefore, calling to mind the good and
wholesome provisions which have at different
times been made, by the vrisdom of parliament^
for the averting such dangers, and more espe-
cially for the security and preservation of the
persons of the sovereigns of these realms, do
most humbly beseech your majesW that it mar
be enacted ; and be it enacted by the king%
most excellent majesty, by and with the advice
and consent of the lords spiritual and temporal,
and commons in this present parliament assem-
bled, and by the authority of the same, that if
any person or persons whatsoever, after the
day of the passing of this act, during the natu-
ral life of our most gracious sovereign lord the
king (whom Almighty God preserve and bless
vrith a long and prosperous reign) and until
the end of Uie next session of pariiament, after
a demise of the Crovrn, shall, within tiie realm
or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise.
rf-i
•Stat.l^Oio.Mcid.
9^
iQKAiUWiy.
T)rM^4tlt*m TUiMtmood
(909
or intend death or destmction, or any bodUy
^MMi MoMa^ W qeatn oc'sMfmeCietty nminiy
or wounding, imprison«ent or resciaint of the
jMBon,e£the.9^.ej^QWi«oY«iai|P to#tha king,
fib hein and successors-*^'' Nov,^. gfNitkaifDB
comes the part which forms the subject of one
ot thO'OOVBtS'ef tlU( indietnent: ^'-^-ortode-
MeohinaPtlMii item Ae* styles honour, or
fitaglf MBO: oT Ae itai|pihl' Cfowv of this
realm, or of any otherof fannajInty^^nnBions
<Vccou;atP«VQttQ la^va-wa&^iiMiistbiBm^iMly,
to h/eixa or 9upces90ia» vitbua tbi> realia> mi
qrd«r» Iqr ft)rc« ot nontlUaiTm, to OMnpeL hiai:
qir tlim ta ehaaga his oc tbei^e meainwii <»
^ftnos^iC wUch.it anathar». " or. io order tO:
B^ ^ *Ai^ ^ conwtffyia mi«v oa to. tnlir
ipidali^o]; Q]rai9tpm.both ^oaef ,.«« eiifaer hoasa^
oX padiinnftiU„ qc. Io Temoy» or s(Ur- aayi fe«
V^jigaaRoi atiaiuKi^, with fiMroa^ t^. iwf««Uthia
i|l94n|y^oc any otbei;of hia«)i^e9t|^s«domi«iona
or ctiiv)ft9efi|U»d43^the(oh«^ywo9e af.hi^aiqiati
ty, his heirs and successors ; and such compas-
SHDgs, JMngwiitiaiiw^ inreBtitns, dfevites orin-
tentions, or anv of them shall espresa, vrtter^ or
40ritti«i^l^ BomibiiiKany Bi>«itfuis.ar -vmtiag,
qr iiT ^I ^^^ act; esKleaa, beina legftUv conr
meted thereof, ufoat tha oatthsi dt tpwo lavrful
y^^ dtedible witByptWi Uflon. trials or olberwie»
<sonvic|iMQr.aitai0jied h^ daa Qw«BB0.Q£laia;.
ihm. ev^rj; suclu parsoi. and pamoas, so aa
ijtiweA»id. Q]|fandipg» shall ha daaiwid dedaasd.
udiafijudgfMi. U> batatraitQ^,ei»d(,trailon, aiad.
s^lfiuflur.p^na^f dcathi^ and« sjk^ loeaawi
4Nr£M^,ai..ii|.cafta» af higk trowiaq,''
I{»^Q.u,reQ))ve.aay fiirthea m)bHiaUoii J<will.
fp3(fi-it t0.yp«;.but^i^ sf»wad,,Iith0ugh(».taJiw
ujufik for. grafted' 1^.th% opuaaal on oneaMUi
^tlMtothei^,th«t.thaprq)eo|» if;proved».waa
ittraaipi^la^c«wMq[unfC» to d^paea tha Uag^
qs^to lm,^»t. agj^AJMl ibfb kiaf r. If tl^jrhad^
sfiocaedad-^aP^Cur afctQ^a«MiU>ih( a. prowoaal
lpirtgmyiSU> tbar.rtqpdt fiMw^iom would hura
€^i9fifiL /W/ aMami^ ll|y wianbeay. aad» bjh
4m^.ti9^ opiP<y>t hw Jiwa<iSia.«iUar«hifc maiii.
•WQii^ smmJ cpuaaahft iii sMili uodoabtadlflrh a.*
of, waft. ifij;thA¥ thill ncu Aftk actual
asing or. %iaanaetiQia fi>a tha sediiM' of evf
fiinpaeed pablia. griavanee was alwaya eoB«
altoad aa an aotiiaii Imiogof war^ under tha
old iMtuie oCSdwaiitha 3rd«
The Jury again retired, and in a quarter of
aa hour returned into* court, findins the
prisoner Oxsrvrt ov tbe' third and nurth
counts*
CM ^Jhr^^M^r-^bidliLorfl the pasaaaa
lor. judgmant^ my^ lord.?
BanfeiS^Jtuthr jm^tt-^ffo, not now.
thalc the jury, should) ha. samtioaad foe £ridef
moniag^ %ii I Caar thaia auoi^hava-haea saaaa
misuadeiriMitdiiigt
Lord' eSkfef AfffarifN^.-^nd' notice tl>
the jury to attend again on Friday meniing^:
the ofll^r shall go round' arihr as he can.
JWsiiaa qf th$i JiMy.-^-WiU yom lasMite
hafa Ae»gpeiaeii to &cbm^vBikam aMeM*
iog tha;eMiiiBg.tBialftl-.
Ijtnf CRfeT Jib^ior Mhttt—^yt consdtinK
with the other tud{ges^,weare oTopiaioir, |on
may be excusaa fironr senring on the next tnd;
we cannot say your attendance, shall be ex-
cosed ' OB 'ftiture trihis*
jlJw^mmCMt* G«ffiEM«i^;r-We baaehttd
^wjfraidooiia dMty to> peiibim,. aad wa shall
haid^haTa tkofi to iBowweg-OMawlveai
IMt'GM^'Justk€Aimt:--Wh hope some-
lldng more wiQ.'be .dbneibr you ; but you will
not DO wanted beibre next Monday, at all
eients : fUrtfaertiianr that'I cannel say.
Ux4.a0mlrm* 'Woidoinotpiaw il^^fhiihar
thaitothai^Qr>lMi^-
Mr; Jmtke Mkhknikm.-^Let itije announcedl
tfiat these trials, wilt be' resumed on Fridaj^
morning^*'
•^Saa* thei fbttowBiiiGaaaM .
009]
y'^^^^r ' ^^^^kW ^^^H^RIwi
JUlkMID.
Idsft
70*. The wh(^ Pkt^ceedings on the Trial of James Ings, for Higb
Treasoa, before tbe Court holden under a Special Commis-
sion^ for the Trial of certain Ofifehces therein mentioned^ on
die ^Ist and 22tid days of April: 1 GfiO. IV. A. d. 1820*
SfiSSIONS HOCBE^ OUO BAILSY,
Frid&t, Apfttt 21st, 1810.
T1)e Ri{jt)t Hem. lord CMgfJvtUkt IkSim.
The Right Hoiu lord GAi^JWofi[R5cli«ids].
Hie Hon. Mr. ^Ttafioe Itidicrdiim.
Tlie Cpffimon Serseont* *
And Others his Mijesty's Justices, 8ce.
James Ihos was set to the btr; and Joka
Thoifaas Bnuil^ aichurd Tidd, William
DaTidsoB) James William Wilson, John
HarnsoD, Ridiard Bmdbvm, John Shaw
Strange, James Gilfihrist, and Charles
Cooper, were placed at the bar behind*
The Jurv panel was called oter, commen-
cing widi No. 108.
Ckmiu Fannar^ hardwaremaa, awDRi*
{JkrulopkerDmimmf ship-bniMer, cbaUcnged by
the priaoner;
WUUam Jama Fanmt^ baker, chaMcnged bj
the priaoimr.
JJaM 17eiiitm% firmer, diaUoDged by tibe
Crown.
€j€ofgc Sntkhf jaipanner, sworn.
ikor^ Tkcrpf dockraae^makety 6haUn§ad bf
dieCrowm
Bauy SeaborUf eooper, eieased on aecomrt of
ilmeis.
Runm Sherbom, esq. and fimner, challenged
by the prisoner.
JBthoard .SwiplsK, sbipvrighly challenged by the
pnsoi
>aer.
JDflRMS, shopkeeper chalk aged by the
Crown.
Mkkard Fnmkiy esq.- a»d sflk-Hkepeer, chal-
lenged by the prisooeff.
nomm Lmgby, ship^BiidlMr, <^ellsiiged by
the Crown.
Geprge Priai, esq. chslkinged by the prisoner.
Ammsj iraam, gentlemaa and meichant, dwl*
lenged by the pfisoner.
WUHmm Moon, bndkiayeiy awoim.
Mkhad JUmu, esq. ekaUniged by thwCfow»»
vlamss SdSf ftnaer^ swons^
AyM Bmon, esq> awi peg toi>doahf, chatong>
•d by ibe Gvewn. i •
Omffjge 3Wofv hMAvnt^ cbaUeBgdl by the
priscmef^
JMn wi
Woodirn^^ gentftmais, challmigdl bf the
prisoner.
.*. ».
pieeedhig
Edmmd Citni^ j0weUqr» ehaUeoged by ifee
prisoner.
Jb*» Mt^^ne, geatlmum, challenged Iff M
prisoner*
lyivid Pom, esq, challenged by the pfisMer.
Bkhard Tucker, cheesenoageri ehaiuettged to
the prisoner.
Ih)mas BeaduMfy farmer, sworn.
B4)bert Ced^, ngger^ cheUenged by the pri-
soner.
Thomas Fw, eiq. and coachmaM<ff,thalletigd
by the Crown.
MaUhe» Bekker, tfaitner, chafi«iig«d by thh
Crown;
Bemamm WaMH, gentlemltti, chldltoged by
the prisoner.
O^ofgC Burrowi, silversmith, fined for non-at«
tendance, fine afterwards remitted on hie
appearance, and swearing he bad been pre-
vented being in time by indiftposition.
Edward EiUs, gentleman and stock-broker,
challenged by Che prisenttk
Btniamm nljftk, ergan-bnikUr, swoA)«
WUimm Oan^ iBather-djeMer^ ehattehged by
thepcisQoen
Mh Jadmmf gbM-enMer^ ehaUtnged by lh#
prisoner.
Jahm Bw^ geatWmaa awd seedemaii^swortit
Folk Bmtk,mt^ and distiUei^ chalknged bjr
thaprisonM«
Charim Benkam, mmlm foidener, ehattengea
bytheCrewDi .
Zftomai JRoUn^ siWiistoMv ebaB^agsd by the
Crown.
JdmRau, gintlematk* eicnsed o» aeeomt of
the hraupositien of aiduld in • dangeioiK
stated
Frmwk DflrriU^esq. ebaU«iged by the prisoMt^
WHUmm Pertyy plasterer, swonw
Jolm Giorgt Haimd^ fiiasNciiller^ ehattengedi
by the prisomsiL
Jtniibaid BMu^ stone-masMi^ ohaUenf ed by
the Crown*
JeA»JfiiM,gentJeman^cWleiigedby lh«Crow»<
€Ui0iu SStm Prttotk, esq« ehallenged by thtf
l{fl(prt% auHnec^8W<ird«
BmordLe^mk, esq^ mid oowhocpdr, fiaed
fiw ndn-aMendaflee.
GaeK§tFo€^ sawyer, nhnlliagjiil by.the Ciewn.
WHium Jimk, ptaaaber^ ch»llenged by th«
' CroEwn.
Mdmmrd Cmi, caipeatei^ ehalksged bgr ih#
Cieanu f-
George Golding, surveyor, ofanUsngidr bgr th#
prisoner.
M6}
1 GBOBOE IV.
Trial,tfJamm^Iiigi
tfNtO
Bfiieri Roberiif onmaiiy ehall6iiged by Ibe
Ciown*
WUUam Smmdf ibimdery challenged by tbe
Ciowii.
Charlet Page^ esq. and merchant, challenged
by the prisoner.
Wi&am "■
CoUy hxmeVf challenged by the
prisoner.
JmU Lewu, watchmaker, dudlenged by the
Crown. •
EAoard Flower, esq. schoolmaster, challenged
by the prisoner.
Mm^. fioMy centleman ' and tallo1r*cfaandlery
challenged by the Crown.
John 'Yo^9 gentleman and scakmaker, sworn.
Stafford Price, gentleman, and currier, chal-
lenged by the prisoner.
Jomn CarVf joiner, sworn.
Wiiiiam j£fl{gooaifo, joiner, sworn.
TRBJU&T.
Charles Fanner,
George Smith,
WiUiam Mooie,
James Ede,
lliomas Beachamp,
Benjamin Blyth,
John Beck,
William Percy,
Benjamin Rogers, .
John Young,
James Caiy,
William Edgecomb,
Tbe Jnnr were charged with the prisoner in
the usual rorm.
XHE Indictment was opened by Mr. BoUand.
Mr. Sokdior Gefier0/.«-Oentlemen of the
jury; — II is ny duty to state this case on the
mrt of the prosecution, and I am sure, know-
ing whom I now have the honour of address-
ing, that it is unnecessary lor me to request
your serious and patient attention to the par-
ticulars which I am about to detail ; you must
fcel that you owe it to yourselres ; you must
leel that you owe it to the public justice of
the country.; you must feel in a particular
manner that you owe it to the prisoner him-
self who now stands beiore you fbr his delivei^
Oentlemen, there is a circumstance to which
in justice to ^e prisoner, it is my duty to
advert. I should not hare alluded to it if it
nusf not of necessity have already come to
your knowledge — I mean the conviction that
lias' already taken place. ■ I entreat and conjure
you that you will not suffer that conviction at
all to operate upon your minds, to the preju-
dice of the prisoner who now stands oefore
you. Tou are to decide upon this case aocord-
mg to the impression which the evidence shall
make upon your own minds; and yon are not
to be influenced by an impression which evi-
dence that has ab^ady been heard may have
made upon the minds of othcf^men. • You are
to come to the conaideration of this question
totally divested of all previous prejudices and
impressions, and you are to decide this case
impartially, according to the evidence as it
shul be given upon oath before you against
tbe prisoner at the bar.
With re^Mct to the law, as app&cable to
this subject, it will not be necessary for me to
trouble you with a single observation. No
doubt can be entertained upon it No ques^
tion has hitherto been raised in the course of
these inquiries with respect to the law. The
charge against the prisoner at the bar, divested
of every thing that is technical, is shortly and
simply this ; that he has conspired with other
men, whose names will be mentioned in the
course of these proceedings, to overturn by
force and violence the lavrs and constitution
of Uie country. This, though stated in tikhni-
cal language upon .the record, is the .substance
of the change against the prisoner at the bar.
The object at which the parties aimed was to
be effected by means of an extensive plan of
assassination; it was to be effected also. by
other means to which I shall presently have
occasion to direct your attention.
In this stage of the prosecution, all tbat I
have to do is, in a plain and simple manner^
carefully abstaining from all exaggeration, to
state to you the focts that will be detailed in
evidence in support of this charge. I shall
state them as I now know they will be pioved,
without distorting a single hd or civcomstanoe
to the prejudice of the prisoner •'at the bar.
We are all interested in the fair and impartial
administration of justice ; no motives arising
out of any particular circumstances can pos-
sibly operate upon the nund of a person stand-
ing in the situation in vrhkh I am now placed
to lead him to forget his duty. . The fair, im«
partial, and uprisht administration of justice
IS that upon which we justly pride ourselves ;
it is the best gift we enjoy unaer the laws and
constitution of our country.
The prisoner at the bar, vrith a person of
the name of Thistlewood, a person of the name
of Davidson, another of the name of Brunt, a
person of the name of Wilson^ and several
others who will be mentioned in the course of
this inquiry, held^ in 4he eariy part of 4lie
year, secret meetings and consultations at a
place known by the name or sign of the White
Hart, in Brook's-market. 'fhose conauha*
tions.- vrere : held in a back room in a yard be-
longing to that public-house. I shall not
trouble you by stating what took place at those
meetings, because, after they had been held in
that place for a^ahort period of time, for some
reason to which it is unnecessary that I should
direct your attention, they left that place, and
held- their. meetings in another situation to
which I am now about to advert.
One of the prisoners, a man of the name of
Brunt^ who is a shoemaker by trade, lived in
a place called Fox-oonrt, in Gray's*inn-4ane ;
be occupied two. < apartments in' the front of
the house; there was in the back of the bouse,
upon the same .floor, . another- unlnmiahed
room, and that room was hired for the purpose
of Continuing those meetings whidi had beei^
formerly held at the White Hart. Tbe pri-
soner at ttie bar and Brunt, in conjunctioii,
hired the apartment. This took place About
6611
for High Tnoion*
the middle of fhe month of January, and from
that period to Wednesday the 23rd of Teb-
ruary, to which your attention will often be
called in the course of this inquiry) those
meetings were held always once, and fre-
quently twice a day, by the persons whom I
have mentioned, all of them, except Thistle-
woody being in humble situations of life, jour-
neymen mechanics — Tliistlewood himself was
in a more elevated situation, having formerly,
I believe, held a commission in his majesty's
service. The object of those meetings was, to
form a plan for overturning the government
of the country ; and the plan which was form-
ed, which will be proved to you in the most
distinct manner by the evidence I shall lay
before you, was of this nature. In the first
place it v^as proposed, that when an oppor-
tunity offered, all his majesty's ministerSj being
assembled at a cabinet dinner, which is usually
held about once a week during the meeting of
parliament, should be assassinated. It was
proposed that arms should be provided for
that purpose^ which I will by and by describe.
About thirty or forty persons were considered
as sufficient for tlie accomplishment of this
object, and it was arranged that on knocking
at the door, under pretence of delivering a
letter, a party armed with swords, pistols, and
hand-grenades, should rush into the room
"Where those persons were assembled at dinner,
and that they should be all destroyed. Ano-
ther party was to watch the stair-case, to pre-
sent any assistance from the servants ; a third,
the area, and other persons were to take care
that no interruption should occur to the eie-
cutioD of this project from persons without.
This was a part of the general plan. It was
thought the blow would create such an im-
pression, in striking off all the first^uthorities
ID the country, that it.would afford an oppor-
tunity for carrying into complete effect the
other projects of the conspirators. One of
these projects was, to set fire to various parts
of the town, and a party to be headed by a
person of the name of Palin (who was one of
the association) was to execute that project.
Another project was, to take possession of some
pieces or cannon stationed in the Artillery-
ground. The party to cany into effect that
part of the plan was to be headed by a person
of the name of Cook. A fourth party was to
take possession of two pieces of artillery sta*
tionea in GrayVinn-lane,
It is necessary for me to inform you that
all the persons whose assistance was to be col-
lected on this occasion were not to be let into
the whole history and contrivance of this plot.
The secret was confined to those who were ia
the habit of assembling in Fox*court; but
they had associates vrithont, who understood
that a plan was going on; that something was
in preparation to which they were to lend
their assistance^ when it was qpe for ezeco-
tion, and that when ripe for execution, the
pttrtionlan.were to be communicated to them.
For the purpose of canying this into execu-
VOL. XXXIII.
A. D. 1820. [9^
tion, arms of various description were pro-
cured. It is unnecessary for me to particu-
larize the whole of them, but I shall direct
your attention to one or two descriptions of
weapons. Independently of swords and pis-
tols and a great number of pikes, there were^
collected, for this purpose^ a number of
hand-grenades. These were collected chief-
ly by the prisoner Davidson : they were
formed, each of them, of a tin box filled with
about a quarter of a pound of gunpowder ; a
fuse communicated with the interior; large
pieces of iron were placed round the box, and
the whole was secured with cord, and after-
wards dipped into pitch and tar, and cemented
strongly together. Those grenades were in-
tended, in the first instance, to be thrown into
the house where the ministers were assembled
at dinner : and they were ailso to be made use
of for the purpose of aiding in the further pro-
jects which the parties had in view. Another
description of instrument, prepared for the
occasion, were fire-balls, which were called by
them illumination-balls, to be made tise of by
the party, under the direction of Palin, in
setting fire to different buildings in the metro-
polis. These preparations went on for a con«
siderable period of time. As the instruments
of destruction which I have thus described
were successively prepared, they were brought
to the place in Fox-court for inaction, and
they were afterwards transferred from that
place to what was called the d^p6t, the lodg-
mgs of one of the conspirators, a man of the
name of Tidd, who lived in a place called
Hole-in-the-wall-passage, near Brook's<mariLet.
The plan which had been thus formed, be-
fore it was completely matured and readv for
execution, was suspended by the death of the
king. In consequence of that event the ca- '
binet dinners were discontinued, and it became
therefore impossible to execute the project at
the period when it was originally intended,
and you will find these parties were continually
expressing their disappointment at the delay.
They became at last so impatient, that, on Sa-
turday the 19th of February, they determined
to consider whether some other plan, if not so
effectual, at least to a degree effectual for the
accomplishment of the purpose they had in
view, might not be substitnted for it; and
accordingly they determined, that on the foU
lowing day, Sunday, in the forenoon, a com-
mittee should be appointed for the purpose of
considering what measures should be taken, it
was then considered that there was no imme-
diate prospect of all the ministers meetings to-
gether, so as to enable them to attempt the
enterprise wfaidi had been contemplated. On
the Sunday, they accordingly met together,
and formed themselves into a committee ; and
Thistlewood, who undoubtedly was the leader
and framer of the whole plan, proposed that
as it was probable they might be able to col*«
lect about forty^men for tiie purpose of exe*
cutinswhat was denominated the west-end**
job, forty determined persons calculated for
3Q
960)
1 GEORGK IT.
Trial of Jama lugi
C964
an enterpiise of tint kind iiicNild divide thenfr
selves into four perties» for the purpoie of
putting to deatb, at the tame time^ four of
those who were considered the leadiog mtm-
ben of the cabinet. This plan was agitated^
proposed^ c^msidered, ana at last reaoWad
upon. It was determined that all the reat of
the prpfect should be earned into effect, as it
had been originidly intended ; but that instead
of striking the blow at all his majesty's minia*
tersy as circumstances did not permit that to
be carried into effect, they would confine
themselves with the means th^ possessed to
the taking off four of the leading uembera of
Ithe cabinet, whose names will he mentioaed
to you in the course of the evidence. The
prisoner at the bar expressed a hope that he
should be of the party destined to put to death
my lord Castlereagb, andhe exclaimed, '< It will
not be necessary to draw lots for the purpose
of knowing who shall be the individual to put
him 10 death, for I am ready to do that with
my own hand." After this resolution was
adopted, the parties separated, and it was un-
derstood, that if on the following Wedn^ay
(which was the day on which the cabinet
dinners were usually given) there should be
■o opportunity of stnking the great blow,
then the plan should be carried into effect in
the manner I have now stated. They met
again on the Monday, and also on the Tuesday
moniing.
In the mean time the king's funeral had
taken place, and as a proper interval had
elapsed, it wtfs considered that those dinners
might again be renewed ; and in the latter end
•f the preceding week, either on the Friday or
on the Saturday, cards of invitation had been
issued by the desire of lord Harrowby, re-
questing the attendance of the cabinet minis*
ters at a dinner to be given at his house, on
Wednesday the 23rd. You are aware that
these dinners are usually announced in the
public papers, and particularly in the papera
which are supposed to be in the interest of
Government The court reporter sent the ac«
count of the invitation to tiie New Times, and
it appeared in that paper on the morning of
Tu^ay the SSnd instant. These oonspi-
xatoiB were assembled on that morning, at their
plaoe of rendesvottS, in Fox*court. It was
mentioned that a dinner was to be held on
the following day, and that it was advertised
in the newspapers. A newspaper was sent
for, the paragraph was read, and the utmost
exultation was expressed (in terms so gross
that I do not choose to repeat them) by the
prisoner now on his trial. EVeiy thing was
imasedialehr in a bustle, and they determined
to go Totfnd to their dilforent associates, to get
them in readtnesB, to carry into efihct the en-
terprise on the foHowittg i|ight.
I should state to you that they did not con*
rider that the room in Fbx«eonrt would be a
eonvenient spot^ from whenoe to issue to the
ececttlion of their praject* They weie exposed
there to a good deaii of observation^ and it was
al too remote a distanoe fivm Ike swit when
the blow was to be stmek. In order, tfaen^
for^ to carry on their design with: more fuim
lity, they had hived premises in an obseusst
stieet, lalled C^Orsiieet, near the Bdgwaver
soad ; a street thvoogh which there is no pee^
sage for earriagea. PresDises consisting of a
saiiall stable^ a eavt-hense, a loh^ and tfwo
rooms communicating with the loft, were hired
for the purpose of carrying the plot into ef^
feet, from a peraoa of the name of Finh, b^
Harrison, one of the partiea most active in thft
eottsptracy ; and it was detemined that em
the following evening, about six or sevem
o'clock,, arnied in the manner necesoaiy foe
aecomplisbing their object, they should a»»
semble at these premises in Cato-etreet.
When this project was thus nearly ripe foe
execution, it was conceived that theymig^t,
with the less danger^ eommunicate the pmnim
culars of it for the purpose of getting additional
assistance ; and aecordingly a eommunicatiois
upon the sol^eet was made by one of the eon-
smtators, Wilson, to a person o# the name of
Hiden, a milkman, bvinoin the Heighboarh<M)d
of Manchestet^uare. Wibon told him that
there was a design to overturn the govemmeaft
of the countsy : he told him that this was to ba
effected by means of assassmating his majesty'a
ministers, who were to dine on the fottowiag
day at lord Harrowby's ; and that these wera
parties who were to take possession of tha
artilleiy in Giay's-iim-lane, and in the dtf,
and another party to set fire to the town, im
different parts, for the purpose of prodnciny
general oonfosion and disorder; and aa the
labouring classes of the people were sappoaed
to be disaffwted to the govemmeat or tha
country, that it was hop^ a general rising
would take place, and that a force veuld b«
collected sufficient to set al defiance the ra*
maining authorities of government.
When this communication was made t»
Hiden, he listened to it with astonishment; and
when required to join in it, he immediately
assented, because he felt that when sueh a pro-
position was made to him by persons oapabla
of forming such a plan, if he shcrald refose hia
assent to it, his own personal security would
be endangered. He promised, therefore, ta
meet the conspirators, laid he would briag
such accesrion of force as was in his pawer^
and after this communication was made, >»•
turned to his own home. He then began la
reflect seriously upon tiie nanire of this
diabolical project ; he turned in his mind uHbaft
Qoorse he should, pnieae, and be immedialBl|r
sat down and wrote a letter to my lord Gastla«
zeagfa, communicating the particulan e£ Qstm
plan. With this letter he proceeded to St.
JamesV^iiuara, afraid to knock at the daor of
my lord Castleraagh, lest he riionld be obsemd,
but remaining in the neit^hooriiood for tha
purpose of seeing his lordship in the atiaet, of
deUveting to him this letter, and ef making tha
imporUnt disclosure. No oppoitaaity of onifw
ing this design into eiibct oocmived, imd he thai
1
Jar High TreoMon.
A. D. 1830.
(066
prooaedad from SL JaBi€8*8-fl(|iuire toGrosre-
WJt^eqvMitf where my lord Harrowby re^iden,
for the pnvpose of endeavouring to make a
eommunieaUon to that noUeman. Fortunately
my lord Harrowby went oat to lide unae*
«ompanied by a senraDt; Hiden stationed
himself at Grosrenor-gate, and waited hie
return. This oocuired about two o'clock on
the Tuesday. He told bis lordehip that the
letter contained information of a most im-
fmrtaiit nmnre, and requested his lonkfaip to
4ake cate Hmt it should be instantly delivered
ito lord Caitleieagh. Lotii Hasrowby asked
Avhether he had giten his name and addrees in
Hhe letter ; he said he had not, but he immedi-
Alely delivered a eard to his lordehip ; and the
jnoment this eemmuoioatjoa was made to
4|Ovemmeoty of coufse every step was taken
mi the polioe offices for the purpote of counter-
jMling the design^ andaeeuring the conspirators,
when they should assemble the next night in
Cato^reet for the aoeomplishment df their
object. .
At about two o'dock on the following di^,
many of the parties assembled in Fox-court,
for die purpose of finally equipping themselvee
. iot then enterprise, and, among others, the
prisoner at the bar. Thistlewood came in,
.and seeing them thus engaged, used some
words of encouragement, wA said, '^we must
■write a proclamanoo.*' Brun^ who lived in
the front room, jent out>his boy for some sheets
of cartridge paper; six sheets were produced,
and ThisUewood sat down and wrote three
copies of a proclamsdoti in these terms : —
<« Your tyrants are no more :— the friends of
liberty are requested to come forward, as the
provisional government is now sitting" — sign-
,ed**J. Ings« secretary.*' — It was intended that
.Abase prochmatiens shoi^dd be posted up in
tbe neighbourhood of the places where the
.fires were lighted, that they mig^t be seen by
. Ae persons there assembled, and might add to
the general alarm; and, gentlemen, what
would have been the state of the metropolis at
tliat moment, supposing, at nearly the hour of
* midnight, it had been circulated through this
. extensive city, that every one of his mi^ty's
natnisteis bad been cut off fay assassins ; thst
the town was set on fire in different places ;
aod, in addition to all this, that artillery was
moving from different points towards the city ;
aad that a provisional government consisting
of unknown persons, mid therefore, perhaps,
the more terrific and alarming, was acknlly
HistaUedaBdsuhstitttted in lien of the tegiti-
msale government of the empire ;-^wbat would
bsive been the state of agitation, alarm, tumult,
9md disorder in the metropolis, if sueh an event
lind taken iploce ?
. AAer this the prisoner prepared hims^ for
she purpose of protiBeding to the place of ren-
siezvons, with pistols ia his belty a sword, two
tegs or haversnfts over his shmddeSrs, and a
l»Jteher*s kaife (for he is by trade a Imlcher)
wihiLh he prodooed to the party, with the
handle woi^id toond with wax tadf which he
had so secured in order that he might have the
firmer hold. He Was resolved, he said, to take
off the heads of two of tbe ministers who wall
be mentioned, and to expose them for the pur-
pose of exciting the people to insurrection,
duch was the language of the prisoner, mis-
calculating extremely the feelings of the people
of this country, if he supposed they could be
excited to insurrection by assassination and
murder ; for, if any thing were wanting to have
deterred them from engaging in such an
enterprise, it would be sufficient that it had
been commenced by assassination^—a crime
foreign to the character of Englishmen, and
which I hope and trust will ever remnin alien
to their feelings and habits.
After the prisoner had thus prepared him-
self, the conspirators by degrees went off for
the purpose of assembling themselves in Cato*
street They met there at about six o'clock.
When they arrived, their numbers amounted
only to about twenty ; fower than tbey had
calculated upon, for it was supposed that from
thirty to for^*vras the number that would have
assembled at that meeting. For some little
time, there was a suspicion and a jealousy
in the meeting, in consequence of tbe non-
appearance of Tidd : they were surprised that
he had not come, and became alarmed and
agitated. But Brunt, who knew him well,
stepped forward at this juncture, and said he
would answer for Tidd that he would not for-
sake the cause. Shortly afterwards, Tidd,
accompanied by a person of the name of
Monument, whom we shall call as witness,
entered the rooen. Still there were many of
the persons present who, looking round, and
cslculating Uieir force, and at the same time
considering the object to which it was to be
directed, mlt that it was inadequate to the
purpose. They betrayed symptoms of uneasi-
ness and doubt. Thistlewood, who saw what
was going on, and who was apprehensive lest
the scheme should be abandoned, said they
were too far advanced to recede ; that if it was
now given up, it would be another Despard's
job; and begged them not to abandon the
cause. Their numbers, he said, were abundantly
suffideilt: '^ we shall take them by surprise;
though they may have many servants, they
will be unarmed : we are now five and twenty,
fourteen will be sufficient to enter the room,
and the rest may'guard the entrance." Brunt,
who was always eager and zealous in tbe cause,
then stepped forwaid, and said, ^ I presume
those who. betray alarm are not aware of the
instramenis we have prepared,'' and he then
pointed to a grenadeof very large oonstnictioD,
tntepdcd to be thrown into iie room, and
whieh would at once have effected the destruc-
tion of all the persons there assembled. Ings,
the prisoner at the bar, also declared that if
they did ppt proceed to the accomplishment of
the object, he would either hang himself or
, cut his throat inamediately. After* this scene,
it was put to the vote whether they should pro-
ceed, and they were unaatmous in their
967]
I GEORGE IV.
TrM qfjai^et /«tg(
[968
determination to go on with the enterprise. It
xnras then fixed that fourteen should be selected
for the purpose of entering the room, and
those who were willing to engage in that part
•of the design, were desired to pass across the
room, and to take a particular position. Im*
mediately the prisoner at the har and several
others, in -conseqtience of this notification,
went to the spot assigned.
At this moment an alarm was giren below —
^ look out above there/* was shouted. This-
tlewood immediately went to the ladder (for
there was, a communication only by a ladder
with the stable below), and, looking down, he
saw persons coming up with considerable acti-
vity. They were police oflicers, Ruthven at
the head, Ellis second, a man of the name of
Smithers third. When Ruthven mounted the
ladder, he looked round the room, and saw
the persons there assembled armed in the
manner I have described, desperate in their
appearance, a kind of bench crossing tiie room
covered with arms of various descriptions —
aome of the parties endeavouring to retreat
into a small a^oiningroom— Thistlewood seiz-
ing a sword and following them into this apart-
ment. Ruthven made 'good his landing; he
was followed by Ellis, ai^ by Smithers, a man
of great spirit, who immediately sprung for-
ward. Thistlewood drew back his arm, and
«s Smithers approached him he plunged the
sword into his heart. Smithers fell dead upon
the spot. There was a cry — " put out the
lights,^ and the lights were put out; and there
was a cry — ** kill the thieves, throw them down
stairs ;" upon this there was a general rush to
the ladder, Thistlewood descended in the con-
fusion, he discharged a pistol at an officer near
the door, escaped, and was not then taken.
Hie prisoner was first seized in the stable
below. The knife I have described was taken
from his bosom, but in the confusion, in some
way or other, as you will hear from the wit-
nessesy he made his escape. He was pursued
into a contiguous street --John-street ; finding
that he was not likely to escape from his pur-
suer, he turned round and firea a pistol at him
— ^the ball grazed his neck. The prisoner still
contioued to run, but was stopped by the
watchman. When he was brought back, he
was asked his motive for firing, he said — ^^ I
know the upshot of it, I wish I had killed you.
I know what I have done." He was then
secured. Davidson, the black, who will be
produced at the bar, was also apprehended in
endeavouring to make his escape. He was
taken to a public house; and, as a further
proof of the object of this meeting, and of the
projects which the parties had in view, you
will find that he immediatelv began to swear
that the man deserved to be damned who
would not die in the cause of liberty. Brunt,
one of the most active of the party, eflected
his escape. He returned to his own lodging
about nine o'clock. His apprentice was there,
whom we shall call as a witness. He came in
jsded and dirty. Be said t» hit wilt.-.<« it is
all over ; we were attacked by a great nimiber
of officers. I have saved my life, that is all s*'
— ^however, recollecting himself, he went out
shortly afterwards with another person, sayings
'* no, there is something to be done yet,** ie»
ferring, no doubt, to the other parts of the
plan ; namely, the setting fire to the town,
seizing the cannon, and the other particulars
whidi I have already stated. He returned in
about two hours, and went to bed, first desir*
ing his apprentice to clean his boots eariy in
the morning ; when he arose, he called hie ap-
prentice into the adjoining room, took out of a
cupboard a number of hand-grenades, a num«
her of bags filled with powdery so oonstnicteA
as to serve for cartridges for the cannon, and
a number of fire-balls. They were pot into
two baskett, one of them covered up with the
apron of Brant's wife, which had been used as
a blind to the window of the room in whi^
the parties had held their meeting. He de-
sired his apprentice immediately to take the
two baskets to a place called' SnoVs-fields, i»
the house of a person of the name of Potter— •
Potter being one of the conspirators who had
been in the habit of meeting at Foz->oourt.
Just at this moment, Taunton, the Bowi-
street officer, ascended the stairs. He searched
the room of Brunt, and fbond nothing ; bnt
going into the back room, he discovered tlw
two baskets, prepared in the way I have de^
scribed. Turning to Brunt, he asked him
whose room that was,— he replied he did not
know — a man whom he had met accidentally
at a public house had taken it. He was asked
to give an account of the baskets, — he said he
knew nothing of them. Taunton then took
him into custody, and proceeded immediately
to Tidd's lodgings, which I have described as
the d^pdt, and there he found a trank contain-
ing* 965 rounds of ball-cartridge prepared lor
service ; he found separate parcels of cartridges,
amounting to between two and three hundred;
he found several hand-grenades, and several
cartridges prepared for cannon, and several
fire-balls, showing that the project the parties
contemplated was not confined to the assassi-
nation of his majesty's ministers, but had a
more extensive range, and was of the character
I have described.
I have now stated to you thb case, as I
know it will be proved in evidence. I have
given jrou the whole history of the transaction,
from its commencement in the middle of
January, to its termination on the 23rd of
February, when the prisoners were apprehended
in Cato*street. You must of course be aware
that in a case of this kind— a secret conspiracy
carried on in the manner I have describe —
the minute details can only be proved by some
of the conspirators themselves; I therdbre
must call before you^ for that purpose, one or
more accomplices. According to the law of
England, and according to the law, I beliesie,
of every country in the worid, an accomplice^
nnder such ciicumstanoes, is a witness compe*
tent to be heasd in a cooit of jnstice : ir it
960]
Jot High Treason.
A. D/ 1820.
C970
/
were not so, the consequence must be most
ruinous to the interests of society ; for the
great cbedL upon combinations of this nature
is» that the parties feel they cannot trust each
other; that tliey are in the power of their as-
sociates, and that those very associates may be
eaXied to give evi^nce against them : put an
end to this, and let it be laid down as law, or
as a practical course to be pursued by juries,
ihat accomplices, when they come forward as
witnesses, are not to be considered as entitled
to credit ; and you offer an encouragement to
secret and dark oonspiracies of this kind, for you
hold out complete indenmity and impunity.
But when 1 say that an accomplice is to be
heard in a court of justice, do not understand
me ta say that his evidence is not to be watched
with the utmost jealousy and oaution. You
will, in the first place, inquire what has been
the previous character of the roan, and if you
ifind it to be untainted, this circumstance will
add to the reliance you will be -disposed to
^lace upon his evidence.
You will in the second place ask yourselves
what interest he has in perv^ting the truth.
AVhen an accomplice appears as a witness, in
a court of justice, he may possibly be desirous
of lessening his own guilt at the expense of
those with whom he has associated ; but he
has no interest in stating that the crime which
the parties combined to commit was of a dif-
ferent nature from what it really was : he has
no interest in aggravating the character of the
offence. Although no express promise has
been made, he must know, from the course
pursued on these occasiona, that if he comes
forward and states fairly and honestly all that
he knows of the transaction, the vengeance
of the law will not fall upon him. But this
can be no motive to induce him to &lsify the
facts, and to represent the case as being of a
xnore atrocious character than it really was ;
and I adc you, therefore, when I call the per-
son to whom I am alluding before you, in
examining his evidence, to put this question
to yourselves:— what interest has this indi-
vidual in misrepresenting the nature and cha-
racter of the crime ?
You will in the third place inquire, whether
in the story he is telling, he is exposing him-
.self to be contradicted if he tells that which is
fidse. If he says that there were such and
such persons present at the transactions he
describes, you will see that he must know that
those persons may be called for the purpose
of giving evidence against him ; you will in-
quire whether this must not of necessity be a
^arantee of his truth, and prevent his stating
that which is false ; and you will then observe
whether those particular witnesses are called
on the other side, for the purpose of contra-
dicting him.
You will in the fourth place inquire, whether
he is confirmed in the story he is telling;
which is J^e great principle to be applied in
the admimstration of justice on occasions of
"''"'sort. When you inquire into tibe«ciedit
due to an accomplice, is he confirmed in those
parts of his story, where, from the ciroum*
stances of the transaction he can be confirmed
— not in collateral and trivial particulars,
which have no relation to the essence of the
crime— -but is he, in the main current of his
story, confirmed in those particulars which
lirom the nature of the case admit of con*
firmation. I beg you, after you shall have
all the evidence laid before you, to apply those
tests to the evidence of the accomplice, and
say, whether or not you think him entitled to
credit.
But this case does not depend upon the
credit due to an accomplice ; it may be neces*
■sary for the purpose of proving a particular
fact, of making out some of the detail, to odl
an accomplice; but we have many other
witnesses. I have told you of the communica*
tion made to Hiden, a man of unimpeached and
unimpeachable character ; a man who on the
communication being made to him, instanUy
did that which every honest man would do,
revealed it to the officers of government,
that so foul and desperate a conspiracy might
be defeated. But it does not depend even
upon this evidence, for there are the facts them^
selves, which speak emphatically on the
case. These parties were assembled: for
what purpose were they assembled? for no -
ordinary purpose ; the veijr arms and prepar-
ations negative such an inference, is any
assignable cause given or can be given, for
this meeting, except that spoken to by die
witnesses? I/H>k at the nature of the arms
that are prepared; they were not prepered
solely for the purpose of executing this pro-*
ject of assassination, because yon will nnd»
that at the d^pdt— At a distance from the place
where the project of assassination was to be
executed, smd after all the preparations were
oomplete for the purpose — there was found
that quantity of arms and ammunition which
I have mentioned; those illumination balls,
as they were lightly called by the parties, and
the preparations for loading the cannon, which
shew to demonstration, that the case, as stated
by the accomplices, is in the whole of it corv
xect. It appears to me, that from the evidence
a% it will come before you, it is impossible to
entertain a doubt upon the sul^ect. But it is
not for me to determine it, it is for you when
you have heard the evidence dispassionately
to judge.
It may be said that this was a wild and
visionary project ; and because it was a wild
and visionary project, yon vrill probably be
told that no such project was formed. The
question is not wnether you or any othef
prudent and sober man, eten if his heart
would allow him, would have embarked in a
design of this nature. It is impossible to ex«
.amine the history of the plots and conspiracies
by which any country in the world has in its
turn been agitated, and not to say that, in-
dependently of other considerations, there is
not one in a hundred in whidi any prudent
071J
1 GEORGE IV.
TritU qJT James I«g*
[97a
tnan wouU liMc embariMd. Yon wiU AdA
them im fMeittl tU-^imniged, wHd, fend eHlm-
iraganty leandnf ewty thing to haiHrdy formed
with inad«quliie twatM, like thst whidi is now
llie subyaet of ^otir iKniiidtmtion. But mta
becovie oattauauMB in coks of tkie nakiwe;
Ifao^ftie Ulina to the inmediatediflfeuhioB;
they look to tiie eitaimnoat of the ultimle
•Igect, and, in so doing, oreridok the impedi-
aents in their way. Bat let sm only at^te
one obeerration to you^ and you wiU cease at
Mme to eonsider that any arpmient oan he
founded apon the Tisionary nature of this ftoi,
when you ca«e to spp^ the ease to these
partioolar iodividiiahi. They had eoosideiod
•-^fidseky I know, but they had eodsidtred*-^
HMtllie gnsai 'naas of the hiboving part of
the covtitry was ripe for insorreetien ; they
oomdoved them as radically disaffected to tibe
yweimnent of the ooantry ; they ihoiiqi^ht thete*
me dial if they oould stnhe this sort of stoiK-
ming blow, tey might at once eommenoe an
iMuneeliODaad sbtoU that would enable them
io lobe poBMisiofi of the goyemment of the
«nmtiy. If they wove right hi the suspicion
Hiey bad foimodi that disaffhotion had spread
00 widaly, and had assaosed sodh a eharaeter,
the progeet ceased to be wiM aad Tisumaiy.;
mad it is tfpon that opiniouy and thai opinion
alone, ibat the whole df this pkm appears to
have been boilt. But the qaeition is aot
wisether the pejeot was itmvgimt, but whe-
ther the pwQeec was fomed; end yon witt
look to the #»e»eetbiit will be laid before yon,
for Aeputpoee%fiBSo«rtihiitig Ihatfoet; and
however ^iM, bowefffr^ztrnvasantitiiiay ap-
ftm to yemr sober jmJgmnma, if yon find it
psof ed by the tesiimoAy of tvitnesees, and by
em cppoal to faels wlneh*eaiiiiot he pet? oited
m deaMy that oaeh a prijeot was fonswd,
then howover wild «id mmmajy it may be in
yo«T'esii*atioii, it will he yaur iiuty.lo|w»>
«««ice aceordiMly.
I hate laid mis case simply befose ysoti.
My leanmd IHend who sits near aoe, and I,
iMeno intflvest to answer upon Has oeosaion,
iMt ID brittg tfiis esse simply, distfoeOy^inielli-
•fildy befose a jury of the oountiy; ^m^ij owe
»f 9P«a is as mudh interested in die fesult of
^is in^piiy as we can be : for myself I speak
sieet since^sly, when I say thai I am desBPoos
mAf that jastieef vhould be foirly administered
dpon this emasien. I entreat yoa, if any rea^
iloDable doubt should exist in your minds tmon
ibis cioestioB, to remember the beBerileDt
ffrinoipleoftbelawofSoglaiid, sad give tbe
piisoner the benefit of thai donbt; but if After
you hA«e oeusiderod the whole ^estiOD,-«4f
Mer yov ba?e heard the whole eraidenee, it
shall «arry ooaviciien iivesistxl% to yoor
iniads ^ hopwerer paiafal it may be, yet I am
-sore wta ^svll ^floharge yoar doty, whaterer
fwy be the eonteyiiaoe, with firmness and
iaitegiify«
CtlDEVCft VO% THE CBOWN.
'Rtkiri Adams sworn. — Enoninad by
Mr. AUem^ Gtntnd,
Yon ale now « prisoner in custody, I be*^
lieve ?— -Yes.
Before you were apprehended, did yoaiei.
side at Holeaaithe>wall passage ? — ¥ee.
ThiLt is near Brook'oimmtet ?-«Yes.
Weie yoa acquainted with a pemon of Ike
name of Brunt f — I was.
When did you first beeome aoqaaimed wiili
him l-^The iist of my aeipisaatance with Bramt
was at Cambray in France ; at tet time ka
pitfsed l^ tbe naase of Thomas Morton.
I beliere sone yearn mgo yon were a soldier
in the Oafovd-^blues f-^I was.
How many 3ftBars agol— Aboot ^htaea
years ago list Chriscmas.
You were dischaeged from iUnessf — ^Yea.
Wliat has been your trade or employmewt
«inoe f «-«<!hiefly dhoem^ing.
When you were in J'ranoe were yoa poaM»-
ing that trade with tbe £aglish army that 'was
tbeve ?— *I was.
When did you senewyomraoquaintaace with
•him in this country ? — ^I cannot pretead to st^
the atonth, but some few months aflerl re-
taraed.
Where did Bmnt lire for the ksi few
months ? — He lived in Fox- court, Oray's-inn*
laae.
Do yon know a pesson si the nasoe of
ThisUewood ?— ^Eomemely weU.
When did you ftrst beoorae aequaioted with
him ?-^n the 19th of January, a Wedneedaj,
thiak.
In this yeii?«^Y«s, it waaon a Wedneedsy ;
I think Sunday was tbe Dlh.
Who iDirodaced yoa to him l-^Bniad and
logB.
The prisoner at tbe bar, Ings ? — ^Yes.
How long- bad you known logs before that ?
"—About five or six days.
Where w^re you inttodnced to Thisllewood T
— At his lodgings in Oompton-etreet, Chura-
market ; Staldiopo^treety I asean.
Had you a conversation at that time with
Tlastlewood^Mi te preseneeof Brunt and Ings ?
«--Ihad.
Tell ns what passed npon that occasion ?—
Ob finmt introdneiog me into the room to
ThisUetiood he said, ^ Here, Mr. Thisaewood,
is the Bsdn that I was speaking to yoa about. ^
<< Oh, is lUs the ma* ?" says TUsdewood, «« you
helODged to tbe Lifei^asds, did you not ^ I
said no, that I befanged to the Blues, the
mpernameofthe vegimeat was the Bqyal-
norse«gaaid8. <^ I beU^e," ss^ he, ^ yon are a
g6od soldier, and can ase a sword welC" I told
him i onto waa a'cood soldier, and I once ooaU
use a sword well ; I told him I could use a
swwrd/fntffiflwmtly todefeud myself, if oaeasion
shocAd sequin it. XJpsn this he tamed the
sufai^ct sespectiag the difierent sfiopkeepen of
London, saving they were alia set of aristo-
trats^ and aaworhinguadjsroae system; that
9731
far H^h "TwHon.'
A. D. ISSQ.
t9T4
he should gloiy I0 see the day thel their diops
weie all &it m, and well pluodened. He
liezt turaed his diflsoujiere«peettAg Mr. Hunt,
saying that Hunt was a damned ceward, and
he was no friend to the people ; that he had no
douht ia his nhnd, eoalo be get into Whitehall
to overlook tlie books there^ he sheald find his
name upon: the porerameBit hooks as a spy fm
goveniment. Upon Ihia he turned his dts»>
coarse to Mr. Cobhetty that he had no donbC
he was as had ; that with aH hts writings, he
waa not a naa fin the good of the ooaatry at
Did any tiwag move pass ?«— There was
nothing more passed at this time, further than
tiiat Brant saia, he had two men \o call upon
in Careahy-maiket; he asked Mr. Thistlewood
whether he woold odi epea them Amt the pur-
pose of seeing those men ; this I did not men*
tion hefom;
Lord ChirfJu$tke IXdla$.^-^ev& mind what
you mentioned before.
Wiinm^^Mr. Thistlewood declined it, and
apon that we left the room.
With Brant and Ings ?— Yes.
Mr. Attornw GeneraL — I believe you went
to prison on the 17th of January, for debt? —
Yes.
Had you, previous to this» other interviews
with the prisoner and Thistlewood 7--rI had
an interview with him on Sunday the 16tb.
Where was that?— At the White-Hart in
BrookVnarket.
Whereabouts did you meet P In what part
of the house or premises t — We first or all
met in the tap-room, and proceeded from the
tap-room to the room we had taken.
Where was that room f— In the back yard
on the ground floor.
Behind the White Hart?— Yes,
Who were present at that meeting ? — ^Tbere
were Thistlewood, Ings, H(iU, Brunt, Tidd,
that was all, besides myself.
On the following day, the 17tb> you were
taken to prison ?-^Yes, I was.
How long did you remain there ? — I remain-
ed there until the day a^r the dealh of the
late king.
That was the .90th of January, I beUeve ?
When did you next meet the prisoner at the
bar, Ings P— ]( saw him the d«j after at the
White Hart.
That would be the Sift then f-rYes.
Did jfm go with him to any other place, or
ii^eet him at any other place but the White
Ilart?^! believe I saw dim at Brunt's room.
Whereabouts was Bruat'a rooiUf of which
you are now speaking ?<— The room thet Brant
oceopM was a firpal room on the second floor,
and 4e io«m Uk^ fi>r the meetings waa a
Back roQW pn the same floor.
Do yon recollect who weire at Bnmt^s room
on the sight of the 3|st, when you went there ?
—I saw Tnistlewood*
Lotd €kkfJm$k€ JOtOw^About what hoar
f wBsii^^ThiswlaabetweeasiaMd8fivefto*ek)ck
in the eveoJBg^
Mr. Attorney General, — Had you ever met
in that room before you went to prison ? — No,
never.
This vras the first time you had been in thai
room ? — The first time I had- known of its hav-
ing been taken.
Mention whom you recoUect to have been
there on the evening of the 31sf, when you sav
you went there between six and seven o'clock r
-—I will mention as far as my recollection en*-
ables me. I saw Thistlewood, Brunt, Ings,'
Hall, ILdwards : t cannot charge my memory
vrith any other at present.
Did any thing particular pass on that evening,
in that room, that you recollect I — ^Nothing par-
ticular that 1 recollect.
When were you next at that room ?*— I be-*
Heve it might he about the Wednesday nighty
to the best of my recollection.
M what time on the Wednesday were you
there ?--^About seven o'clock in the evening.
Who were there on this Wednesday erenin^;
thai you recollectf-^I saw Ings, Hall, Harrison^
and Davidson.
Any other persons'that yon recollect?— Hiia-.
tlewood. Brunt, and Edwards.
Dayoa itmetaber any thhif paesing en ttat
evening T^^Tbese was a oeaveraatiea betwettt
them respecting prodaimiog of the new king ;
the indisposition of the new king brought up
a copvarsation, a few words were said upoa it.
Did you see any thing in that room that
evening ? — I did.
What did you see ? — ^I saw seme pike stinres..
Did any thing pass on the subject of those
pike stares ? — Mr. Thistlewood made a remarl(
that he wished those pike staves were HI ^r-
raled, and holes bored at the end of them in
order to admit the pikes ; that they might be
taken to a place of safety, which he called the
d^p6t, as he did not consider ^em tp he safe
there.
Did you know at that time where that d^|
was ?— Not at that time.
Did you afterwards know f — ^I didi
Where was it f— At Tidd's.
At the houfe of a map of the name of Uddf
—Yes.
Where did Tidd live?— In the Hole-ip^fee-
wall passage, an adjoining house t6 that where
I lived at that time.
Thistlewooff* remarking that those stavee
should be remored to the d^p6t ; did any thing
more pass upon the subject of them at that
timet — ^No farther than leaving word with Mr.
9runt, that he hoped they woukl be taken then
when they were done, but they were not
flnished at that time.
What sort of staves were tfiey ?— Tbey wefe
green sticks, thd substance of my wrist, some
lerger> some not %q large; they were quite
green, they were brought from the other side
of the vraterr I did npt see them brought, hut
I heard Ings say that he brought tbcm there ;
they were fresh cut.
9753
1 GEORGE IV.
TrM qfJamet Ingt
f97«
Do you recollect any thing more happening
or passing that evening ? — Yes ; this evening
U has come to my recollection : I saw, after
the conversation that had pas:ted respecting the
new king, Ings himself pull a pistol from his
pocket
On that evening ? — Yes, on that evening.
Was any observation made ? — ^Yes, from
the discourse ; it being said that it was likely
he would die, it was remarked by Thistlewood,
he said he hoped he would not die in conse-
quence of the duke of York coming to the
crown. On this, Mr. Thistlewood said he had
rather the new king would lire for a little
while longer, as it way not their intention that
he should ever wear the crown. On this, Ings
alluded to the people of the country in general,
saying they were all a set of damned cowards ;
that the day the prince regent, at that time
when he was prince, opened the parliament,
^ I, myselP says he, '' went into the park that
▼ery day, and took a pistol in my pocket, with
the sole intention to shoot the prince regent ;''
on his makine use of that expression, he takes
his right hand, pulls the pistol from Ins pocket,
and, to convince them of the sincerity of what
he bad said, *^ There,'' says he, " is the pistol
'that I took."
Foreman of the Jtary, — On what day did this
take place was it the 2nd of Februaiy ?
Mr. Attorney Genend^-^-YeSf we are still
upon that evening.
WUneu. — ^Regretting with himself that he
had not an opportunity to do what he had
intended, saying, had he done it, he bad not
cared a damn for his own life. I cannot bring
to my rkoUection any thing further that passed
tibat night.
How often did you meet at this room ? — The
appointed time was twice a-dav, eleven o'clock
in tbe morning, and seven in the evening.
Was there any furniture in this room ? — 'So*
thin^ but a stove fixed in the room.
Did you learn from the prisoner, or any of
(hose persons whose names you bare mention-
ed, for what purpose the room was taken P —
I learnt th^t the room was taken for the pur-
pose of Mr. Ings, taken for him ; but for what
furpose the room was taken, I cannot say, for
was not present
Did vou attend many of those meetines be-
tween the day you have mentioned and Satur-
day the 19th ? — I did, but not so regularly as
I did afterwards.
At those meetings at which you were pre-
sent, between the 2nd of February and the
19th, did you at all or any of them see the
prisoner Ings ? — I saw him at every meeting I
was at.
Do you recollect any meeting in the interval
between the 2nd and the 19th, shortly before,
or about the time of the king's funeral ? — I
cannot speak positively to the date, I can come
within a few oavs.
Do you recollect a meeting before the time
of the king's funeral P— Yes.
9
At that time, whom did yon find in the room
when you came in ? — I found Thistlewood
there, and Brant, Ings, and Hall, Harriaon,
Davidson, and Bradbum.
Were they all there when you first came in ?
— ^They came in, some of them, afterwards.
Who were there when you first came in, ac-
cording to the best of your recollection .^«— To
the best of my recollection there were Brad-
bum, and Edwards, and Brunt.
Was Harrison there P — Yes.
Harrison had been in the life-guards ? — Yes.
Do you recollect any conversation about
what might be done at the time of the king's
funeral ? — ^Yes.
By whon^?— Harrison. At the time Har-
rison began this subject, I was close by him ;
he had been communicating this to Thistle*
wood.
Tell us what passed after you came in? —
Thistlewood began to tell me of the proposi-
tion Harrison had been making to them.
What did Thistlewood tell you?-— That Har-
rison should say be had seen one of the life
guards, and that the life-guardsman should
tell him, Harrison, that on the night of the
funeral of the king, every man in the life-
guards in both regiments that could be mountCMi
were to attend the funeral of the king, and tbe
foot-guards as well, all that could be spared,
were to attend the funeral, and the police ofii-
cers as well that could be spared from London.
This was the conversation that passed between
Harrison and the life-guardsman ; that after he
left the life-guardsman, it struck him that
would be a favourable opportunity to collect
their men together.
To do what? — For the sole purpose of
having a riot in London that night, and to pnt
themselves in possession of Uie cannon in
Gray's-inn-lane, two pieces there^ the six
pieces of cannon at tbe Artiller)'- ground. It
was thought by this time, when they had got
these cannon, they should be able to proceed
by means of the people who would turn OTer
> to them. They thought it would be best to
send a party of men to Hyde-patk-comer, in
order to stop any orderly of his majesu's ser-
vice proceeaing from London to Windsor, to
EVe information of what was going on in
radon. At the same time it was proposed,
that the telegraph on the other side of the
water should be seized, to put a stop to it, in
order to prevent that communicating any
transaction that was going on in London to
Woolwich : at the same time it was thought
necessary to dig entrenchments across the ends
of the roads that led to difierent parts of Lon-
don, to stop the artillery passing to those parts
of London.
Was any thing more said about their planT
— It was thougpt by Thistlewood as well as-
Harrison ; he agreed in his ideas on this head,.
that in case the soldiers at Windsor got anj
accounts that there was a disturbance in Lon-
don, th^ would be so over-tired on their ai^
rival in London, that they would not be fit fi>r
k
0771
far High Treason.
A. D. 1820.
[978
anj d^iy. Daring this discourse, Brunt and
ings -were not present »t the time this was
talked of.
But they came in? — Yes, at the conclusion
of the observation I have just been repeating.
Upon [ngs and Brunt ooming in, what pass-
ed then ? — On Ings and Brunt coming into the
room* Xhistlewood goes to them, and com-
municates to them the plan that Harrison had
proposed, and what he had laid down by way
•f amendment, what be thought was necessary
er might be done. '
Did he communicate to them that which you
have been stating to tlie court ? — In short.
What did Brant or Ings say to that? — Tlie
observation that Mr. Thistlewood had made to
them did not meet with their approbation.
What did they say ? — There is nothing short
of the assassination or murder of the ministers.
I will not be sure which was their expression :
'l)ut there was nothing short of that should
Mitisfy th.em.
Had you before this meeting heard either
firom^Brunt or Ings, or any of the others, that
there was any intention to assassinate or murder
liis ra^esty's roinistefs ? — ^Yes.
From which ? — From Brunt and Ings both.
Do you recollect any thing more passing at
Ibat meeting? — I do not recollect any thing
particular that night, but I can recollect a cic-
pumstance between that and the 19tb.
What was that cifcumstance ? — ^Ings was in
tiie room ; his blood was all on the boil to
think that he could not get to do that which he
Wanted to do.
' Never mind that, what did he do or say ?^
Hesaid, we must have the ministers, if possible,
^fore the parliament dissolves.
On jStttorday the 19lh were yoU at Brunt's
foom ? — ^I was.
At what hour of the day ?— Between eleven
fund twelve.
In the forenoon ? — Yes.
Were any persons there when you went in ?
— ^Ycs.
Who were there ? — I saw Thistlewood, Wil-
son, Davidson, Harrison, Ings, and Hall ; I do
BOt recollect any body else.
What passed upon yonr coming into the
XDom? — On my entering into the rpom they
aeemed to i>e in a deep study -betwefn them-
selves; all on a sudden they got up, aayi^f that it
was agreed on, that if in case iK>tliing.pt«urred
between this and next Wednesday liight, that
Wednesday night should be afteed <m to go
to work, for they were all so poor Ch«y«ofdd
BOt wait any longer.
Was any thing proved or settled ?— This-
tlewood at that time proposed there should be a
meeting the following morning, at nine o'clock,
in order to form a committee.
For what purpose ?--^The purpose of draw-
ing out a plan to act npon ; on this they were
goia|r to separate. Thistlewood all on a sud-
den said, " Oh, Brunt, if you go round to any
of your ^en, give them orders to come armed."
W|i9 Brunt present at this meeting ?*— Yes.
VOL. xxxijr.
You have not mentioned his name ? — Brunt
turns himself round, and says, " Damn my
eyes I are you afraid of any officei-s coming
into the room, if auy officers enter the room
now, as time gets so neai*, I will take damned
good care they shall not go out alive."
In pursuance of this proposition did you go
there again on the Sunday morning ? — Yes, I
did.
About what time in the morning ? — Just at
the turn of eleven.
Tell us whom you found in the room when
you went there on Sunday morning ? — When
I went, there were Thistlewood, Brunt, Ings,
Harrison, Davidson, Hall, Bradburn, Wilson,
Cook, Tidd, Edwards, and myself.
What passed after you entered the room ? —
I had not been in the room long before Mr.
Thistlewood thought it highly necessary, as
there werr; twelve men in the room, which was
enough to form a committee, for some one
to take the chair and enter into business ; on
this he proposed Tidd to take the chair.
Did Tidd take the chair?— Tidd took the
chair, with a pike in his hand at the same time.
Afier that what was proposed or what was
said ] — After the chair was taken, Thistlewood
standing on his left and Bmnt on the right of
Tidd ; Thistlewood proposed tliat as they had
been waiting so long, and were all out of pa-
tience, and there was no likelihood of the min-
isters meeting all together; it was agreed, he
said, between themselves, that if nothing oc-
curred between this and next Wednesday
night, the ministers should be taken off sepa-
rately at their own houses ; he said, during
this, they should not have so favourable an op«
portunity in destroying so many of them as
they intended to have done^ but as there was
no signs of their coming aU together, they
must put up with what ithey could get : he
thought within himself that three would be as^
many as they would be likely to kilL
Three of the ministers P — Yes; he proposed
that this ^^hould be done on Wednesday night ;
it was proposed that, on the same evening,
the two pieces of cannon in Gray Vinn-lane,
and the six at the Artillery-ground, should be
taken, and that Cook should be the person
intrusted with that command ; that Cook should
be at the head of that party.
Lord Chief Justice Dallas, — Do you meun
that Cook was to be at the head of the party to
take the two knd the six, or the six only ? — ^The
six at the Artillery-ground only.
Mr. Attorney Gcfiem/.— Was any fhinqj srfid
as to what was to be done vnth this artillery ?
— ^After he had got the cannon, it was pro-
posed that these cannon should be loaded on
the ground before they were brought out to
bring them into the street; after that was
done, and if any body interrupted* them, these
cannon were to be in readinesi to fire on those
persons that interrupted them directly ; but if
Cook found himself so situated by people
coming orer to him, that ha would find him-
3 R
9791
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of James Ingt
[980
9elf able to make a movement, he was to move
ffom there to the Mansion-house.
What was to be dooe there ? — ^The Mansion-
house was to be beset on both sides ; the six
cannon they were to take there were to be
divided into two divisions^ three on each side :
Cook was to go to the Mansion-house, make
a demand of it; if the Mansion-house was
refused, he was to withdraw directly, go to
his cannon, and give orders to fire on both
sides ; on doing this, it was thought they would
soon give up the house to them.
What was to be done with the Mansion-
house? — ^The Mansion-house was to be the
seat of the provisional government. After
they had secured the Mansion-house, it was
thought that they might, with the two pieces
of cannon that would be brought from uray's-
inn--lane, attack the Bank of England. After
they had attacked the Bank of England, it was
proposed to plunder it, provided they succeed-
ed, which they made no doubt of: but they
did not intend to destroy the books ; Thistle-
wood thought it was necessary to keep the
books, as that would be a means of bringing
to light some of the proceedings of govern-
ment, they had not yet got possession of.
Did any thing more pass? — There was
something more belonging to this plan, but it
was not proposed on this day.
Confine yourself to this day? — Mr. Palin
was then proposed by Thistlewood.
Was Palin present ? — ^No, he was not then.
What was said about Palin, at that time,
by Thistlewood ?— Palin should be the man
to set fire to the difierent buildings that were
proposed. As to the time, Thistlewood said
they could not come to any particular set time
at the moment, but as there would be time
between that and the Wednesday night, he
thought it better to leare that to a future op-
portunity.
After Thistlewood had made this* proposal,
tell us what passed ?~After Thistlewood had
made this proposal, he said, he had nothing
more to say at that time upon it, but that
Brunt, or his friend Brunt, had a proposition
to make, respecting the assassination of the
ministers — how it was to be done; on this
Tliistlewood declined; and Brunt came for-
ward directly with a view to propose what he
bad to say, and was beginning to speak ; This-
tlewood said, " Stop, you had better let the pro-
posals I have made be put from the chair, to
see whether every one in the room is agree-
able." *
Was it put to the vote ?— He put it to the
men, *• If any one likes to speak or say any
thing on that which has been dropped, they
are at liberty to speak."
Was the proposal put from the chair ?— Yes,
it was put from the ctiair, and was assented to
by all that were in the room.
Being assented to, did Brunt say any thiny ?
—Brunt came forward, saying, that the pro-
posal he had to make was respecting the as-
sassination of the ministers ; he said it should
I
be done in this way,*that as many men as tliej
could get together for that job, should be di-
vided into as many parts as they thought thej
should be able to kill ministers, he supposed
three or four.
Was that agreed to ?•>— Brunt had more to
say before that was put; he said, after these
men were so lotted out for the killiug of each
of those ministers, that there should be ooe
man from each lot riiould be drawn, and that
man that it fell upon, should be the man that
should murder the gentleman or the lord that
they had to kill. The man that was appointed
to do this, if he made an attempt and there
was the least signs of cowardice seen in the
man, that man, if he did not do tliat, was to be
run through upon the spot.
Was that proposal agreed to ? — ^This propo-
sal vras agreed to.
After that, do you recollect any other per-
sons coming into Uie room ? — Yes.
Who came in after that?— Palin, Potter,
and Strange.
Before they came in, and after this proposal
had been made by Brunt, do you remember
any thing being said by any other person upon
this subject? did Ings say any thing? — He
did not.
Did Thistlewood communicate to Palia
Potter, and Strange, the plan? — ^Thej were
communicated to them both ; Thistlewood his^
and Brunt his ; and they agreed to them.
Did any thing pass after they had agreed
to them? — ^Mr, Palin had something to say
upon it.
What did Palin say? — Palin got up and
said ** Mr. Chairman, I wish to speak a few
words upon what has been dropped by Mr«
Thistlewood and Mr. Brunt. I have paid
perfect attention to what has been said, asd
nave been one that has assented to it, agreeing
as I do within myself to the propositions thai
have been made, if in case they can be car-
ried, I consider it will be a great acquisition
to what we have in riew ; but this is what I
want to know*' — ** you talk of from forty to
fifty men for the west-end job,'* as it was call-
ed by Thistlewood ; " you talk of taking the
two pieces of cannon in Gray VintKlane — the
six pieces of cannon from the Artillery-ground^
and for myself to act my part, and all this to
be done at one time." This was what he
wished to be satisfied upon— how it was to be
done. — ** You ought to know better than I do
what men you have to depend upon. I, for
my own part, can give no satisnction with
respect to the men I may bring forward, un-
less I could be intrusted from the committee
that was there sitting to communicate to them
in part, if not in full, what their plan was, and
what they were going to do, and when they
would l>e wanted/' 1\ was thought that Mr.
Palin knew what kind of men he had, and it
was hoped he would be able to trust theoA.
Was that said ?-'Yes.
Who said that ? — It was said bv Tldd in the
chair, and Mr. Thistlewood and Bmnt; this
981]
Jor High Treason*
A.D. 1820.
[982
confersatioQ passed between them — if Mr.
Palin had got such.meoy as be thought he
could depend upon to intrust them with what
was in nand, they did not conceive where
th« harm could be of Mr. Palin haying that
liberty.
Did any thing more pass at that meeting
that you recollect ? — No, not at that time ; on
this the chair was left ; just after this, the chair
being left, they were walking about the room,
and Thistlewood turned round *^ Well thought
o(, Brunt, as my friend Palin is here, you may
as well take him to the place, which is just by
here," that was Fumival's-inn -buildings; ** let
him look at the place, and pass his opinion
UDon it, to see whether it is practicable to do
Wnat we think of.''
Did Palin and Brunt then go away toge-
ther ?— They did.
How long were thev absent ? — I do not sup-
pose ten minutes, to the best of my calculation.
Fox-court is near at the back of Fumival's-
inn ? — It is not at the back of it, it is at one
end of it.
It is behind it?— Yes.
Did they return again ? — They did.
Upon their return, did either of them, and
which, say any thing T — It was given in to the
committee, that Palin thought it a very easy
job, and it would make a good fire.
Did they then separate ? — No, upon this
Brunt renewed the subject of the assassination
again ; he said he had not an idea upon his
mind that there would be any difficulty in re-
^rd to fixing upon the men who should be
the men that murdered their different lordships,
logs was the man that said, whoever had the
lot to murder lord Castlereagh, I am the man
tint will turn out to murder that thief.
When did you meet again? — On the Monday
morning.
This being on the Sunday P — Yes.
About what hour did you go to Brunt's on
the Monday morning ? — ^To the best of my re-
collection about ten.
Who were in the room when you got there ?
—I saw Brunt, Harrison, and Thistlewood.
Was Ings there then do you recollect? —
Y«s, he was.
Were any other persons there that you re-
coillect ? — I cannot say that I can charge my
memory whether they were then, they were in
the course of the morning.
Tell us what passed on your going to tlie
room on that Monday morning? — On going
into the room on the Monday morning they
seemed to be rather cast down.
Tell us what passed ? — ^The principal that
{Missed in the morning was in consequence of a
report which had been heard out of doors, and
which I communicated to them.
What was that report which you communi-
cated to them, state it shortly ? — It was what
Mr. Hobbs had told me the preceding night.
You must not refer to what you were told
ainl^ you communicated it f— That there
jwere two officers had been there from Halton«
garden and Bow-street, from which it appeared
that there was an information at Bow-street,
and likewise at lord Sidmouth's office, of what
was going on.
What did they say to you? — Harrison turns
himself round upon me, and says, '* You have
acted damned wrong." I said " Why ?*' Brunt
turned round directly, and said, '* You have
acted wrong, Adams," I do not know, indeed,
whether he mentioned my name, ** if you have
any tiling to communicate, whatever you may
hear out of the room, it is your place to speak
either to me or to Thistlewood.;^' I told him I
did not conceive I had any right to speak to
either him or Thistlewood, I thought it was
my duty to mention it to the whole, as it con-
cerned the whole.
After this, did they go from the room for
any purpose to separate? — They began to
think of separating, to call on their different
men, and to call on the Mary-le-bone Union.
Was there to be any meeting again tha^
evenins? — Not on that evening.
On the following day, the Tuesday, did you
go again to Brunt s in the morning ? — Yes, I
did.
About the same hour ?— About ten pVlock
as nearly as I can guess, they began to meet
earlier after the 19th.
Whom did you find there on the Tuesday
morning when you got there ? — I found This-
tlewood in the room, I found Brunt in the
room, I found Tidd there.
Was Ings there ?-— Yes, and Hall ; I had not
been in the room long before I saw Ings pull
out three daggers from out of his pocket; he
was asked the intention of those daggers, he
takes one in his hand and makes a rush, in
that kind of way [describing it], " with a view,"
says he, " to run into their bodies," with an
expression which I will not repeat, unless it is
necessary ; those being hanaed about they
were put into his pocket ; just at tliis juncture
of time, just afterwards, in came Edwards,
Edwards goes up to Thistlewood to tell him he
had seen it in the paper that the minbters
were to dine together, on the Wednesday
evening, at lord Harrowby's.
Upon that being coQamunicated, was any
thing done P — ^Thistlewood rather doubted it,
having seen a paper in the morning and not
having seen that ; and he proposed, in .order
to satisfy every one, that the paper should be
sent for.
Was the paper sent for F^—It was.
On its being brought back, was it read ? — It
was read by Thistlewood himself.
Upon that, was any thing said by any of
the party? — When the paragraph was read,
and appeared to be true. Brunt jumped about
the room, and ran backwards and forwards,
'* Now damn my eyes I believe there is a God ;
it has often been my pmyer that God would
call those villains together; now he has an-
swered my prayer."
What further passed ? — Ings was equally as
pleased as Brunt,
983]
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial cfjamei Ivga
C964
What did he say?— He said that would
give a better opportunity, he should have an
opportunity nov? of cutting lord Castlereagh's
bead off.
Did Thistlewood propose any thing then? —
Thistlewood proposed then that there should
be a committee sit in order to enter into an-
other plan of assassination of the ministers
altogether.
Was the comnoittee formed ? — ^The commit-
tee was formed ; I was appointed myself to
take the chair first : I took the chair and called
to order. Thistlewood was going to proceed
in his business, I having something that I
wished to say, put a stop to him.
What did you say when you stopped him?
—Before they proceeded any further in the
business I hoped that every man that heard
*vhat fell from my mouth yesterday morning
had given it a due consideration.
What passed upon that ? — ^On my saying
this they were all like a set of mad devils more
than any thing else. Harrison was walking
about the room like a madman ; he looks at
me like a madman, with his arm going all the
while.
What did he say? — He said any man that
threw cold water upon what they had then in
view, he would run that man through directly
with a sword.
In consequence of this confusion did you
remain in the chair?— In consequence of this
confusion, I was considered not nt to keep the
chair.
Who was put into the chair ? — ^Tidd.
Was any thing then proposed or said by any
other person? — ^There was a proposition by
Mr. Thistlewood respecting a plan that was to
be proceeded in by the taking the ministers
all together.
In consequence of your leaving the chair, was
any thing proposed by any body ? did Brunt
propose any thing? — ^Yes.
What did he propose? — As Thistlewood
was going to speak, Palin — ^
Palin was tliere then? — Yes, he was, he
said, " No, as there has something fell from
Mr. Adams's mouth yesterday morning, and
he has made an allusion to it again this morn-
ing, I want to know what it is Adams has
alluded to."
Was any thin?: further said by any body
upon this ?— Upon this Bruirt jumps up direct-
ly, " Damn my eyes I will tell you what it is ;"
upon, that he got up and communicated to
Palin the same as I had communicated to
them.
Did Brunt make any proposition? — He
proposed from what had been said, that there
should be a watch put upon earl Harrowby's
house.
When was that watch to be put ? — At six
o^clock in the eyening to a minute of time.
What were they to watch' for.
They were to take particular notice who
went into the house, if any body went in that
they thought had the appearance of police
officers or any soldiers sudi wts to be common
nicated to the comnstttee.
What was said upon that by any oAer pev^
soi^? — This was agreed to; but Brunt said
' further, that if in case there should be ho*
body found to enter the house, such as was
likely to give us any obstruction, the busiaeas
should be proceeded on ; this beine done, it
• was looked out who should go on we watch *
they were picked out by Brunt, on a proposW
tion made by him.
I Were their plans forther talked of ?— This
plan was dropped regarding Brunt ; Hustle-
wood then came forward to address the cob>*
' mittee.
Lord Chief Justice Dotios.— What do yo«
mean by dropped ?
I Mr. Attorney General. — Do yon mean am
I end put to the conversation ? — ^Yes.
Was it agreed that there should be a watc^
. or not?— >It was determined that there should
be a watch set, and then it was dropped.
I Then Thistlewood came forward ?— -Yes.
What did Thistlewood say upon that occa^i
sion ? — ^Thistlewood came forwards saying, it
was a much more favourable opportunity in
the ministers all meeting together than what
it would be to take them separately at their
houses : *' In taking them separately at their
houses, we shall stand a chance to have but
two or three ; in taking them all together at the
dinner we may have from fourteen to sixteen
of thcra, which will be a rare haul : I think.
forty men will be sufficient : I will go with a
note to the door, to be presented to lord Har-
rowby by th% servant^ telling him I must have
an answer.*' On going in he proposed that
he should be followed by men supplied M#lh
pistols and different things, pikes, and so on,
to see if there were servants about, and to pre-
sent pistols to their breasts ; if the servants
offered to make the least resistance, they were
to be shot upon the spot ; when this was done
the men that were appointed to take care ef
the house were to rusn in after Thistlewood,
take possession of ^e stairs leading to the
upper part of the house; two men to do that;
two men to take the command of the stairs
leading to the bottom part of the house;
each of these men was to have a hand-grenade
in his hand, in order to put a stop to any body
making any retreat from the upper pan of the
house, and as well from the lower part of the
house ; if any person attempted a retreat, if
there yas an attempt of the people, such as
the servants in the house, to make their escape,
a man was to clap fire to this hand-grenade
and send it in amongst them, with a view to
destroy them all together; two men at the
same time were proposed to take the command
of the area, one with a blunderbas9, die other
with a hand-grenade; if any attempt was
made from the lower part of the house, horn
tfie area, they were to be served in the sane
way as th^ persons in the upper part of the
house. In the time of doing this the men
085]
for High Treason*
A. D. 1890.
[986
that were to enter the room, after the sertaots
were secured, and the stairs secured too, were
to be led by f ngs, at bis own proposal.
What did Incs sayF — Ings said be would
go to their lordships' door, aud particularly
mentioned the description of thing he would
take, in order for his defence ; that he would
hare a brace of pistols ; he would have a knife
iStaX be bad prepared for the sole purpose, to
cut the heads ot them off a« he came at them ;
the bead of lord Cattlereagh and lord Sid-
motftb, he was determined to bring away in a
bag be bad got for the purpose, and one hand
of lord Castiereagh he was determined to bring
iKway ; in a future day that would be thought
a great de^l of.
l>id be say any thing about what he was to
say when be entered £e room i — ^iie said be
should say on entering the room, that he
would go in this way, '* Weli, my lords, I have
got as good men here as the Manchester Yeo-
manry ; Snter citizens and do your duty."
Who were to go into the room with him ? —
He was to be succeeded by the two swords-
men that were appointed for the purpose.
Who were tneyf — ^Harrison ana myself
were appointed.
' Was it stated what was to be done after this
was accomplished at lord Harrowby's ? — ^They
were to make their retreat from the house in
Ae quickest manner they could, with Harri-
ton, going to the horse-barracks, in King-
street, with illumination b^b, a& they called
Ibem, and fling tbem into a stranf^ed, with a
▼iew to setting fire to tbe barracks.
What was he to do with ibe fire-balls ?•— To
put them into the window where the straw is
Kept to set fire to them,
^hat more was to be done ? — The others
were to proceed, after they bad left the house,
to Gray's-inn-lane, with a view to take the two
cannon there : on the road to GrayVinn-lane
if they met any body that offered to give tbem
ittiy tntermption, it was agreed that they
should be shot or run through with a pike that
diey might have.
You say a party was to go to Gray Vinn-
lane : was any thing else proposed to be done
dian taking the cannon in Gray*s-inn-lane ? —
It was proposed to take tlie cannon as I have
before described.
What cannon i — ^The two cannon in Gray's-
inn-lane, and the cannon at the Artillery-
ground.
Was it proposed or agreed who were to take
the cannon at the Artillery-ground ?— Cook was
the man appointed for that purpose.
Oo you remember whether any thing else
was j^i'opot^' — bigs still repeated that he
Mt rejoiced that he should have an opportu-
nity of cutting the heads of them off.
Harrisou, 1 think you say^ was there? —
Yes.
Do you recollect any thing else being stated
by the parties present f — ^Efarrison, after diis
business was done, proposed that there should
be a countersign, and tnose men that had to
go round to inform the men that they had to
call upon to come forward to-morrow night to
their assistance, this countersign was to be
communicated to them.
What was the countersign t—Tbe coun-
tersign that was proposed was button ; it was
to be pronouncea separately; the man that
came up to the man that was to be appoint-
ed at the top of Oxford-road, the person ap«
proaching was to say b, u, t, the one that was
mere in waiting to receive him was to pro-
nounce tfO^n; on ^this being done, he was
to be conveyed to the place that was to be
appointed afterwards by Harrison.
That being repeated by the man, the person
was to be taken to the place that was i^f^int*
ed ?— Yes, he was.
Did you go again to BrunV's that day f -»I
did.
At what time did you go again ? — ^I called
in the afternoon.
About what hour f — It might be three o'clock.
On going up stairs, I perceived a Strang^
smelT; on my entering the room I saw the
cause of it.
. Who were in the room? — ^Ings, Hall, and
Edwards. Ings waS making tbe fire-balls for
the purpose of setting fire to the different
building^. Edwards was making fbses for the
hand-grenades.
Was Hall about any thing 7— -Hall was oc-
cppied in layins sheets of paper down in order
to prevent the nre-balls sticking to the hand,
after they had been dipped into an iron pot.
Did you stay there at that time, or did you
go away and come again? — I went away
almost immediately.
, Did you call at Brunt's again that evening?
—I did, between six and seven.
Whom did you find there, when you returned
in the evening ? — ^I found Thistlewood in the
room. I saw two strange men in tbe room.
Two men whom you had not seen before P«-
Yes.
. Do you know the name of either of those
men ?^'I can tell the name of one ; tbe other I
cannot.
What was the name of that man? — The
name of that man was Harris ; but I did not
know it then.
Whilst you were there, did Tidd come ? —
Tidd came about half past eisht o'clock.
Did you remain lliere ? — ^les, I did.
Upon Tidd's coming, what passed ? — On
Tidd's coming into the room, be being
one that was appointed in the morning by
Brunt, and Brunt nimself> to go on watdi at
nine at lord Harrowby'b house —
Who had been appointed to go at six ?—
Davidson vras one, tne other I cannot tell'.
Davidson is tbe man of colour ? — ^Yes.
At nine Tidd and Brunt were to go f-— Yes.
On Tidd entering the room, he expressed him-
self dissatisfied in being disappointed in not
meeting a man that had promisea to meet him
that night Brunt said after this, ** It is time
for us to go on the watch, to relieve the men
987]
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of James Ings
[988
at the proper time/' Brant and Tidd started
for the purpose of going to lord Harrowby's :
in about fi?e minutes Brunt returned back
again, saying that they had called at the house
where the man was appointed, and had found
the man, and that be was likely to be a man
of great consequence to them, and that Tidd
could not go and leave him. Inss said, then
somebody else could go with nim. Brunt
looked round the room and said, ^' Adams,
there is nobody can go except yourself." I
consented, to go : just as I was going out, in
came Edwards : he had been a kind of aide-de-
camp to go backwards and forwards, and see
that the men were on duty.
Did you go with Brunt ? — ^Yes, I went with
Brunt. On JBdwaids coming into the room, I
asked him whether there had been any thing
seen, he said, '' what I have seen or heard I
shall communicate to Thistlewood,'' then Brunt
and myself proceeded to Grosvenor-square.
When you came there, did you see David-
son ? — I saw Davidson.
Was there any person with Davidson? —
There was another man, but he was not near
enough for me to notice him ; he went off.
How long did you stav in Grosyenor-square ?
—After we had relieved Davidson, we stopped
a very little while, we went to refresh our-
selves.
Where did you go to?— I do not know the
same of the house, but it is at the comer of the
Mews directly at the back of lord Harrowby's
house.
Whilst you were there, did any thing
happen ?— Nothing occurred there except that
Bnmt got playing at dominos after we had
refreshed ourselves.
With some person there ?— Yes. We stopped
there till vei^ near eleven o'clock, witn my
^ing out twice by the desire of Brunt, at
intervals.
To watch ?— Yes.
Brunt remaining during that time in the
public-house 7 — Yes.
How lonff did you stay in, and in the neigh-
bourhood of Groivenor^uare? — ^Till the time
of twelve.
That was the time to which you were ap-
pointed to watch ? — Yes.
Then did you return home? — I left the
square, and came directly home ; the watch was
to commence the next morning at four o'clock.
Ings and Hall were to besin at four o'clock.
The next day was Wednesday the 23rd ?—
It was.
At what time did you go to Brunt's on that
day ? — ^At about two o'cIm^.
You did not go there till two o'clock? — ^I
called up there occasionaUy earlier, but did not
stop.
Upon your going at two o'clock in the aftei^
noon did you find Brunt f — I found Brunt in
his own room.
Not in the room in which you met, but in his
own room ? — In his own room.
Were there any persons there when you came
in? — There were no persons in the room bat
himself, his wife followed me in.
Whilst you were in the room with Bnmt did
any persons come in ? — Strange.
Any other persons? — ^There were two or
three whom I had not seen before.
Did you see anv thing in Brunt's room ? —
There were several pistols that I saw lying on
the top of the drawers, but the exact number I
cannot state.
Was any thing done by Brunt or Strange, or
any other persons in that room ? — ^They begaa
to put their flints into the pistols ; on Strango
coming into the room and those strange men.
Brunt directly proposed they should go into
the other room.
What did they do to the flints ?— They put a
bit of leather round them, to secure them.
What did you see on going into the back
room ?— On goine into the back room I saw
arms of different descriptions.
What were they? — Cutlasses, pistols, a
blunderbuss with a brass-barrel.
Did any persons come into the room while
you were there, besides those you have mentioii-
ed ? — Yes, just after that came Thistlewood,
and not long after him Ings and Hall came,
and a very little while sfter that anoth^
stranger or two came in.
What passed on their coming in? — ^They
began, as they came in, to prepare themselves
with the different arms they wanted to take
with them, such as fixing the flints, and fixing
slings to the cutlasses ; on Thistlewood*s
coming into the room he looks round him aod
says, ** Well, my lads, this looks something like
as if you were going to do something." He
came up to me, laying his hand upon my
shoulder, and said, " Well, Mr. Adams, how
do you do ?" I told him I was very low in
spirits ; he wanted to know what was the mat-
ter. I told him I wanted some refreshment,
as I had not had any thing to drink that day ;
he directly proposed to Brunt to fetch some-
thing to put me in spirits.
Was any thing brought? — ^Yes; on this
being said. Thistle wood proposed to fetch some
paper, in order to write some bilb.
What was done upon that? — ^Thistlewood
produced the money to Brunt, and Brunt sent.
Did any thing pass before that, when he pn>>
posed to fetch some paper, what paper ?— lie
said he should like the same kind of paper as
the newspapers were printed upon. 1 said to
him, *' Aj you do not know the name of the
paper, you had better get some cartridge paper,
which will answer the purpose equally as well.**
The cartridge paper was sent for.
Who sent for it ? — Brunt.
Whom did he send?— He said be would
send for it either his apprentice or his boy.
Was any money given ? — Yes.
By whom ? — ^By Thistlewood ; Tbistlewood
produced the money to Brunt.
Did Brunt go out of the room in order to
get the paper ? — ^He went out to the door.
Did he bring back the paper ? — ^I cannot say
9891
for High Treason^
A. D. 1820.
[990
who brought the paper, btit I saw it in the
room. •
What sort of paper waa it ? — ^Cartridge
paper.
Upon the paper being brought what occur-
red } — Upon the paper being brought, Thistle-
wood sat down to write ; he wrote three bills
out ; in writing the last bill he expressed him-
self Tery tired, he did not know what was the
matter with him, but he could not write any
longer.
Were those bills which he first wrote read
to the people in the room ? — ^They were read
by himself.
Did he read them aloud? — ^Yes.
What was it that he read ?
Mr. Ado^fthm, — I must object to that.
Mr. Attorney GeneraL—rAfier he had finished
those three bills he appeared tired ? — Yes, he
did. Am I to state the contents of the bills f
What became of those three bills which he
wrote f — Those three bills that he wrote, the
first thing that was to be done with them, after
he had done with them, was to lay them down
in the room, in order to dry : after they were
dried they were doubled up; I saw one in lug's
hand, and I saw one in Thistlewood's hand ;
but what became of them after that, I cannot
tell.
Mr. Addpkm.'-^l only wish to see the thing
done regularly.
tAuAttometf General, — ^Then, now tell us
what Thistlewood wrote upon those bills?—
** Your Tyrants are destroyed — the friends of
'liberty are called upon, as the provisional
government is now sitting. James Ings,
Secretary. February 23rd, 1820.''
Mr. Attorney General, — I will not ask as to
the other bills, my lord. I believe some other
persoh was desired to take the pen to write
the fourth bill } — Hall was called upon, and be
refused it ; and another person, a stranger to
me by name, whom I never saw before, was
called on, and ha at first refused «
We will not go into that ; was Ings in the
room at this time ?-»Yes.
What was Ings doing ? — Ings was very busy
in preparing himself for action.
iiow did he prepare himself ?— He put a
black belt round his waist, in order to contain
a brace of pistols; another black belt he hanged
upon his shoulder, to support a cutlass; he
next placed on each shoulder a large bag, in
the rorm of a soldier's haversack. When he
had done this, he viewed himself and he
said ** I have not got my steel, I am not com-
Slete I" he said ** never mind ;" he directly
ravfs a great knife from his podiet and begins
to brandish it about, swearing at the same time
that was the knife he procured to cut off the
head of lord Castlereagh and the rest, as he
came at them. On being asked what he in-
tended them bags for that he had about him,
he positively swore that he intended to bring
away the heads of lord Castlereagh and Sid-
mbuthin them.
You say he brandished the knife ; what sort
of a kpife was it ?— It was a large broad knife
that he said he had prepared for the purpose,
and bound round the handle with wax end to
preventit slipping in his hand, when, he said, he
should be at work.
• After this, did any other persons come, or did
those persons go away? — After this, Thistle-
wood and Brunt were out of the room.
Who came into the room ? — Palin came into
the room.
On Palin coming into the room, did any
thing pass? — ^At the time Palin was in the
room, perceiving that Thistlewood and Brunt
were not present, he takes upon himself to
address what were in the room : he said he
hoped all that were in the room knew what'
they had met there for; if such, he hoped they
would give it a proper consideration ; in the
first place, to see whether the assassination
was likely to be . a thing that would be ap-
§ roved of by the country, and whether m
oing that the country would turn on tiieir
side.
Was any thing 'observed upon that f — Just
after.
By whom ? — ^There was a tall man in the
room made some few remarks on what was
dropped, after Mr. Palin went a little further
on.
What did he say ?— He said, ** you seem to
speak as if all in the room knew ^ what was
Oto be done ; this is what some of us have
, but wish to be satisfied. I, for mypwa
part, from what you have said respecting
coming to an agreement to stick true to each
other, am not afraid of myself, nor do I con-
ceive that any man who turns out in a case
like this ought to value his life.'^
Upon his sa^ng tliis, do you recollect any
thing being said by Brunt ?--Just at the con*
elusion of this, Brunt enters the room again :
seeing the alteration in the countenances of
what were in the room, he wanted to know
the cause ; he was told by this tall man again,
that there was some in the room that wished
to know what they were met there' for.
What answer did Brunt makeP — ^^This is
not the place,'' savs Brunt, ^ where you are to
be informed; go along with me to the Edgware*
road, there you shall know what^ou are going
about, and all that goes along with me i wiU
take care they shall have a drop of something
to drink to put them in spirits.^
Was any thing said to you ? or did you take
any ^ing yourself to carry to the Bdgware-
load P — I es.
What was given to you P— This blunderbuss
with the brass barrel was fixed vnth a b^lt
round my shoulder, and hung to it, and put
under my great coat, that I had then on, to
carry to Cato-stteet.
Any thing else ? — After this, there was a
broomstick which had been prepared for the
reception of a bayonet at one end, this was
991]
1 GEORGB IV.
Trial of Jama Ings
T892
Bmntfs : I was to take this broomstick in my . band sid^ alWr you have passed throagh Um
hand as a walking-stick/ there was.pothing, archway ?-^Yes.
iirther communicated, or, at- least, done in the | When you got into this stahle whom did yoa
loom at this present any way particular, except • find there ? — I found Davidson sitting, and a
that Brant said, it was time K>r us to begin to ; person etanding apparently as if ihey were
prepare us to go, as tiie room where we were doing something with the pikes; I passed thev
would be wanted by Palin's men in the even- in the stable and went up the kdder into ths
ing. I loft above.
You told us in the early part of your evi- { ^Weie Uiere any persons in the loft, over tlie
dence that some pike staves had been pro- \ stable, when you got there ?— Yes ; I foaad
cured and were to hava some ferrules put upon
them ; had they had, to your knowledge, fer-
rules pot upon them ? — ^Yes I saw ferrules piA
iqpon some of them.
Where, and by whom? — ^lu the room at
Brunts, I saw a doxen of them fnruled by
Bradbum*
Was there any cupboard iu that room P —
Thefe was.
Had you ever seen that cupboard open ? —
Yes.
What was that cupboard used for ?— It was
used for the reception, for the purpose of put-
ting, swords; I saw soBM tallow there; I saw
some pitch there ; I saw some of those small
hand-grenades in it, those were the principal
things I have seen there.
Had you ever seen any gun-powder pre«
MCred thever? — ^I had seen gun-povnder^ a mus-
Mi, belt, aqd the hand-grenades laid tbepe.
Ings and Hall there.
Any other persons ?->Yes,Bradlmm,
Wliat were those persons about when yon
got into the loft?-— They were taking tbe dif-
ferent arms.
Where were those arms ? — Lyiag on tk
bench that was in the room.
There was a bench in the room on vtidi
the arms were? — ^Yes.
Was Tidd there when you arrived ?— No, bi
was not.
Do you recollect anv thing passing in con-
sequence of Tidd's not being there ?— Yes; is
consequence of Tidd not being there, Tbis*
tlewood and Brunt were talking about it, This-
tlewood began to be rather agitated for feir
Tidd should not come.
What said Brunt? — Brunt seeing themes
rather confused, for it ^was pretty general, ssid
there was no occasioa for any uneasiness re-
What had you seen done wHh powdet in that ; specting the arrival of Tidd, for he woald ven-
room? — I saw the powder put into some of
thoae hand-grenades to complete themi
Did you ever see the powder put into v/f
Ainf elie ?;— Not to my kuowledge.
Btfure yeii ever seen any bags of any desedpA
ture to forfeit his existence that Tidd woald be
forthcoming. About this time, in consequence
of what had appeared in the faces of the men,
Ings began to show himself mad, quite U^
rified, he began to stamp and to swear, to tak^
tiouUiere? — ^I saw tbe powder chat was brought both his hands up in this way against his hair,
i» a brown pup« bag there, and I haye seen j as if he would tear it off, and said, *< Damn my
Brant take a bag to carry the hand-grenades \ eyes, if you begin to taUc of dropping the con
there.
What time did you go away from Brant's
that evening for Cato-street ? — A» nearly as I
can calculate^ it was dravring very near to six,
or it might be six.
With whom did you. go away in company ?
cern now, I will either cut my throat or shoot
myself." .
Did Thistlewood say any thing? — *•*»
Thistlewood then said ** for God*8 sake do &o&
think of dropping the business now; if you do
it will turn out a second Despard's job.
— I went by mvsel£^ and was to be followed by Thistlewood, looking round, said, '' you se^
Strange and this taU mui, and two or three to think there are not men sufficient." »^
Others whose names I did not know, and Brant cast up the. number of men that were ia the
was to follow. I room : ^ let us see, Uiere are eigM^BD hett
Did you go en towards the Edgware-voad ? and two below, that makea twenty, that isqnite
«-I went right up Holborn, aad right up Ox. sufficient i^ says he ** suppose there tobe fS'
ford-street ; in going up Holborn, \ teen servants in lord Harrewby's house, ^
We need not go through the particulars, of are not armed ; we eball go pr^Kued, aa<} ^
your journey to Cato -street, did you afterwarids will not take us, from cmtering thehoase^
go to Cato-street ?-^Yes, I didU aoming out above ten minutes.'*
Who went with. you finally to Cato-»tr0et? ' Was any thing done in respect to the M
— Thistlewood, Brunt, and a strange man, who wsfre to enter the house f— He proposed
whom I do not know. that.t^re i^uld be fourteen men ojatoftbe
Where did you meet Thistlewood beforayofi tsentv that should outer the room; tbatbt
got to Cato«stBS«t?— In the fidgware raad^ | thov^ht six vroi^ be ^ufficieBt to take caie of
When you got to Cata*street where did -yeift the servants,
go? into what building or house ?— -I t^tAsed ; When did Tidd eeme ia?-^He eatto i9
into a stabling, a kind of stable. j about twenty minutes^ to the best of my reee^
That is near the end of Cato-street, by Johjs- lection, before the offieera eaiered the roOB»«
stracitP — Yes.
You went under an archway ?-^Yes^
This stahle is the first building on the right-
i
Did Tidd bring ua^ persons with him ?-:^
did not see him enter |be room^ but I saw hitf
after he was there*
993J
fi/r High Treason*
A. D. 1820-
[994
Yon my he proposed fbuvteeii p«nons sboald
enttr.lord Hamwby*s hoiiM? — Y«8, on seeing
Tidd in the room (for he was in ^e room at
the time Tbistlewood was talking of this), seeing
Tidd in the room, Tbistlewood fixed his eye
upon him. I looked at him, and This tlewood,
upon seeing this, turned his eye away directly.
I saidy ** do not yo« think it is a pretty set ont?
do you think they will be able to ao this thing?''
he said, •* Never."
You say fourteen were to go into the house ?
—Fourteen were to be selected to go into the
room ; it was first proposed to be pnt to them
to see if they were all willing to go : this was
put, and it was agreed to, at the time the men
were called out, the fourteen men that were
to enter the room. Brunt produces a gin bot-
tle from his pocket. Shall I state the men
that were picked out to go into the room)
Was Ings one of those ?— Yes, he was.
Were you one of them ? — Certainly^
Was Harrison one P— He was one } this
being done, thinking to get myself in readiness
to go, I heard somebody in the stable.
What did you hear ? — I heard something be-
low, and directly there was said, ** hollo, and
Tbistlewood directly takes a candle, and looks
to see who it is; upon that, he sets the candle
on the bench directly again, in quite a confused
state. I never beard him spealL
Did any persons come up the ladder?—
There were two officers directly entered the
room.
What became of Tbistlewood ? — He sidled
off from the place where he was, into a little
room.
Was that the little room nearest the street ?
—It was the room, as the officers came up, on
the right-hand side.
There were two rooms there, we understand ?
— ^I do not know that ; I had never seen it till
the officers came up.
Did any other persons go into that little
room besides Tbistlewood ? — ^There were Ings
and Brunt I saw in, and Harrison.
What happened upon the officers coming
up 1 — On the officers coming up into the room,
thej stood in the room at the top of the ladder,
as It were, with a small pistol presented, say-
ing, ** holloa, here is a pretty nest of you ;"
looking round, and seeing the arms of different
descriptions lying on the bench, and some of
them with arms about them, they said, ** Gen-
tlemen, we have a warrant to apprehend von
all, and I hope as such you will go quietly.'*
On this, Smitbers, who was behind, cried,
^ make room, let me come up :" on Smitbers
coming into die room, between the two officers
that were making way for him, at this moment
of time, those that were in this little room
nade towards the door, a group of them ; at
that instant of time, I saw a man rush forward
firom the group of them ; at the same time,
pother hand presented itself with a pistol ;
at that moment a pistol was fired off,, out went
the candle, and I ooold not see what went on
afterwards.
VOL. xxxm.
Did you see Smitbers fall ?— I did not see
him fall.
In consequence of this, was there consider-*
able confusion in the room ? — Great confusion ;;
the officers, as soon as they perceived their
brother officer was killed, ran down stairs, and
gave the alarm of murder.
What became of you?— I kept my standing^
where I was.
In what part of the room were you ? — At
the end of the bench^ at the further end of the
room.
Did you get out of the room ? — I came out
of the room after this.
Down the ladder? — ^Yes, through the stable^
and out under the archway, the same as I got
in.
And made youT escape off? — ^Yes, I got out
into Cato-etreet, and turned my head on one
side, and there was a pistol fired out at the
window at me. I thought it was at me, for
there was not a soul besides.
You got out under the archway,, and got off?*
— Yes ; as I was under the archway the sol-*
diers were coming through.
When were you yourself apprehended ? — Oi>
the Friday.
Ingi, — Am I allowed to ask any qnestion^
my lord ?
Lord Chief JiuHeB Dallas. — ^You may ask any
question, but you will consider whether to
put it yourself, or to leave it to your counsel.
Mr. Ado^^hus. — ^If you will write down an^
question you wish to propose, if I think it
proper I will put it for you.
Mr. Attorney General. — ^You have been m
custody ever since ?— Yes, I have.
Robert Adams cross-examined by Mr. Addphust,
You were examined here on Monday, I
think ?— Yes.
I should like to know a fittle move of you^
are you an Englishman ?^Yes.
liom in what part of the country ? — Ipswich^
in Sufiblk.
Educated as a Christian ?— Yes.
You profess that religion, do you, now ?— ^
Yes, I do now.
Did you ever cease to profess it? — Yes.
What mode of faith, or disbelief, did ^ott
take up while vou disbelieved Christianity?
what were you then ? — ^I was induced.
Never mind what you were induced ; answer'
my question first,, and you shall tell your in*,
ducement afterwards. W^at were you when
yon were not a Christian ?-— A man^ certainly,
in the same form as I am now.
What faith or persuasion had you when you
were not a Christian I — ^If I must answer that
question.
You shall answer the question. — Then I wilL
I was in faith what they termed a Deist.
Did you believe in God when you were a
Deist? — They strove to make me,
Did you believe in God when you were a
Deist P — ^Yes.
3S
^953
1 GEORGE IV.
Then joa renottoeed Cbrittiaiiity to be a
Deist, aad believed only in God?-— Yes, thai
Was the case.
• How long may yon bave embraced Cfaris-
tiaoity again ? — I consider myself to have em-
biaced Christianity again ever since I first re-
ceived conviction that I was in the wrong.
Give ns the day and month ? — I cannot.
Was it before the 23rd of Febmary last ?—
t was convinced even before I was taken, and
my conviction grew stronger after that.
Was it before or after &e 23rd of Febmaiy
last yon called yonrself a Christian again ? —
After the 23Td.
So mnch for yoor religion. How long might
von remain in tiie fa«ppy conviction of Deism f
Low maqy vears ?— Or a Deist?
When did you renounce faith in our Savionr ?
—It first happened since last August.
Since last August jrbu renounced faith in
our Saviour, and since last February you have
taken it up again ?-^Yes.
In your progress downwards, you say you
had got down from Christianity to Deism.
Did you ever get to the point of Atheism ?— *
Never.
Did you ever profess yourself a Deist? —
Never.
Did vott ever deny your belief in a God at
all, and that the Scriptures were all a fable ? —
I never denied a God, though I was brought
by that aecursed work of Paine*s to deny Sie
Scriptures.
And now you are brought to call the Bible
a good book, and Paiae's accursed. How
long did you serve the king ? — Five years.
Where did you serve, in England or abroad ?
—In England.
In the Blues ?— Yes, property speaking, the
Royal Horse Guards.
We among tlie illiterate call it the Blues.
Had you any allowance or pension on your
Mtiring from the army? — ^None at all.
You have retired again to your trade of a
shoemaker ?-*Yes.
Is that yoor hand-writing ? [ihewmg a small
piece of paper to the wUness.] — Yes, it is.
You were examined here on Monday? —
Yes, I was.
Where have you been since f — I have been
in the same custody as I was bi^fore*
Where was it ? — In the House of Correction.
Cold Bath-fields P— Yes.
In solitary confinement, or have you seen
tny body ?-^I have not been in solitary con-
finement, but I have not had commuification
with any body, nor have not had since I was
taken.
Have yon been in solitary confinement or
^t ?— I liave a it)om in the house of tile
gpveriior.
Have yoo been icOifary or seto any body ?
—I may say solitary, for when I reflected with
nyself,
I do not ask as to your reflections. Have
yon seen any persons or been alone ? — ^I have
certainly seen those that have attended me.
witfi
Tfiai cfJamei Imp [gM
Have yon seen any body who told yom any
thing that passed in th» Com aftv yon left
it ?— No, I have not.
That yon swear ? — I have sol seen any bo^
who told me any thing that pMMid na this
Court.
Have yon seen any body who told yoa any
pan of what passed in thb Conrt after yw
left it ?— No, I have not.
Have you had any writing, printing, or any
other thing eonteyed to yoo, *'*— ■■"■Haiiiig
it?^I have had no writing whatever coamm-
nicated U> me.
Then yon do not know any thing abevt
what passed ?-— No ; I heard the day belbre I
went ofi^, the day the verdict was given against
Thistlewood, that he was found gniMy.
Where were yon da^ by day f — I was kept
in a room by myself, becaase I wrndd ham
conraranication vrith no person.
You were guarded? — I had two
me.
Did you hear any thing of the
upon your evidence f-*No.
Not a word ? — No.
Now I vrili tell you why I ask yon that
question : you have altered yoor endenee a
good deal since that?— I do not know tiknt
I have.
Then I will bring it to your raemoiy, that
you have, without going through the whole
couTM of your evidence the other day : how
long have you known Edwards?— I have
known Edv^unds ever since the eariypaitof
January.
How long have you known Ings, was that
by Brunt introducing him U> you ? — ^Yes;
And you became acquainted with Brunt, on
the continent three or tour yean ago ?*~Yes.
From the time.you began to hc4d any conw
munication or correspondence with Bruv^
with Ings, and Thbtlewood, was it year
intention to execute the project they pro*
posed to you, or did you intend to give in-
formation against them ?-*-! never intended ;
it wds no inward intention of mine to commit
murder, nor I never had any intention to give
information against them ; after I got into the
knowledge of what was in hand, I waited dir
opportunity to get out of it.
You never intended to commit murder, nor
to give information, but you waited for the
opportunity to creep out of it ? — ^Yes.
What hindered your creeping oat of it at
any time ?— From threats that had been held out.
Let ns see how that is. Early in Januaiy,
Thistlewood had a conversation with yon, in
which he said that the shop-keepers weire all
aristocrats, and he should like to see tlMr
ihops !(hnt np and plundered ?— Yes.
Were you dfqp!osed to go ihat leq^t
should you like to shut up their
plunder them?— 'I should not widi tc^go
length.
Moderate your action a Httle V«I aa pes*
fecUy collected. 1' on stand hetn If yoa
desire it till to-moirow momiiig.
mm
far High T/ii0«M«
A, D« 1820i
I90a
Wen you ditpoted to ahvl op tb« shops
iBd plunder them? — ^I was not.
Bat yoa were in the society of men who
tvd they were? — ^That society I was just
entering.
There were no threats held out in that con-<
▼ersation 7 — Not at that time, Ihat I admit.
You had the benefit of a recess of fburtecn
days in White-cross-street prison?— But I
had had threats before I went into the White-
cross-street prison.
Had you nad threats before any thing was
communicated to you ? — ^Yes ; before I went
to prison.
' Your first conversation with him was in
January ? — Yes.
What sort of threats were they ? — ^Tbis was
the yery day before I went into prison. I was
asking Mr. Brunt, in the presence of Thistle-
wood, for the plan that, I was told by Brunt,
first of all was drawn up. I wanted to know
what it was; I wanted to see it. Brunt said
directly that there would be nothing commu-
nicated or given till the day of acting. This-
tlewood answered this directly, ^By no
means, there shall be nothing given, and the
yery day that we think of going to work,'' then
gays he, ^ we will have ue men all together,
gire them a treat, and then we shall teU them
what is to be done ; and after that we will
sever lose^ sight of them.'' Upon this Brunt
said he would take damned good care that
there shonld be no writings kept in the room
where tfaey were, that would put them into
danger, '* But," says he, 'Mf any roan I have
ever spoken to concerning this will give me
reason to suppose he will give information, I
will run him through and put a stop to it."
I wonder you were not afraid to come out
of prison ; that would have been the safest
place ?— I certainly was, I am sony I did come
oat.
How much were you imprisoned forP—
Twenty-three shillings and eight>pence.
And these discoveries were made to you
before you went to prison, on the 16th of
January ? — Yes.
Had you been at any meeting with those
gentlemen then? — ^I had met them several
tines At this public-house.
Whom had you met? — ^I had aeeo Bmnl, I
had seeft Ings.
Do you remember on what day you were
iotrodueed to Brunt ?-~On the 2nd of January.
To Thistlewood ?-^n the Wednesday, I
believe Sunday was the 9th, then it must be
the 12th.
You told na the other day the 13th, I do
not want to fix you particularly? — ^If I said
tbe 13th, it must be a mistake ; I know it was
the We^esday.
Iliatvrasthe first time you ever saw Thia*-
tlewood P-^Yes.
HiM# many times betweeii that and the time
when yon went to Thistlewood's did yon hedr
ftlM>8e thmatt7*7l have stated to yon the ftsst
time I heard threats thrown out.
When was that ?— On the 16th.
Who held them oot then?— Mr. BrunU
What day of the week was the 16th, do you
recollect ?>-0n a Sunday^
You not being particularly incumbered with
Christianity, thought that a good day to meet
those people? — Yes, that was the first day
we met in the room we were then in.
What room was that ?-~The White Hart.
It so intimidated you that when you came
out again you sought those persons, and went
on with their plots ? — ^I had a right to be in-
timidated with such a man as Mr. Ings; when
any thing occurred his whole blood and soul
boiled for murder.
You had not seen Ings at that time ? — God
bless me are you going to reason me out of my
Christian name ? I have told you I saw Inga
between the 2nd and the 0th.
Then I have mistaken you ; oh it is so to-day
I see ; then on the 30th, when you had been im-
prisoned fifteen days, yon joined those parties
again ? — ^I did.
Had the thing then got a great deal forwarder
in your absence ? — Yes.
The room had been taken, I think P— Yes,
the room at the White Hart had been given
up, which I did not know on the Monday
morning, cor did I know of the room having
been taken at Brunt's ? I did not go to that
room, but to speak to Brunt's wife.
You have told us of a meeting on the 3rd of
February, you call it the 2nd to-day ; was £d«
wards at that? I do not wish to raise any thing
on the difference of date; the other day when
you were examined did you say any thing about
Ings pulling a pistol from his pocket and say-
ing, he h<^ped tne king would not die then, and
that the duke of York would not come to the
crown ? — I did not; if you question me here'
you will bring a number more things to my
mind ; as I have pledged myself to my Maker
to divulge all I know, I will tell it.
And the more you are asked the more yon
will know ? — ^Undoubtedly.
You have told more to-4ay than yon did the
day before ? — I told all I recollected.
But this curious idea of Ings, saying he hoped
the king would not die then, but would live a^
little longer; and that the duke of York would
not come to the crown, and that the king shouldL
never wear the crown, you did not state ? — No^
I did not recollect it.
You have told us that Ings, who happens to
be the man before the jury, said they were aH
a damned set of cowards ; lliat he took a pistol
in his pocket when the prince regent went tb
pariiament, with the sole intention to shoot
him ; diat on hisjnaking use of that expression,
he took the pistol from his pocket to convince
them of the sincerity of what he had said, and
exclaimed, ^ There is the pistol that I took,"
and that he regretted he had not done it, say-
ing, had he done it he had not cared u damn
for his own life ; all that remarkable fact you
kept to yourself on Monday last P— The reason
Why I kept it to myself was, that it did not
990]
1 GEORGE lY.
Trial afJawm Inp
come to ny recollection : the words I bave
said this moniing were all fact.
The reason yoa did not state it on Monday
was, that it did not come to yoor recoUection f
— It did not.
I think yon told ns some things then, that
did not come to your recoUection to-day? —
That may be. I will not pretend to say, that
the next time I come up here I can oommnni-
cate erery thing as I haTe done to-day.
Certainly not ; there are people thtt pro-
verbially ought to have a good memory f — Vesy
certainly.
Yon told us of their being to go to Brighton
and Margate and Dover, and take possession
of the ootports; yo« hare not toM us that to-
day ? — I do not consider it necessary : if it
had struck me, I would have mentioned it.
You make your evidence a little longer or
shorter, according as the occasion suits ?— Yes,
I mention the circumstances as they come to
my recollection.
On one day it is, that the king is to live a
little longer, and on another day the ports are
to be taken possession of?
Mr. Gtiniry.— That is observation, and not
question.
Mr. Adotphm, — I am asking him a question.
Mr. Cumey.'^Bai that is not a question.
Lord Chief JuUke JMbt.— You should not
now observe on the evidence.
Mr. Gvm^» — ^Your lordship knows that we
shortened his evidence the other day, and pass-
ed over various circumstances.
Mr. Adolphus, — You could not stop him;
yoo tried several times. This about the digving
entrenchments you did not state on Monday r
—No, I forgot that.
The next time there will be a new stoiy ?
Mr, Gutnof, — ^I must interpose, my lord.
Lord Chief Justice PoOm.— All diese obseir-
ations are certainly incorrect.
Mr. Adoiphta. — ^He has said it himself;
** when next I come into the box, I shall recol-
lect other things,'* and upon that I put the
question, wheUier he would tell ^another story
the next time he comes.
Lord Chief Jtatice DaUai, — Ask him the
•question if you wish it.
Mr. Adolphm. — Shall you teU ns a new story
the next time? — No. If any thing new occurs
to my mind when I come to stand hcve, I will
state it.
There is another little fact you had not men-
tioned before, that the assassination must take
$lace before the parliament was dissolved ?«-
That did not occur to you on the former oc-
casion ? — No, it did not. I recollect it perfectly
well. ^ ^
You have omitted something you told vs last
riteo
Monday, that at the neetiaf on Wednwday
the 3rd of February, Brant said be had wotk to
finish, and ooold not go abont the amassiualiuu
the next day ?—l stated that oo the 19ili of
February.
Did you not sute that that happened oa the
2nd or the 3rd of Febraaiy which ever vraa the
day?
Lord Chief Jmtice BoU^.— What do jtm
refer to?
Mr. Adoiphm.^Bnni saying he had busi-
ness to finidi, and could not go the next day.
Upon voor oath, did you or not say that thai
took place on the 2nd of February ? — I stand
here upon my oath already. I conceive that
as such, I said, and I say now, that Brunt
being asked by Thistlewood to call on his men,
said, he had woik to do, and did not know diat
he should be able to attend ; this was on the
19th.
Did he or did he not say so on the 2ndt— .
I do not remember his saying so.
Did you say on Monday last, upon your
oath, that he said so on the 2nd ?~If snch a
word dropped from my mouth, it is past my
recollection.
Mr. Adoi^fkn.^^1 am convinced I
taken in that, the date was written narrowly
in the margin, and I overiooked it. This meet-
ing on the 19th was when twelve penoos weM
present f — ^No.
That was the SOth, the Sunday ?-^Od the
20th ; before they all left there were fifteen.
That was at the time Tidd look the diair
with a pike in his hand ?— Yes.
They did not then know of the dinner at
lord Harrowby's? — No.
Their plan then was, to go to the houses of
cabinet ministers, and kill two or three, or four
of them? — ^Yes.
And then they vrere to take the cannon and
do all the rest of the work ? — Yes.
You have given us this addition to-day, dMt
the cannon were to be loaded on the ground,
and biought out to fire on any who opposed
them 'y but that if Cook found himself strong
enough, he was to make for the Mansion-house,
and to secure that for the provisional govern-
ment ; all that you have told us for the fiiit
time to day ? — If I recollect right, the major
part of that was stated by me on Monday.
Was there any thing about the cannon being
loaded on the Artillery-ground ? — ^I will not
go so for as to swear that I did state that.
Did you say any thing about Cook summon-
ing the Mansion-house, and demanding it to
be given up ? — ^If I did not, I forgot it
Bless me, cannot you rememl>tf from Mon-
day ? Those things you are speaking of wers
three months ago ; is your memory worse since
you took to GImstianity ?^No, my memoiy is
strengthened.
Did you state that on Monday 9—I stated
that Cook was to demand the Mansioa-houBC^
and in case it was not given vp^ ht was to firs
upon it.
1001] f^ ^'MI* Trmmm.
OrdidydttSfl^itwMto b« suiniiKmed, or
demanded to be gi^en up, or not? — Certaanly.
You seid that as haWng happened then, did
you \ — I oonsider summon and demanding as
two similar things. I do not know whether I
am right or wrong.
I mean them as the same thing: to pass
that we will come to the meeting on the 22nd ;
was that the time when Ings puUed three dag-
gers oat of his pocket ? — Yes.
He said they were to ran into one of their
bodies, using an expression tiiat you very
properly kept back ? — ^Yes.
Why did you not tell us that on Monday ? —
When I was here on Monday, if I was to state
the whole, and give the whole, I should be able
to state it; but for me to come here and select
one single inditidual out of thirteen, it con-
fuses me, it put a stop to my recollection.
logs was at the bar on Monday, though he
was not on trial on Monday ; why did you not
tell us that then ?»If I had thought of it at the
time I would have mentioned it.
It was then that the watch was agreed on P
—Yes.
To be on duty from six in the evening till
midnight ? — ^Yes.
And a committee was to sit twice a-day ; at
eleven in the morning, and seven in the even-
ing \ — ^Yes ; on the Sitarday it was eight that
they met, at nine o'clock on the Monday.
How long did your committee meetings
last P^There was never no regular time.
Did they ever sit till 12 o'clock at night P — >
X never saw them sitting at 12 o'clock at nighti
You have told us further that at the meeting
on the 23rd or 22nd, Brunt said he had left
Tidd to meet a man tlmt would be of great eon-
seqoence, and therefore he could not go to the
watch, and you were to go, and Brunt and
Edwuds and you preceded to Grosvenor.
square, and these saw Davidson? — ^Yes.
Why did not you tell us that on Monday ?
— -I did not consider, according to the dictation
of counsel I had, that I had a right to tell that.
^ I did not consider according to the dic-
tates of the counsel" that examined me, how
am I to understand that \ — There were things
that tmnspired on the 22nd, that I have not
stated either last Monday or to-day.
This was one of those you did not state last
Monday, but havestated to-day ?— Those things
I ha%'e not stated to-day.
But this as to Brunt's meeting a man you
knew last Monday P — ^That was not in Mr.
Thistlewood's proceedings.
You mentioned as Mug parties to that.
Brunt and Tidd, and Edwards, and yourself,
and Davidson? — This was proposed on the
Monday morning, the Tuesday morning I mean,
the question was asked' whether Tidd, —
Did ^ou state that on Monday or did you
not? Did you say on Monday that Brant said
be had left Tidd to meet a man that would be
of great coBsequence, and therefore he could
«ot go on the watch?— Brunt said that on
Tuesday.
A. D. 1^.
[1003
Did you say that on Monday last here F--
That I will not pretend to sav.
We will go over a good deal at once: you
are quite sure that when you came to Cato*
street, twenty was the number of men there ?
—I took that from the statement of Thistle-
wood, I did not count them myself.
That there were eighteen above and two
below ?— Yes.
Do you know a gentleman of the name of
Monument? — I never saw Monument at all,
not to my recollection, not to know him by name.
Perhaps you can tell me the room is fifteen
feet one way and ten the other? — I do not
know the width.
Is that about a trae description of it ? — I
should suppose it might.
Were you all pretty close together in thai
room, all yon eighteen ?-— Not at the time the
accident happened, the murder, I kept my
standing wbere I was.
Where was that P — At the end of the bendi
under the vrindow.
Was that nearest or ftirthest ftom the door ?
— ^Furthest from the door.
Was that nearest to the smaller room where
those parties retired into?— That I cannot
positively say, fori never observed the door
till that moment.
You said you sawthe party come, in a gtoup,
from .that room ? — ^Yes.
Was it near thatP-^That door appeared to
me to be in the middle of the room.
Therefore the bench would be near it? — No,
the door is in the side of the room, the bench
stands lengthways.
Were you at the end nearest to or furthest
from that room? — I never pretended to say
the distance of Uiat door from vrhere I stood,
and cannot.
Then you were nearly in the middle of the
room P — ^I was at the end of the room.
The end nearest to the ladder, or the other 7
— Nearest to the street.
You could see all that was in the room?—
Do you mean to ask me every thing that was
in the room ?
I do not ask you for an inventory of the
things in the room, but you could see every
thing ? — ^Yes.
How many candles were there in the room P
—One.
Only one P— One I will be answerable for ;
whether there were more I will not take upon
myself to say.
Were there three or four ? — ^I can be answer-
able for one, I can be answerable for no more.
You can answer whether they were there or
not? — I did not see them.
At any time were there four candles lighted \
— I never saw but one.
You can tell whether there were more or
not ? — I did not see them. .
Were there mora than one candte in the
room at anyone time during the time you
were there? — If there were it was the time
when I was out of the recmi.
10081 1 OBO&GB IV.
Hhm stable with ThisUftmrad.
Waittkem mora than omF — ^nare was
E1004
If any «aa twean. thcie wan aigbt, ha
awtaiB that which is falaa?^If he qieaka
the tnith.
And n iMii that speaks the tntth will not
sagr there wen eight candles in the room f— If
any man swore there were eidit caadka in the
room, I will swear he was a nlse man.
That one candle was put out, and it was all
daih then ?*-As soon as e? er the pistol fired it
was all in a stale of daikaess.
Very good. I want to know which of the
officers made a speech oa ooming into the room ^
— ^Ijfot knowing the offioem by naoM, I canaol
say.
ShonU you know the gentleman again if yon
•aw him I — ^I do not know that I should.
But it was one of the first men that oame in^
«-Yes.
He need those words ?— Yes.
And to Umse words yon are quite poeiliTe P
•-To the best of my reeoUectiott those were
the words.
I do not want h> trap yon in one word, or
the tons of a word^ hot that one of the officers
w.ho came in said, ^ Here is a pret^ nest of
yon f— To the best of my reoouection those
were the words.
Or» ** here is a fine nest of you,'' or something
of that kindy ** pretty" or '' fine," oar whate?er
it might be?— Yes.
You are ooite sue a phrase of that kind was
used?— Yes.
You are quite sure that this same officer
eatdy ** GentlesMn, we have got a warrant lo
appnhend you all?"— Yes, that was the ex-
pression.
And that you swear to ? — ^I will be answer-
able for an expression of that kind.
^ ClenUemen, I have a warrant to take you
all, or u> commit you all/' or something of that
kind ?— Yes.
That you swear ? — ^Yes.
And added ** as such you will go peaceably^
we hope ?" — Yes.
Those were the woids that were used by ttie
officer ? — ^Yes.
If any man has said that th«nr only said ^ We
are officers, seiie their arms," that man must
be a fidse man, must not he ?— If such a word
as that passed, I cannot chaige my memory
with it.
If any ooe has said Aat passed, and that
only, he asust be a fiJae man ?— Do yon su|^
poee it is possible fiir meto stand here and sav
I will be answerable lor ereiy weed that passed,
or even every transaction f
No, certaioljf'; that is not my qneslion ; but
you are eertam that those wonis yon have
spoken to did pi^ ?— Yes.
Mr. Bdvards was the aya^de^mnp lo this
business ?-*I ahmya found Mr. EdmA snem-
ud lo be vmy deep iu it,'aMl vary amdh in ceu-
venation with Uu BonAaad llallnrood.
And you fate Urn the ItHe of
just now? — [ gmre him the title pemaps^
that was not the word thai passed at the tiaae.
No, so I understood, that that was a tana
you yourself applied to him. Yon used tlM
expression. You went home after this aiaix^
as quietly, as unabashed, as if aotlung was tlie
matter?— To outward appaamnee.
You did not tell us hsit tisM of the piafeol
being fired f — I did not think of it at the timMi
nor when I was taken did I think of it thai it
was fired at ase, but in the coat I had ol^
was a hole where the ball went.
But you did not think of that when voo
teken into custody, nor on Monday 7— Thurc
were several thiop that I have noc stated to*
day ; when I eome up acain I will state theua
if they ooonr to. me, and if they eoncem the
Siisoner. There are things I have stated to*
ay that did not exactly concern the prisoour
on trial : those are the very grounds on whacb
I omitted stating some things. I do not wmnt
to fix the guilt <M another man on the piisoiicv
on trial.
Certainly not, therefore I suppose he was th*
man that fired the pistol at yon ? — ^I do not kncrw.
You have mentioned it to^ay, and not om
the fintaer day : vou are cautions of fixing uny
one, 1 see. Is that the great coat you httd om
at the tiaie f — ^No, it is in the room I sleep ao.
Has that ever been piodnoed to shov tW
shot-hole ?— No, I did not find it out myaeir at
first, but Maidment, the officer.
Do you know a peison of the naase of Cham-
bers ? — ^No, not that I recoUeet.
Tboams Chamben. Did you ever call on
such a man, in company with Bdwards, am
Heathcock-oourt ? — ^No, never in my hie.
That you swear ?^Yes, that I swear: nor dQ
I know where it is.
Yon never caUed on any person of tfaal
name, nor do not know that person ? — tio.
Did vou call on any person in company with
Edwards, about three or fimr days before ttiiu
afiair in Cato-street took place?— Ed warda w<emt
akmg with me in order to buy a pair of boots
that a woman had to sell ; that was th« only
time of my beins in his company pdratdyy
that was on the Monday.
Where did yon meet?— He caUed on ne nt
my lodgings*
Did you call on any body 7— No, we caUcd
in at a wine*vaults at the comer of Newport^
market, and he treated me with a ssBeU ^nan
of rum.
Did vou ever call on any penon along witli
Edwaads to solicit him lo jinin a party to kill
his mnesty's ministenf ^Never in my life.
And say that you would have blood and
wine for your supper ?— Never : if any pecsom
comes to swear that, they will paoure thusn*
selves.
Whether they are oopvurted to Chriatianilsr
or not r— Yes.
Did you eall on mA a penon *wicn!^l
never ^kllod OB aaty ^^
Edwaids.
looftT
Jbr Higk IVmwor.
A.O. laaOL
ctoos
Do yon know a peiton of tlit nuno of Stephen
Whatman 1—1 do not.
I am going back three yean : did yon know
such a person at that period ? — I do not know
that ever I did in my life.
Three years ago, that would he 1817 ?— -I
waa then in Ffaoce.
How long have yon been letnrtied fton.
thence? — ^Two years the lOtb of next month
to London.
Had youy at any time, a conversation with a
man living in Ringsland-road about the Tower,
and using Cashman as a watch-woid ?•=—! had
nothing to do with Cashman's concerp.
JDid you ever tell any person to speak about
the Tower, and to use Uashnan as a watch-
weid ? — Never in my life.
After this a/Fair was over in Cato-street, did
Jou take any ammnnitioa back any where ? —
To, after I left the room ; I will tell you the
last time I had any ammunition in my hand.
I am going tp state a thing I have not told be-
fore. Hall was the man that brought me a
pistol, and brought me five rounds of ball-car-
tridges. I loaded thd pistol, and laid it on the
end of the bench next to me, and there lay the
fistol when the officers camci into the room,
have never handled a pistol since ; and the
fan rounds of ball-caTtndges I had left, after
I loaded the pistol, I throwed them away in the
room as I came out.
• Had you to carry the large grenade?— I
never had it in my hand. I saw it.
Did you carry it back to TIdd's the day
srfier ?— If you will believe me what I am about
to say, here is the fact. I went home on the
Wednesday night. I got home about nine
o'clock ; never did I lay my hand on the latch
of the dioor to go out of it till I was taken by
the officers.
Did you ever earry that hand-grenade anj
where ? — ^I never took it up, nor saw it any
where but at Brant's. I can tell you as far as
this ; I believe I carried some pikes from that
loom of Brunt's up to Tidd's, this thing has
never come out yet; there are a number of
things I ha^^ not stated yet.
You never carried the hand-grenade at all t
•>— Ko ; if you wish to know the principal part
of them, I can tell you.
I d& not wish to know. Mn Edwards^ I
thi0k,-wa8 the enaineer ? he made the fuses 1—
He was making {he tpuch-papet fbr.theiuses
that were put in ; he was drying them by the
five ; my time was too short in the room at that
time to see more.
You have not told us what Edwards said at
any of those ; meetings ; one said one thing,
smd one anodier ^ wthat did Edwards aayT— I
cannot pretend to charge my memory that Mr.
Sdararda wts a man that 1 ever can -chaige my
memory with a score of words that the man
mtd ; he had v«ry little to say, and what he
IhrI to sa^ to Mr. Thiatlewood and Mr. Bront,
and Harrison, it was always in a side-winded
kind of wuf whispered to them.
You never. heard from Edwaida aape^
have been in confinement I^-Never.
Y6u foigot to tell ua the story abont the
one-pound note to treat the mett| you told ,na
on Monday ? — ^I had nothing to do with thai
to-day ; it does not belong to this man's crime;
I suppose I shall not &Lve to state all dier
things every time ; if I thought I should I
would prepare myself.
You told us about six shillings, and one
shillings and seven-|>enoe ; that waa all the
mon^ you ever saw: by whom were they*
given } — The six shillings was given by Thia-
tlewood to Brunt.
What was the one shilling done with !•— I
have not stated that to my knowledge.
The paper that Edwards mentioned th»
dinner in was the New Times, was not it F-— ^
Yes it was.
That was the paper that was brought and
contained the article ? — ^Yes, I dare say you
will find it in the New llmea <tf Februaiy the.
22ttd.
I see the last question pat you on croes-'
examination' was, whether you knew who put
the candle out, and you said you did not P— I
do not.
There was but one candle? — ^There was but
one candle; and that candle^ ae soon at ever
the pistol was fired, went bat ; and, as I said,
whether the candle was put out mtentionallyy
or the report of the pistol put it co^ I cannot
tell.
EUaaor Walker swotn^ — Examined by
Mr. Ginuy.
«
I believe you are the' niece and the servant
of Mrs. Rogers, No. 4, Fox-court, Gny^s^nn-
lane ? — ^Yes. ,
Do you know the prisoner Brunt?-— Vea.
Did he lodge at your master's house? — Yes.
Had he lodged there many months beCbre
last January ?-tHq had lodged there alboat #,
twelvemonm as nearly as I can recollect.
Wh^ rooms did he occupy ?— -Two -front
rooms.
On the two pair of stairs floor ?— Yes*
In the month of January last do you rememrr
her his introducing to you any other person to
take a lodging? — ^Yes.
Who was that?—He did i^ot tell nt the.
name*
Did you afterwards find what the nana was f ;
•^-^0^ t ^d not knomf it tHl I saw his naaM in
the paper ; then I found it to be lugs. . ■/
WsB that the mim at the.batr— I ctoaot
•ay. /
Do yod beHAve that to be Ihe man?— He
appears to be eometfaing tike him,.hnt I cann«r
swear to him.
Did Brunt tell you ift tie pies^naawhat be
was ? — No, he did not. i
Did he tell yon aAwt liet was ?--l7o, neither
of them.
What aras the lent a£ the room F-^Thiea.
shillings a^^week.
Unfundshcd ^^Yea•
Do yooa jv^memiber Ibr how many wieek#.W
had toe room ?W!l noAth or five jreeltf. . u.j.
• «
UMTl 1 GEORGE IV.
' Wlieahe took it^ did lio-n3r aoy tiling about
ftmitttre ?•— He said he perbaf^s- migbl bnagin*
his (coods in about a week or better.
Was this tho two-pair of stairs back room T —
Yes.
'Eleanor Walker cross-examined by
Mt.Cvnoood.
' What part of the house* did you live io ? —
The lower part.
Was that far from the staircase? — ^It was
near the staircase, but the door was always
shut.
Could ten or twelve men meet once or twice
a day witliout your knowing it ? — I did not
know it.
Was it likely ten or twelve men could go up
once or twice a day without voor hearing it ? —
I miffht hear it ; I have heard persons come up
and down stairs, but I did not see them.
As many as ten or twelve at a time ?-t-No,
I never heard that.
Ten or twelve in the morning? — ^There might
have been, but I did not hear them.
Eleww Walker re-eiamined by Mr. Gtmey*
Is there a door by which the lodgers go up
without going through your shop? — Yes.
Is that a trout door into the court f — ^The
' shop door .is in the court, and the private door
in a passage.
And that leads to the staircase? — ^Yes.
Is there any back door besides? — ^There is
only one back doorJ
Is there a back door ?— Yes.
' Bo you call the door at which the lodgers
come in, the back door f— Yes.
That is a door coming out of a passage on
to the stairs? — ^Yes.
And they came in at that door without com-
ing'into your shop at all?— Yes.
Mofy Rogert sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gumey.
Eleanor Walker isyonr niece -and servant
we understand ?— Yes, she is.
Yoo remember the circumstance pf her let-'
ting your two pair of stairs back room in
January last P«-I do.
How many weeks did this person occupy
it ?— Four or five.
How many did he pay for ? — Four, and there -
was one left unpaid.
Waicthe lodging kept till Brant was taken
up? — ^Yes.
" During the four or five vreeks did you ask
.' Brunt any question as to. who the lodger was f
— I did.
^ Did he-.tell^ou of what business he was ?—
He told me he was a butcher joai of employ.
' Did he tell you what heLknew of him ?-^He
said he knew nothing of him, only seeing him
-At the publio*hoii8e, aod.heaiing him inquire
for a lodging.
Po you remember one evening. when you
' 'W«re.puttiQg;your chUdnsn to bed. steing any
wenttpott-thettaircwef—Ido. .
TruUafJimm lagi
[MM
' How ma»y men did joo see?— Three.
Were they going up stain or going down ?«—
Groing np stairs.
AVaa tbere any thing remaikable in the per«
son of either of the three ? — ^The middle matt
was a bhck maD«
I do not know whether you took, snfficiant
notice of him to identify him ? — No.
Joeqfh Bale sston. — Examined by
Mr. Gtmuy.
Are you wprentice to Brunt ? — ^Yes.
Did you live with him at his lodging ur
Fox-court? — ^Yes.
We understand he had the two front rooms,
two pair of stairs? — ^Yes*
One to live in and the other to work in?*-
Yes.
Do you know the prisoner, Ings?^Yes.
Do you remember his taking any room. ia
that house as a lodging ? — ^Yes.
What room was that ?— A two-pair of stakn
back room.
Had you seen him in company- with Braat
before the day on which he took that lodging ^
— Yes.
Where had you seen him?— >-In Bnmi!s
workshop.
How long before he took the room ? — ^Abo«t
a fortnight ; the first time I saw him in Binai'a
room.
H[ad you seen him more than once befwe
he took the room ?— I .b^eve I had.
At the time the room was taken, did Ings
look at the nam alone, or did any person look
at it with him I — Brunt looked at it with. him.
Did you hear either of them say any tbi^g
while they were looking at the room ?^Wheft
they came out of it, I heard Brunt say to Ings,
^ It will do, go and give them a shilling."
Do you remember what day of the week that
^•■s?— On the Monday.
That evening did Ings come there I — ^Yes.
Did any person come with him ? — Yes. -
Who was that? — ^A man< of the name of
HalU a tailor.
How did Ings .get into the room? — He
came and asked Mrs. Brunt for the key.
Did. she give him the keyf — ^I believe she
did.
Did he and Hall .go into the room ?— Yes.
Did you hear any other persons oome into
the room - that evening ?— Y^ there . were
. others.
From that t^me, until your master was taken
up, did persons use to come to that room ?•—
Yes.
. At what part of the day had you an oppor- ~
tonit^ of observing that they, came?— ^In the
evening.
Had yott done .work genaialhrat di&ttime?
—No.
Can you give me the names of the pecsosa
who-, used to oome to those meetings in tk^
evening F*-Ye8; Thistlewood, Ings» DttiiU
son, Bradbum, Tidd, Edwards, Adams.
;. Dq yoU remember HaU?'p-Yes.
MKO]
^r H^ 'ff^aton.
A. D. 1820.
ElOlO
Did bi com ?-*-¥«■•
Do you know a man of the nam^ of PoUer ?
—Yoi.
Did ko uto to oonot>-«*Yes.
Do 70a know Strange ?"-^Yea«
Did be use to ooae ? — ^Yee.
Waf them any {unkaie in the room ?•— No.
How did they manage fer iUrnitiiif when
Ih^oame to thoee meetin^i?— 'They need to
bont>w Brant's ebain to fit o»»
Did your matter go in in the Of^ninge too
when they were there?-— Yeiu
Did you see theee penoni> or any of them>
in yomr maater^a room, besidef eeeing them in
this room ? — ^Yes*
Did they eail eaoh other by their names?—
Sometimeik
^' wihal name did tbjnr genemUy call
Thistlewoodf— ^ometimei 2; and sometimes
ArOmr.
Do yon remember^ any day, seeing the door
open, and observing any thing in the room l-—
What did yon see in the loomt — ^I saw
eome long poles like the branebes of trees.
Hare you at any times heard any work going
on in tile room T — Yea.
What kind of work ? — I have heard them
hammering and sawing.
Yonr master was taken up, I btdiore, on
Thursday the 24th of February f — >Yes« he was.
On tl^ Sunday morning before that, was
there any meeting in that room ?--*Yes.
Wwe the persons whom you have now named
to me present at that meeting ?-»Yes.
Were there any others there beeides those ?—
Yes.
Was thai a large or a Bmall meeting to the
beat of yourreooUeetionf^A laiger meeting
than what there usually vraa.
Did they go away all together or one or two
at a time r---<)ne or two at a time.
Was your muter in the room with them ?-^
Yes he was.
After the meeting was over, did you see any
body in your master's room in company with
your master?^- Yes ; Strange.
Had he been at the roeetfng?-^Yes, he had.
On Monday evening was there a meeting?
— ^Yes. ,
On Tuesday evening was there another ?-—
Yes.
In the course of Wednesday did any number
of persons oome } — There were several persons
came op at difTerent times.
At the different tiroes, bow many persons
fan you speek to having seen or heard oome
up?-^I cannot say how miany ; there were se-
veral, but I cannot say how many^
At what time in th0 dey did they come ? —
Some in the morning and some in the afternoon.
Do you remember any of them coming into
your workshop P«-Yes.
¥rho were they ?--^trange, and a man that
. I do not know.
At about what time of the da^ was that ?*—
Al etomi two o'clock*
VOL xxxm.
What did Strange and thii other man do ?.-
They were fiintine some pistols.
How many f— 'rive or six.
Did they finish flinting them ?— No.
What prevented their finishing themi — One
of the men said there were persona overlooking
them, and Brunt told them to go into the back
room.
Peraons overlookinff them ftom what ph^e ?
—From the opposite nouses.
Frote the windows of the opposite bouses f
— ^Yes.
Did they then go into the back room? —
Yes, they did.
Was Brunt in the bade room much of that
day ?— Yes, he waa in several times.
Did you see Thistlewood there .' — Yes.
At about what time ?-^About four o'clock.
Did he ask you for any thing? — Yes.
For what ? — For a piece of writing paper.
Did you give him scmieP— -Yes.
To what place did he take it?^Into the
back room.
After that did any person oome out of the
back room and tell you to do any thingf —
Yes.
Who was that ?— Brant.
What did Brant tell you to do ?-^To go and
get some cartridge paper.
How much ?— ^s sneets.
What money did he give you to pay for it?
-^Six pence.
Did you go and buy six sheets }'^Ytm,
To whom did you give them ?**^o Bnmt.
To whom did he tske them ?-*-Into the back
room.
After this did any of them go away ?i-Ye8.
Did any of them go into your master's room
before they went away that you remember f —
Yes.
Who was that ?— I do not know the man's
name.
Did your master go away ?-**Yes.
About what timer— At about six o'clodc.
After Brant your master was gone, did you
do any thing respecting your mistresses tea ?-f^
Yes.
What did she want for the purpose of mak-
ing tea ? — She wanted the table.
where was that table ?*-In the back room.
Did you, at her desire, knock at the back
room door and ask for it ?— •Yes.
Who answered you ? — A man by the name
of Potter.
Did he give you out the table } — Yes.
Upon the opening of the door did you see
whether there were other men in the room be*
sides Potter? — Yes,
How many P — ^foor dr fL'^e^ I cannot be cer-
tain which.
Was there a fire there P-^Yes.
In the course of that evening, did you see
the prisoner Tidd ?**Yes.
where did you see him ?— He came to Mrs.
Brant's room.
Upon his coming there, what passed be-
tween him and Mrs. Brant ?— She took him to
3T
I01I3 I OEOflGE- IV.
the cupboard and showed him a ptka head and
a swora.
What did she say ? — She asked him what
she could do with them.
What did he say P — He told her to give them
to him, and he would take them away*
Did he take them away ?^4ie did.
I do not know whether you ha?e told me
about what time that wasr-i-Between seven
and eight.
Did you see where he went to f — ^He went
into the back room.
After that, did you hear any persons go down
stairs ?— Yes.
Did any .person come into yonr mistress's
room and deliver any message to her ?— Yes.
What message? — A person came and said
if any persons came and inquired they were
to be sent to the White Hart.
Shortly after, did any persons come ? — ^Yes.
How many ? — ^Three.
Did your mistress direct them to the White
Hart? — ^They did not know the way to the
White Hart) and I went and showed them the
way. When you came back from the White
Hart, did you find Potter there? — He came
while I stood at the door.
Did you tell him the same ?*-Yes, I did.
Did he go, on your telling him ?— or did
you show him the way? — ^He went, on my
telling him.
He did not require you to assist. him in
finding it ? — ^No.
At about what time did your master come
home f — About nine o'clock.
Was there any difference in the condition
of his dress from what it had been when he
went out P — Yes.
What was the difference P— His boots were
▼erv muddy and the tail of his coat.
"bid he apnear composed, or otherwise P —
Noy he seemed rather confused.
Did you hear him say any Uiing to his wife
about what had happened ?~Ye8.
What did he say ?— He told his wife.it was
all up, or words to that effect.
Wbat more did be say P — He said that where
he had been there were a lot of officers came
in.
What more did he say?— Just as he was
sayine that, a man came in.
Did be say any thing about his lifSe ?— He
said he had saved his life and that was all.
Do you know the name of that person who
came in ? — No, I do not.
What passed between them?— He shook
hands with him, and asked him if he knew who
had informed.
What answer, did the man give?— He said
no.
Did the man say whether any thing had
happened to himself? — ^Yes.
^ What did he say 7 — He said he had had a ter-
rible blow on the side, and was knocked down.
Did you judge from the maoer in which they
spoke- to each other where they had been to-
gether?—Yes.
Trki of James Ings
(101^
After that did Brunt say «ny thing t— -Ho
went away.
As he was going away, do you remember
what Brunt said? — He said there was some-
thing to be done yet.
And they went away together ? — Yes.
When they were gone, did your mtstres
and' you go into the wxk room ? — ^Yes.
What did you find there ? — ^Tbere were
several things in the cupboard.
Was there any thing that was not in the
cupboard ? — Yes, there was a long pole thai
stood in the comer of the room.
What was there in the cupboard? — Several
rolls of brown paper and tar.
Any other things? — ^Yes, some nmnd' baDs
made with string and tar all over then.
What do you underatand them to be? — ^I
have heard since that they are hand-greoades.
They are tied over with rope-vam r-^Yes. -
Were they the things ^icn the officers
found the next morning ? — Yes.
Mr. Qwmty. — ^You- will see them hereafter,
gentlemen. Was there any Iron pot in the
room? — ^Yes.
To whom did that Iron pot belong? — Ta
Brunt.
Any flannel bagsP — ^Yes.
FttU or empty P-^There were two of ^em
full of something.
Were the things left there ?— Yes.
Did your master come home again ? — Tea.
At about what time? — About eleven o*clock.
Did he give you any directions what to do
in the morning?-- Yes.
What were they? — He told me to gel ap as
soon as I could, and clean his boots.
In the morning did you do so P — ^Yes.
After you had done tbat, did your master
ask you any question ?— Yes.
What?— He asked me if I knew the
Borough. I told him yes. He asked me if I
knew SnowVfields. I told him no.
Did he then give you any directions hovr to
find Soow's-fields ?— Yes.
Did he tell yon to whom he wanted yon to
?[> there P — ^Yes, he told me I was to 90 to
otter, Kirby-street, Snow*s-fields.
After that|» did he take you into the back
room ? — Yes.
Did he desire you to bring any thing there ?
— Yes, a rush basket.
Was there any other besides theone you took?
— Yes,
Who took that ?— Brunt.
Did he tell you what to do vrith respect to
those baskets T — Yes, to put those things into
the baskets.
The things you had seen the night before f
— ^Yes.
Did vou put the things which yon had
the night before into the two baskets P — ^
Was any thing then done with respect toeitber
of the baskets P — ^Yes, one of them was tied up
in a blue apron of Mrs; Brunt's.
To wbat use had that blue apron beea bcfere
1013]
Jar Hi[{A ZVeoMm.
A. D. 1890.
L1014
applied ? — ^It had been^uwd as a eurtain to the
window of the back room.
• Was the other tied up ?— No-
How happened that?-*Brttnt went into hit
own room to look for something to tie it up in,
and two officers came in.
TWo police officers ? — Yes.
And they apprehended him ?•— Yes.
. I am not sure whether I asked yon as to the
number who met there on the Sunday: can
you speak to the number P — There were about
twenty, I think.
5iMfh Hale cross-examined by
Mr. CunoootL
I think yoti told us on Monday or Tuesday,
that when yon found the brown paper, you found
some pieces of cartridge-paper along with it ?
-—One piece of cartridge paper.
IVere not you surprised at those meetings ?
—Not particularly.
Of course, perhaps you knew what they
were about? — ^No.
Were not you surprised when you found
meetings, and their haying arms together
there f — I never saw any arms except in
Brunt's room.
You saw them putting some flints into pis-
tols there ?— Yes.
Had not you any knowledge what that was
for?— No.
You knew nothing about it ? — ^No.
Were you ever in a court of justice before ?
—No.
Were you ever before a magistrate T^Nerer
till I was examined about this business.
Never about any business of your own ?— '
No, never.
2%osMi Snmrt sworn. — Examined by
Mr. LUtledale.
I believe you are one of the ^watchmen of
die night in the parish of St. George, Han-
orer-square ? — ^Yes.
Do you remember, on the night, of Tuesday
the 22nd February last, being on watch? —
Yes, perfectly well.
Were yon on watch in Grosvenoi^uare f —
Yes.
Did you see any people there that attracted
your atteotion ?-^i saw four pec^le, rery sus-
picious characters. f
At what time ?— About half-past. eight, or a
quarter befota nine.
Was one of those people a man of colour P —
One man was a man of colour, and there was
ft tall man along with him.
You say they were suspicious looking peo-
ple, what were they apparently doing ? — Peep-
ing down the areas, and watching as if they
were about no good.
What time did you leave your watch? —
Seven o'clodc in the morning.
Was Bissixa watchman at the time with
you T— Yes, he and I met every half-hour s^t
the end of our round, and I told him there
were fourauspicioua charfKrters, and to keep a
loo)BOQtaft«ithem.
CharUt Bmix sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. UUkdalt.
Are you one of the watchmen of St, George,
Hanover- square ? — ^Yes, in Grosirenop^quare.
Do you remember seeing any bodV that
attracted your attention on the 22nd of Feb-
ruary P — On the 22nd, as I was calling ^ half-
past eight,'' being then at the end of my call,
and therefore about a quarter before hine, on
the same side on which lord Harrowby lives,
there were two men passed me, one a dark
man.
Do you mean a man of colour ? — Yes, it
was a uttle darkish, within about a quarter of
nine, and he asked ''watchman, is it almost
nine o'dock," that is the dark roan, I said, ^ it
is not nine yet, but within a few minutes of
it;'' that was the answer I made.
Emry Oilian sworn.— Examined by
TAr.BoUand.
Do you live at No, 15 Mount-street,
Berkeley-square ? — ^Yes.
Do you ever use the Rising Sun public-
house ?^ — ^Yes.
Where is that? — ^The corner of Charles-
street, and Adams-mews.
Do you recollect being there any night, and
playing at dopiinos ? — ^Yes.
When was that?— On Tuesday the 22nd of
Februaiy.
Witb whom4id you play ? — ^With Brunt
What time of the evening was it when you
first saw him?— Between nine and ten o'clock.
Had you been in the public-house . before
became? — ^Yes.
He came in between nine and ten ? — ^Yes.
Was he alone or in company ? — ^There was
another man with him.
Had they any refreshment } — Yes.
What ?— ^me bread and cheese and some
porter.
How long did you play at dominoe ? — ^Abont
half an houc
Did you leave the public-house before they
went, or did they go first P— I left first.
What time did y<»i go ? — About ten o'clock
I think it might be.
Semy Oilian cross-examined by Mr. Curwood.
How do you know it was the 22nd ? — By
the list I have when I carry out medicines.
Have you that list with you now ? — ^No.
That is the only recollection you have of it ?
— ^Yes, it is.
John Hector Moriton sworn. — Examined by
Mr.BoUand.
Are you journeyman to Mr. Henry Thomas
Underwood P — ^Yes.
He is a cutler ?*-Yes.
Where does he live ? — In Dniiy-lane.
Were you with him at Christmas last P —
Yes.
Do you remember at Christmas last anv
person bringing you a swoid to sharpen?— A
10151 1 GEORGE IV.
penon brought one od Christmts-evie tQ be
ground.
How was he dressed ?— -He was dressed like
a botcher.
Should you know the person of the man ?— •
Yes.
Look at the piisoner, and say whether he
was the man ? — ^That is the man.
Did he call again for the sword ? — ^He call-
ed three days afterwards for the sword^ and
paid me nine-pence for doing it.
Did he give yon any pftrticiilar ditections
about the first ? — Yes, to grind the point par*
ticularly sharp, and to make it otit both back
and edge.
Do yott mean the point F — ^Yes.
Was that a cut ana thrust sword| or a sabre ?
->->A TeiT short sabre.
You did according to the directions t — ^Yes.
Did he brinj^ you any other work? — Yes,
about a fortnight after another sword, a very
long one, ^abre ; he told me to grind that
as I had done the first.
Did he give any name?— It is cuetomary
for us to ask the name, and to the best of my
recollection he said Eames ; it might be Ings.
Edward Smpton sworn. — Examined by
m.Boliand.
Are you a oorporaUmiyor in the eeoond lifo-
guards ?-«-*Yee.
Do you know a man of the name of Har«
risoD, one of the prisoners ?«-I^know a nan of
the name of John Harrison.
Was he formerly in your regiment?—- Yes,
he was.
Do you know whether Harrison was ever on
duty at Ring-street barracks ?— ^Yes, I am cer-
tain he was.
How long was he there? — ^In the regiment?
No; at those barracks ?-~I cannot say exactly.
Was he there tine enough to know the state
of them, and where the different things were
kept in the rooms ? — Yes.
Would his duty make him well acquainted
with them? — ^Yes, perfectly acquainted with
them.
Do they join upon Glotteester'-niews ?— Part
of them do.
Are there any windows looking to the Mews ?
—There were formerly.
How long have those windows been slopped
up? — ^They were stopped up two or three
days after the aflhir or Cato*street.
Was there an^ straw or hay or other com-
bustible matter in any rooms communicating
with those windows 7«-There was straw in the
room communicating with the window and
hay likewise.
If fire had been thrown into those windows
and communicated with the straw, would tlie
consequence have been the destractien of the
barracks ?— M ost undoubtedly it vntM,
James Aldout sworn. — Examined by
I beKete you are a pawnhroker ?^Yel.
TrM qfJmim Tnp
[*»»
Whart do yeu cany oa your bu&Mtsl-^Iii
Berwick-street, Soho.
Do Tou know the prisonar, Davidsony Ibe
man of oohiiir^««Yes.
Did be, at any time, pledge with vovnbiasa
barrelled blunderbuss? — ^Yes, he did.
Did he leave it with you, of take it ovt of
pawn 7 — He redeemed it.
When was that?— On the 38id of Febniaiy.
At what time of the day ?— In the morning.
Did he say any thing to yon at the tinae he
took it out ? — No, he did not.
Yon have' seen that bkmdeibuis again ? — ^I
have.
Did you see it in court the other day I —
No, I have not.
You have seen it at Bow-street? — ^No^ I saw
it at Portman-street barracks.
Who showed it you ? — ^Mr. Ruthven.
Thomat Wdm sworn.— Biamiaed by
He. Anwy.
I believe you have carried on the business
of a cow-keeper and dairyman in Manchealer*
mews ? — ^Yes, I have.
Do you know a man of the name of Wilson !
—I do.
Hie prisoner? — Yes, the prisoner at the bar.
Had you known him some months before
last Febraary ? — I had.
Shortly before the 23rd of February^ did he
make any proposition to you ? — He did ; be
met me ana asked me if I would be one of
a party who were going to meet to desteoy
his majesty's ministers.
To destroy them where ? — ^He told me tbey
had got such things as I never saw, and thai
they had got all ready and were waiting for a
cabinet dinner.
Did he say what those things you had never
seen were ?--^e said that some of them were
made of tarpaulin, and some of tin, bound
round with cord, and thtft their strength was
such, that if it was set fire to, it would heave
up the walls in ftont of the houses where we
were walking.
Did he say what they were for?— -He said it
was to destroy his majesty's ministers; that
they were waiting for a cabinet dinner, and
when there was a eabiael dinner they vroekt
let me know ; and he said they were to lighl
np some fires.
Did he say where ? — He said I had nocanaa
to be farmed.
Did he mention anT names of persons? —
He mentioned some houses, he mentioned
lord Haifowb/s, the duke of Wellington^ lord
Sidmouth's, lord Oaatlaroagh's^ tiie bishop eff
Ixmdon'S) and one more Sat I do not know ;
he told me that I had no ooenston to be afraid^
that there fins a genllemaa's servmrt who had
furnished them with a certain turn of money,
and if they would net upon the anlgect be
would give them a oonsideiable snm uMyie.
Did he say any thing as to what woidd be
4lin«ieel of Hgb&ig up te fires ?-*He said,
'from the lighting up of the iaea^ il
10171
Jiir H^ IVcMon.
A.D. 1890c
[1018
tke town in t state of confiniov, and io a few
days it would become geDeral.
Did he tell you what was to be the use of
those things such as you bad never seen ? —
He told me they were to be lighted with a
ftise and thrown into the room, and all that
escaped the explosion were to die by the edge
of the sword or some other weapon.
Did he mention to you the name of any
person, or offef to introduce you to any person ?
-^He told me, if I would make one of the
Srty which they depended upon me for, that
r. ThisUewood would be gtad to see me. ^
Did YOU promise to make one?— I told him
I would make one.
Can yon tell me bow many daye Ibis was
before the discovery in Cato-street ? — I cannot
Did you go, before that discovery in Cato-
street« and give information to any person ? —
I wrote a note to try to see lord Harrowbyand
lord Castlereasfa.
To whom did you address your letter?— I
wrote to lord Castlereagh.
How soon was that, do you think, after you
had seen Wilson ? — It might be two or three
days.
Did you deliver your letter to lord Castle-
reagh or not? — ^I did not; I went, but could
net see him.
Did you deliver it to lord Harrowby? — I
did.
Where did yon deliver it to him? — I de-
livered it to him in Hyde-park, at Grosvenor-
gate.
Do you remember the day? — ^I do not.
On the day of the discoverjr of the persons
in Cato-street, did yon see this man, Wilson,
again ? — I did ; he met me in Manchester-
street, as I was going home, with a little girl
in my hand.
What did Wilson say to you ? — He met me
and said, ^Hiden, you are the very man I
want to see.** I sSdd, ** Wilson, what is there
going to be?'' He said, ^ To-night there is a
cabinet dinner at lord Harrowby's, Grosvenor-
sqnare."
What more did he say f — ^He said I was to
be sure to come : I asked him v?here I should
come, and he said I vras to come up to John-
street to the Horse and Groom.
What were you to do then ? — He told me
I vras to go into die public house, the Horse
and Groom, or to stand at the comer of Cato-
street till I was shoved into a stable. I was
to meet him at a quarter before six, or by
six o'clock.
Did yon ask him any question as Io num-
bers f«— I asked him how many there were
going to be : he said, about twenty or thirty
there : I asked him if that vras alt that was
going to be : he said, it was not all, there vrere
to be four divisions ; there was a party in
the Borough, another in GrayVinn-Janey
another in the City, or in Gee's-court, I am
not certain which.
Did he say any thing more respecting Gee^s-
coiirit*«*He said all Giee's-oooft was in ii^ but
they vrould not act unless the Englisk began
first, for they had been deceived so many
times, they would not begin unless the English
began first.
What countrymen do you wsderstaiid in-
habited Gee's-eourt ? — I understand Irishmen ;
he told me Irishmen; he said all the Irisb
were in it.
That they would not act unless the English
began l-^No^ for they had been deosived so
many times before.
Did he tell you any thing aboot any place
in the city ?--He said, after they had been
at Grosvenor-square, they meant to retreat to
somewhere about the Mansioa-honse ; that was
vibere all parties were to meet.
Did he tell you any Ihing about what wae
to be dene in other places ?— He said there
were some cannon they oould get very easi^,
two pieces in Grayyina-lane^ by kneddng in
of a small door.
Any thing more than knocking in a deorf
— Nothing more than breaking in a smaHdoor.
Did be mention any other?— He said that
there were four pieces at another Artillery-
ground, which they coold get by ooljp kiHins^
the sentiy, but I forget where mat Artillnry-
ground was.
Did you promise him to come ?^-4 toM
him I wouhi come; I was to be sure to be
there by six, or a quarter before six.
Did you go to John-street tiMt eveninff P— •
I vrent to John-stveet. but I vras behind my
time in conse^iuenoe of budneas.
At what time did you go there?— I think
it was nearly seven o'clock.
Did you see the prisoner, WilsoB) there?
— ^I saw Wilson and Davidsco.
Davidson is the man of colour P— Yes, he is.
Where ware they standing? — ^They were
standing at the post, the comer of Cato-streef .
Do you know Davidson again I— Yes, I had
knovrn him a long ttme before.
When you met there what passed ? — They
said ^ you are behind your time.* I said, yes,
I could not keep it.
Pass over that ; what furAer did he say f —
He asked if I vras going in, saying Mr.
Thistlewood was there.
What answer did you give? — I told him I
could not go in, for I must go and get some
cream where I could. I asked him what time
they vfould go away from thetOb
What did he say?— He told metheyvroiM
go away from dieie about eight o'clo^, and if
Uiey were gone away from there I was to
follow them down into Grosvenop-square.
Did he describe the house to yonl — He
said the lower side, the fourth house from the
forlher comer, that I should find them.
Was any thing more said?— Davidse» said
^ eomci you dog, eome, it is the beat Aing you
were ever in in yourKfo.'*
Is that the tetter you delivered te ford
Hanowby [[slewing i^ to Ms tc»liiMi]3* — ^^ i*
is.
10103 1 GEORGE IV.
' Thamat Hiden cross-eiamined by
Mr. AMphm.
Ii this your own writing ? — ^Tes, it is.
How long hare you been a cow-keeper ? — I
have been a cow-keeper these four or fire years,
I have been a milk-man longer than that
How long? — About five years.
Before tlMt you were a shoe-maker ? — ^No.
. I tboui^t you said you belonged to a shoe-
maker's club. I thought by that you were a
shoe-maker ?— -No, I never was.
In what trade were you originally ? — ^I am
so trade at all.
What were you before that ? — I ha?e been
a gentleman's servant, and was brought up
to farming in the coun^.
Five years ago, were you a gentleman*s
servant r — More than five years ago.
What gentleman's serv^e were you last in f
— ^Thelast place I lived in was colonel Bridges,
in South Audley-street.
How long ago ? — I cannot tell.
Yon must tell me a little better than that ? —
I dare say it is six years i^.
Cannot you speak more precisely ? — It may
be seven years.
What number in South Audley-street? — I
believe it is 69.
Did he keep house there, or was he a lodger ?
—A lodginff<)iouse I believe it was, but he had
the whole of the house.
Whether it was a hired house, furnished by
him, or taken furnished you do not know f —
No.
How long did yon live with him ? — ^No great
time ; I cannot say exactly.
How long ?— It might be a month, or it might
be two or three months.
Will you swear it was a fortnight ? — Yes, it
was more than a fortnight.
Was it three weeks T — ^Ye»^it was.
Was it more than a month ? — I cannot say ;
this was my last place of service.
Whom hare you ever served for any length of
time f I should like to know some place where
you had some settlement of abode ? — ^I lived
with major Dive, in Tavistock-street, Bedford-
square, a year and three months.
In what year? — I think the year 1810*
Is he alive or dead ? — ^He was alive a little
while affo.
As v^t ? In what capacity ? — As footman,
there was only me there.
Did you go directly from him to colonel
Bridges?— No, I did not.
Where did you go to then P— I went and
lived a little while with agentleman in Stratton-
street, a gentleman of the name of Brioe.
For the last five years you have been either a
milk-man or a cowkeeperY—Yes.
How long have you lived in Manchester*-
mews?— Going on of three years.
Have you always lived there the whole of
that time f-^My family have lived there.
Hare you always lived there the whole of
that time? — My family have lived there; I
have not been at home all the time myself.
Trial ^Jame$ Ings
[1030
How much of the time have you been awty
from home?— I cannot justly say; two, or three,
or four months.
Where do you live nowi^I am over in the
Bench now, that is .my home now : I am not
actually in the place.
Where have you lived ? in the Rules -of the
Bench ?— I am not in the Rules of the Bench,
I am in the Marshalsea.
In the prison of the Marshalsea? — Yes.
You are not in the Bench, but in the Mar-
shalsea ; how came you to say the Bench ? —
No ; I did not say in the Ben(£, to my know-
ledge ; I did not mean it, however.
Did you not say, just now, that you were in
the Bench ? look at the jniy, and answer ? —
If I said so, I meant to say m the Marshalsea.
Did you say so or not, I want no ifs.— I am
in the Marshalsea.
Did you not say, just this minute, that you
were in the Bench ?— I cannot say that I did.
Will you, upon your oath, deny that yon
said so ?•— No, I cannot say.
• You cannot say upon your oath, vdiether
you did or not ? — No.
You are in the Marshalsea ? — Yes.
For how much ? — ^For about 1 8/. 3s. and odd.
Due to whom ? — ^To Mr. Powell.
What is he ? — He is a milkman and cow-
keeper, I believe.
How long have you been in the Marshalsea
at his suit? — I went in last Saturday.
Are you there in execution, or on a .bailable
writ ? — I went in in execution.
How long before that had you been sued by
Mr. Powell ? — It is some time ago, some time
the beginninj^ of last summer ; f do not know
exactly the time.
How did you keep off going in so long? — I
was out of the way for about two months, or
from that to three months.
At what period of the year was that ? — I do
not know at what time of the year it was.
The jury will not be satisfied with thiU, yon
must brinff your faculties with you ? — a may
be about June, July, or August.
Was it July or August ? — It might be about
June, or July, or August, or the beginning of
September.
Was it so late as October ?— No, I think not,
I was home before October.
Upon your oath, were you at your house in
Manchester-mews, as you call it, at any time
in July or August, except Sundays? — ^Yes, I
was at different times besides Sundays.
Who carried on your business for you? —
My wife and my sister.
Do they live there and carry on the business
now?*— I do not know that they are living
there now, but they carry on the business
there?
Mr. Gtemey.— -And my question was, was be
living there in February last f
Mr. Adolphui.'— Did not you swear on -Mon-
day that you lived in Manchester-mews ?— 'I or
my fomily live therCf
10311
ybr High Treason*
Did not you ttftte to>day, or on Monday,
that you li?ed in Manchester-mews? — My &-
mily.
Do they li?e there then? — They do live
there» ot did when I left them.
Did not yon say, both on Monday and to-
day, that yoa lived in Manchester-mews? — I
did live in. Manchester-mews.
Upon yoar oath, did you or not say, in that
Slace, on IViesday last, that you lived on that
ay, in Manchester-mews ?— I did not name
the day, but I said that day I lived in Man-
chester-mews.
Did not you answer, being asked where you
lived, ** In Manchester*mews f — I am tiviag
now in this place where I stand, my fismily
lived in Manchester-mews, me and my family
when I was taken away.
Did YOU not say on Tuesday morning, that
your place of residence was in Manchester-
mews r — So it was ; my family was there.
Will you swear your family or you lived
in Manchester-mews on Tuesday morning?
— I will swear that my fiunily live there now,
for aught I know.
When did you last see any of them ? — ^I saw
some of my &roily there when I left.
Where are they living? — ^They are living
there now ; they have the premises ; they go
backwards and forwards to them.
W*ho told you so ? — My sister told me so to-
day, that they go there two or three times
a-day, but I do not^ know that they may be
there at this present time.
You. mean to refer to the present moment
when you give this answer ? — ^x ou put me to it.
And you live where yoii stand, and you lived
at Manchester-mews, except during the time
you are. standing here, and ths time you are in
the Marshalsea? — ^Yes.
Bat whether you have any home or abode
there at this present moment you do not know ?
—No.
How kmg hare you known Mr. Davidson, as
you spoke of him f— I have known Mr. David-
son for these three or four months.
Do you know a Mr. Edwards at all 7 — ^I do
not know Mr. Edwards.
You do not know any such person ? — ^No.
Aecollect now, try to recollect yourself, do
you know Mr. Edwards ?<*-! do not know him.
You know no person of that name ? — I
know a person of tnat name.
Then why do -you say you do not know him?
— I know a good many persons, but they are
many miles in the country.
How do you know that I am .notinquiring
for the very Mr. Edwards you know ?— >lt may
be so.
How came you to answer that you do not
know Mr. Edwards, and then that you do
know Mr. Edwards ? — ^I know a Mr. Edwards
•200 miles in the country, but I should not sup-
pose you meant that Mr. Edwards.
Whom should yoa suppose I mean ? — I do
not kdow.
Where did you carry on your Irosiness a9 a.
A. D. ISaO. [1038
milkman before you wentto Manchetter«mews?
— In little Durweston-street, by the Gdgware-
road.
Have you ever frequented the Scotch Arms?
— ^I have been to it twice.
Where is the Scotch Arms ?— It is in a smaH
court somewhere down by the Strand.
Did you attend any club or meeting there ? —
I attended to what they call a club ; I was
there twice.
With whom ? — ^I went with a friend.
Has that friend a name ?>— He is a master
tailor by the name of Clark.
Why is it called the shoemaker's dub? — I
do not know, it was called so to me.
It was not a radical meeting, was it? — ^I do
not know what meeting it was, it was reported
as a shoemaker's club.
Did politics and afiairs of state appear to be
the subject of conversation there ? — ^1 am sure
it is so long ago I do not particularly re-
member.
How long might it be? — Seven or eight
months, but I am not certain to a month.
As you swear so iMirticularly to conversations,
was politics the subject of conversation there ?
—I cannot say, for I am not used to those
matters.
Was it, or not?— •! cannot say, whedier it
was or not.
You never saw any of those gentlemen at
the bar, except Mr. Davidson and Mr. Wilson ?
—No.
And you had no conversation about thoae
matters, except with Wilson?-*! had some
conversation witb Davidson.
Where was that t in John-street ? — ^Yes. :
Tbat was when you went and were so anxious
to get your cream? — ^Yes, 1 had seen Mr.
Davidson repeatedly before that.
Had you conversed with him about these par-
ticular affairs before that? — ^Yes.
How long was'the last time before that you
had seen him ? — I do not know exactly, it might
be a week or a fortnight.
Will yon swear it vras not more than a fort-
night?—I believe I can.
Had you been at any of the meetings at
Fox-court, or any thing of that kind ? — No, I
never was.
Then you did not know any tiring of this
particular affair till Wilson told you? — ^Not of
that, I did not till he told me.
The cream was, of course, a thing of great
profitvto you ? — It was.
How mudi did you get by it ?— I do not
know.
A shilling ? — Oh, yes.
Half a crown ? — ^More than a shilling.
By that particular order ?— Perhaps, I might
gain two or three.
For whom was it?— It was for a family, but
I< could not state the -name*
What family was it?— -A &mily in Princes*
• street.
Name them ? — I do not know their names,
but I have served.them for three or four years*
1608] 1 OeOROE IV.
Trml qfJmm fngi
[1034
Wkst ttwtobw in Pfkon ■UmI|*-I bditve
Princes -street where ? — Princes - ttnety
Are thej house-keepeis, or lodfen, or what 7
— They kxTt the honaey I believtt.
You have serrad then, how loog?—- Three
jFeeft 1 beUere, it may be sooMliung mon* or
MmgfjitA besoioDf; I bdicTe it is 9bo^i
three years.
Youdoaot knowlUr Bain«af--1 4o not
knew their names.
And you had an eider from Ihemi te eeemn
ihii afternoon which yen coiiUL not eiMCttie 7 —
Repeatedly I haw h«d«
You had an osder from them for eseam that
aftenaeoB ? — Yea.
What servant ga?e yoa the order? a female
or a oraie servant ?— <>Br people broaght home
the order, I did not see tton.
What people f-^Mj wife.
Did you see anv person at the house on ike
airfnect of itf «-I dia not go to the house.
Who infonned them yon ooald sot get it ?—
My wife, or my sister £d.
Vott do not know the namoT-^Noy I do
Whom do you see when you go there ? — I
do not senro them, my wife dioesy I believe they
do not keep a man servant.
Were 7o« ever at tiie house in your life f —
Manvatime.
What servant have you seen there f — ^I have
«een maid servants.
Whan wftveyon there last ?— I cannot aay.
How long befbm the SSii of Fobnmry ) — I
am not able to say.
Do jmoL serve them daily l«~-Yea<
Tfatt is the ihroily at namber aii, Princes-
street, €avendish.«qoare?— Yes.
Whsft cmanti^ of cream was oideaed isr that
night? — I really do not knov^ I have forgoL
And yet yen know that yoa were to get two
or thme shillings hy it 7--Wo ga a mating a
pint.
You am not able to say what was te qnan-
tityJ-No.
That will sot do; we ehall probalfly send
them to inquiveP-^Yon may oo so il you
please.
Howwiudi eieam was oideied for that night ?
— ^It has slipped my memory.
You can only leiuember that yon wen to
get some two or three shiHings by it?-— I only
know I went for creanu
Was it more Unn a onaM?— I believe it
was.
I ask you again, was it or not more than a
quart?— I am not able to si^ indeed.
You will not indulge me with the name of
any servant in that house ?<-^ am not able.
Do you catt tim servants Mary, MoUVp or
^tty, or what?w.I eanndt say indeed, we
bave a many wsAout any bill evoiy vfmk.
Was it the first time or second time yon met
with Wilson that Ae cxptession was natdf you
bad nooocsaisB to be alanoed, fer tkeit WM a
gentleman's servant sHppliad money! — ^It
the first time.
Upon your oath, did you not as poaitinBly
swear, on Taesdav last, it was the seoiMid time,
on the 23rd of Febmaiyl-^No, I did not s^
it was the fiiator eeoond time last Tbeaday.
Upon your oath, wse not it part of yonr
namtive of the 23ni of February, that be said
there was n gentleman's servant eopplied
money 1— ^e repeated it more than onoe or
twioe*
At two separata iaterviewsT— At two dif^
ferent times.
At two dtierent interviews; you aset him
but twice (--I had aean him many times.
How long bad yon been aoqaainied widi
him befem tMs?— I have been acqaainted
with him this long time.
How long J — ^A great while ; I met him nt a
taikNr*a vrhere I ns^ to go repeatedly.
How long had yon aot seen him before yon
Bset ban the ficst tisw, when yon talked to
him on this busiaess ?*-I saw him agmat nun»-
ber of times befbra, long befitre.
Was it at any of those tiroes that bs told yon
a geatleasan's servant aopplied them with
money ?-— He told mo when I met him in tlte
street on the iSid.
Had be ever told you ao before?.^! do not
remember that ho had : he said his msater was
a mtnisleiial man.
Had he ever told yon so before those two
times ? — I cannot ssrear that he had or bad not.
Why did not yoa tdl us on Tuesday that be
laid you so at the first iaterview 7—1 told yon
that he said so.
That would have 'been something mwe to
have told lord Harrowby 7*-'I do not know.
^ Why did not yon tell us that Uat T^msdagr ?
— ^He told me so repeatedly.
How many times do yiou uMan by repeated-
ly 7— He told me so twice.
That you call repeatedly ? — Yes.
Did yoa go up into the room in Cato-street^
or ooiy speak to Davidson at tibe door? — I
never went into €at»«treet, only toihe eomor
of John*street.
,Tkomat
re-examined by
Mr. Gumey,
Did you eontimio to carry on your
at Mancbestcr-mews till laist Saturday 7*-My
femily.
Were yon than airested and taken to the
Mamhalsea 7--I was.
Have you remained in onstody over snoe,
except on yonr coming^ here wkh an oAcer?.
"""X es*
As fer as you know, do your family reaiain
there stiU 7 — They have got Ibe premiaea now.
About this house, in Prine^s-street, yaoL
said, to te beat of your recoUecllQa it is No.
' six;areyou|MSitivaof thator iiet?-:4 thiafc
it is No. six.
Your wife generaOy oenrfs ^--^Shedoes.
Sometimes you nave gone then 7-«- Yiap>
somctiaDiesIhavo.
loas]
f<A Hif^ TreatoH,
A. D. 1820.
Um9
Mr, Ad0ljiAut.''My lord, I understood him
to My positively it was No. six.
Mr. Gvm^. — No, he did not.
Mr. Adofyhui. — ^Will your lordship have the
goodness to permit me to ask as to the descrip-
tion of the housed if he will not swear positive*
ly to the number ?
\ Mr. Gumey.— I will ask those questions
with pleasure : how does the house stand ? — I
think it is the first door on the left hand side
IrOm the square going down to Oxford-street.
Is there any name on the door that you re-
member f — I do not remember.
. The first door from whence ? — Going from
Cavendish-square down into Oxford-street, on
She left hand-side*
The j&r/of Harrowby sworn.— Examined by
Mr. Gvrney»
Your lordship is president of his majesty's
f rivy council? — I am.
Is it usual for the members of his majesty's
privy council^ who form what is commonly
called the cabioet, to have dinners at each
other's houses ?— It is.
In the month of February last had those
dinners been interrupted by the death of bis
late majesty ? — ^They nad.
Did your lordship cause cards to be issued
inviting the members of the cabiqet council to
dine with you on Wednesday the 23rd of
February ?— I did, the latter end of the pre-
ceding week.
If nothing had occurred would that dinner
Jiave taken place P — Certainly.
Will your lordship have the goodness to
enumerate the company who would then have
been assembled ?—ahe lord Chancellor; the
•«ail of Liverpool, first lord of the Treasury ;
Jdr. Vansittart, chancellor of the Exchequer;
earl Batburst, secretary of State for the Colo-
iiial Department; lord Castlereagh, secretary
cf State for the Foreign Department; lord
Sidmouth, secretary of State for the Home
Department ; lord Melville, first lord of the
Admiralty; the earl of Westmorland, lord
Pdvy Seal : the duke of Wellington, master of
the Ordnance ; Mr. Canning, president of the
India .Board ; Mr. Bathurst, chancellor of the
Duchy of .Lancaster; Mr. Wellesley Pole,
master of the Mint ; the earl of Mulgrave ; and
Mr. Robinson, president of the Board of
Jr^e.
Fourteen besides yopr lordship ? — Yes.
Are all those whom you have named, my
lord, members of the privy council P-rTLey
Yout lordship's house we have beard is situ-*
ateinGrosvenor^oare? — On the South side of
Grosvenor-^quare. next door to the Archbishop
^f Yolk's.
On Tuesday the 22nd of February wasyoar
Jofdship riding in the Park ?— I was.
Were you accosted by a person of the name
of Hiden ? — I was accosted by a person #hose
VOL. xxxin.
name I did not know, but now know it to be
Hiden.
Did he deliver that letter to your lordship,
addressed to my lord Castlereagh [handing U
Uf hU i4jrdthip^ 1 — He did.
Did he speak to you of it as of business of
immediate importance ?— *He spoke to me of
it as of business materially importing lord
Castlereagh as well as myself, and some
others, and wished it to be delivered immedi*
ately lo my lord Castlereagh.
I believe your lordship was going at that
moment to the couocil, and delivered it to lord
Castlereagh shortly after ? — I was going home
to dress for a council at Carlton Palace, and
not findinglord Castlereagh there, I despatched
it with a note from myself to lord Castlereagh,
Did Hiden, at your lordship*s desire, give
you his card ? — He did.
Did you meet him the next morning in
Hyde-park, by some appointment you made ? —
I aid.
In the plantation in the park ?~I met him
in the plantation in the place which is called
the ring. ,
I am not at liberty to ask your lordship the
particulars of the communication he raaae tQ
you, but did he communicate to you, that there
was any plan of atmcking the cabinet ministers
at your house ?— That communication is con-
tained in tho letter : he made a communication
in more general terms.
In consequence of the information you re-
ceived, did your lordship end the other mem-
bers of the cabinet alter the plan of the din-
ner ? — ^The plaii of the dinner was given up
for that da^.
Your lordship dined at Fife-house, at lord
Liverpoors ? — I did.
Dia the preparations at your lordship'a
house proceed as if the company had been to
dine there P — lliey proceeded as if the com^
pany had been to dine there, till they were
stopped by a note I sent from lord Liver-*
pool s» to inform my servant that they would
not dine there, which, being despatched be-
tween seven and eight from Fife-house, I con*
ceived reached my own hosue about eight
o'clock.
You had concealed from your servant the
alteration of the plan ? — ^Yes.
The 'Earl of Harrcwby cross-examined by
Mr. Curwood.
I must ask your lordship a question : you
said before, I believe, that you had some in-
timation of this before that letter was delivered
to WOL ! — ^Yes, I did.
Did not your lordship know, or had not you
regular communicatiqns of. all that passed at
those meetings? — I had no communication of
what passed at any of those meetings personal ly.
You had intimation that something of the
kind was in contemplation ? — We had an in*
timation at a period antecedent to this, of a
design somewhat of this kind being in Qon»
temptation*
3U
1CMI7] 1 GEORGE iV.
Mr. Gimi^.— 1 beg yottt lordAipV Mrdott»
but I omitted to point out to you Hioeta ; U
that the person who made the comnkimscatioQ
to your lordship ? — He i9.
John Bakar sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gymof,
Are yon lord Harrowby's butler? — ^Yes.
Did you, by hia knrdahip's directioB» istne
carda of invitation for a cabinet dinner, on
Wednesday the 23rd of Febiukiy?--! did.
1ng». — ^My lord, here are thme or four of the
witnesses in court, giving eadi other their
evidence.
Mr. Gwmey, — ^They nay go out of court,
they will not be wanted again. On what day
did you issue the cards ?— Either the 18th or
19th ; I betiere Saturday the 19th.
We have understood that the preparations
^ent on till a late hour in the evening f— They
did till about eight.
When did yon receive notice from his lord*
ship that the dinner would not take place ? —
It might be about eight o'clock, or ten minutes
after.
To that period neither you nor any of the
serranls knew it would not take place ? — ^No,
they did not.
John Mcmaneni swora^ — EzamiDed by
Mr. SolieUor GeneniL
I believe you come here in custody T-^I do.
Yon are a prisoner in the Tower? — ^Yes.
Do you remember at any time meeting This-
tlewood at the bouse of a person of the name
of Ford ?— Yes.
As nearly as you can recollect hoMr long is
Ihat ago ?— I suppose it was between two and
three months before the meeting id Cato*
street.
After YOU bad so met him, did he call upon
you? — ^Yes.
How soon afterwards T^I suppose about a
fortnight or three weeks.
Did he call alone, or was there any person
in company with him ?— The prisoner Brunt
Was in company with him.
Was any petsdn in the room besides your-
self, when be called? — ^Yes, my mother and
iay brother.
How long did he stay with yon?— I suppose
be was in die room about &fe minutes, when
be called me to the outside of the door, saying
be wished to speak with me.
When you^went outside the door with him
did Brunt go with him or notf— N&, he did
ttot.
You apd he went outside the door?-— Yes.
What did he; then say to you?-^e said
ihat great 'events were at band ; that people
were erery Where anxious foracbange; that
he bad beiSn ()»>iiltsed mppoit hy toany peo-
I^le ^o had deeeited bim, but lioW he had
got inen that would stand by bim.
What did he say ficftther in that c6mrei%a-
tibh?— He asked me whether I bad akfy arms.
What did you say ?— I told him, no.
Trid of Jama lOgi CUMt
Wtat^ASd he ails#«rtd (tmtt-^rSe said iaX
no man should be wi^«Qt anns; beisiid eMf
man that belonged to him had got some ; some
had got a sabre, some had got a pistol, and
•ome a jpike : he sasd that I mi^t bay a pis-
tol for about four or fire sbiUings. 1 said I
had no money to b«y pistols; he then ssad he
would see what he could do.
Do you recollect whether any further ocm-
versation took place at that time ? — ^No, I do
bot think there did.
After that conversatioii t>assed dU yon
return again into the room ? — Yes.
Did Brunt and Thistlewood go away toge-
ther?—Yes, they did.
After this interview did Bruiit call upon yoa
by himself ?~Yes, he did.
How soon afterwards did lie call ?^»Aboak
two or three days, I believe.
Did any thing particular pass at that in-
tenriewP — ^No, 1 oo not recollect that there
did : he said he was in a huity, ibat there
were several people down stairs waiting lor
him, and he was ffoing to call on several nen,
people in our trade.
Do you remember Blunt calUog i^PcMs yen
on Tuesday the 22nd of F^ruary ? — ^Yes.
Did he ckll alone, or in company Witb any
person ?^In company with Tidd.
As nearly as you can recollect, al What tiasi
bftbeday.'— I think it was between twneand
three o^dook.
When he called, at tbat time wifl yo« teH
us what passed ?— Y0»; I kaid I thobght I bai
lost you : he said the king's dealh taid Mida
ttn uteratiott in thefar plans. I adked llim
what plans : he said there would be a m^eiikiig^
on tbe following ev^ng, at Xybuni-tonptke,
Where I should know all the partieuMfs. ^
What did he sar fbrlher ?--^« tairaed iMbI
to Tidd, and asked wb^tber he should gi^evie
the word : and Tidd said, yes, he Mppobed
there was no danger.
Upon that, what did he sayt-^He HM me if
I saw aUT people about, I wtB*to goto dicfti
and say (, «, /, and if they wetift fsiewli ihiy
would answer f, e, n.
Making the word hci«Ai?-^Teii; Ike tbUi
said he would be at otnr house the fb'&<9Wteg
morning and tell me further pafticnlafs.
Did any thing more pass at £hat ttee^af t-^
No : he and Tidd then Went aWay.
On the followiag day did finmt call vfNA
you, on the Wednesday? — ^Yea.
About what hour? — Between four and fN«.
Did he call alone or in coinptiir|[>^AIi>ne.
Wkit did be sKyI— He cilted 'SSe d^wn
stairs.
Was any body in the room abpve staitsf>^
Yes, my mother: be teld me liewttMi'M to
go in half an hour with him. ^
What sad you Co tbat ?-^I teW^fat-I coM
not, that I had got some work to do th«t1BQlt be
finished, and that I eould ncK ^ at Itat tilde.
What did he th^ni say ?^He Ittked me whiii
time the work would be ddfae; I Ibid bim nol
before six o'dddc.
lOM]
Jm Hif^ Tktauo*,
A, 0. 1990;
[1039
I^B^n your ttUiD| bim not before six, what
did ne say to you?~{Ie said I must go to
Tidd*8 liojise» and he told me when) Tidd
lived.
Where was that ? — In the Hole»in-the-waiU
passage, Brook's-market.
After he had told you thisi did he go away ?
—Yes.
Did yooi in pursuance of the directions he
had giren you, go to Xidd's house? — Yes,
about half-past six.
Did you find him at hoae ? — ^Yes.
What did he s^ to youP — He said that h^
was waiting tot some mora men, and they had
not come ; and he said that he would not wait
later than seven o'clock.
Did any persons arrive before seven ? — No*
When seven o'dopk came, what did Tidd
do?— He went to a box in a comer of the
room, and took out a pistol.
What did he do with it P — ^H^ put it into a
belt which he had got round his body, under a
ffreat coat.
What else did he do? — He took a bundle of
pikei, I suppose about six or eight, wrapped
jn a piece of brown paper.
Fixes, or the heads of pikes ?— rTh^ heads of
inkes, about six or eight.
What did he do ivith them f — |Ie took them
in hb hand.
Did he take any thing farther? — Yes, a
staff about four feet long.
Did you take notice of that? — ^Yes, it had a
liole to receive something at the end.
Where did he then go? — He went down
stairs, and through Brook-street, into Holbpm.
Did you accompanv him ? — ^Yes, I did.
And up H^bom, i suppose ? — ^Ves.
While you were going alpng Holbom, did
lie state any thing to you, or had jron any con-
versation wilib him as to the business he vi9fi
going on ?— No, in Holbom he gave me the
•tick to cany.
Where had you conversation with him as to
ftke obiect? — ^I think as we were going along
X>xford-street.
Will yon state what that conversajtjon was?
—I asked him what we were going about, and
tm eaid I should know when we got there. I
jtfked him .whether we were going to the
liaiiist of Commons.
What did hie say ?•— He said no, there were
too many soldiers about there. J jthen asked
Iw Again, and he toM me they were going to
.GiMvenor-iquare.
(DM bo say whesa in Grosvenor-aqunnet— -
Ko, he did not. I asked bim whether any one
in particular lived tb^e, and hs Mid there was
n.oabinet diriner there that evening.
Did any thiuj; further pass f— No, I do AOt
^•ocillect any thing further.
Where did he conduct you to ? — ^To CatiO-
•Uveet.
to what pl^oe in Cato-street ?—Through a
gateway, and on the right-hand side there was
a stable.
When you got to Cato-street to the gateway.
what liappened? — There were two peoplf
standing under the gateway.
Do you know who they were ? — ^Noj^ it was
quite dark, and I did not stand close to ^m
myself} I stood a few atepa behind hiqi.
H^ he any conversation with those peov*
pie ? — Ye99 be spoke a few words to them.
After that, dul you go into the stable 7--r
Yes.
What did ypu observe on your first entrance
into the stable ? — ^There were three or four
men there, and there w^ a light, and he asked
whether Mr. Thistlewood was up stairs.
What was the .answer 7 — ^Yes, they told hli||i
he was.
Did you go up stairs P — Yes.
Was there any body in the room up stairs ?
—Yes, I suppose about one, or two, or three-
and<«tw9nty peopl^i according to what I could
tell.
Was Thistlewood of the number ? — Yes.
Was there anv table, or any tl^ipg like ft
table there ? — ^A bench.
What kind of a bench?— It seemed tp me
like a carpen^r^s bench.
Was there any thing upon it?— Yes, ^ grea^
inany swords and pistols.
Did Tidd go up stairs P — Yes.
When you got up stairs, after you were there,
¥ras any thing said as to what they were going
to do? — Yes, there was a man in a brown
great coat sitting on a low bench on the oppo-
site side from where I entered, and he spoke
abpift the impropriety o^ going with so small
a party as five-and-twenty men to Iprd Harrow-
h/s, and Thistlewood said that that number
was quite sufficient, fi))r, supposing lord H^s-
rowhy bad sixteen men servants, he only want-
ed fourteen men to go into the room, and
therefore th^t number was quitj^ si^^cient. Hp
then said what should they do when the busi-
ness was done, when they caipe out of the
room, because most likely a crowd would bp
about the door, and how should they escape.
That was the man th^t was addressing
Thistlewood ? — ^Yes ; Thistlewood said *' You
Hnoiw this is the smallef t bpdy ; — th^ largest
body is already ^way;" the prisoner David-
son then told him not to throw cold wfiter uppp
their proceedings.
To whom dia he say this ? — To tfie man in
the h9xwn coat, for if he was afiracid of his lite
he n^ight go, as tjbiey could do without him.
By Davidson do you mean the man qf
colour f— Yes; prunt tlvsn said, that sooner
than tfi€v ihoojld leave the business they werjs
going about, he would go into tCe room by
imself, and blow tjhem all up, if he penshea
with thepi ; h^ faid, ''you know we h^ve got
ihat that cap doit,*' or words tp that affect;
the man in ihe brown gresU coat said, though
he did not Ijjce going with ^ o sm^i a number,
yet as they w^ere aU for i^ he would' not be
againft.it ; he tjien proposed that they f^hould
put thepiselves under the orders of Jnr. This-
tlewood ; Thistlewood said, that every one en-
gaged in that business would have the san^
103 i] 1 GEOKGE IV.
boDoar as himself; he then proposed that the
fourteen men to go into the room should
volunteer from among the persons that were in
the room.
After Thistlewood had soproposed, what
\na done ? — A few minutes atlerwards, I sup-
pose about eleven or twelve or thirteen out of
the fourteen, ranged themselves on the other
side of the room, and one of them, Udd, came
out to speak to me to say that I might choose
my situation, and Thistlewood put lum back,
flaying, ** you all know your places." I could
not understand all that Tidd said to me, I do
not recollect any thing partictklar passing
after that, till the officers came into the room.
How soon afterwards did the officers come
into the room r — I should suppose about five
miotttes.
What happened when they came into the
room ?— There seemed to be two or Uiree got
up stairs before those in the room knew it,
and one of those said they were officers, and
told them to surrender, and sud there was a
guard of soldiers below.
Were you afterwards taken into custody in
the room ? — Yes.
And you ha?e been in confinement erer
since ? — Yes.
John Mmuunent cross-examined by
Mr. Curwood.
Mr. Thistlewood said, that every man would
liave equal honour vrith himself? — ^Yes.
What was to be your honourable post ? —
Indeed I do not know.
What led you there? was it the love of
honour f — ^No, it was fear principally that led
me there.
Wliat fear conld take you there ?~-The day
t>efore, when Mr. Brunt was at my house ac-
companied by Tidd, he said that any one that
had eneaged in that, and who did not come
forward at die time would be destroyed.
Had you then engaged ?— I had not engaged ;
he bad not asked me no further than to go to
the place.
2>0 you go to a place at the request of any
man to do you do not know what ? — ^It was
foolishy 1)Ut 1 certainly did.
You were foojish ? — ^Yes, I cannot chaise
myself with any crime.
You asked, as they were going along Oxford-
street, whether they were {oing lo the House
of Commons P— Yes.
Why did you aric that ? did you suppose
they were going there ?^I was afraid it was
something bad when I saw him take the arms.
What made you suspect they were going to
the House of Commons ?*-I do not know any
thing particular that made me suspect that.
To hear the debates perhaps ?— ^o.
He told you it was a cabinet dinner ?— Yes.
I think you used these words on Tuesday,
And then I fully understood what Ihey were
going about ?»'— Yes.
Then what did you fully understand they
Jjrere goin|; about?— I ^o not know that I said
Trial ofjamti Ingi
11033
Al
that exactly; but that I asked no further
question, because I was certain whai it was. '
What did yon then suppose they wer^
going for ? — I could not see that-thc^ could bt
going for any thing but to destroy the persons
there assembled.
And you would very readily join in any
thing df this sort ?~No, I would not.
Had you belonged to none of those meetings
before ? — To the private meeting do yo«
mean ?
Yes, to the private meetings ? — No, I did
not.
How should those wicked men come to ask
you, so honest a man, to join in this ? — ^I de
not know ; I had first seen Mr. Hustlewood at
Mr. Ford's house.
That was just after the Manchester business P
— No, about a week before the meeting in
Finsbury- market.
When was the Finsbury meeting ? — ^I cannot
say.
It was after the Manchester meeting? ^-
Yes.
Then it was that Mr. Thistlewood told yon
that he thought all his friends should have
arms ? — ^Yes.
When Brunt called upon you, yon told him
you were not ready to go because you had got
some work to do ? — ^Yes.
What took you to Tidd's if you did not
like this business ?~Becauae I was afraid.
Why did not you go to a magistrate and tell
him your fears P — ^Xhat was a thing I ahould
not like to have done.
He told you there vras a by-word, a pas»
word ?— Yes.
And you very readily agreed to go with
him ? — ^Wot very readily.
Yon expressed a great deal of reluctance?—
I cannot say I did, I was afraid to do that.
When you found yourself in a trap and
taken, then your conscience came to you, did
it P — It was to me before, for I never intended
to do anv thing, though I was obliged to go ;
when I found what Uiey were upon, my io^
tention was, when I got out, to hare got away
from them.
I think you told us of a conversation in
which Thistlewood or somebody told a man in
a brown coat, if he was afraid to join them he
might go away, for they wanted no cowards
there ?— Yes.
Why did not you take advantage of that?
— I wished, at the time, he had said so to meu
You thought it was only the man in the
brown coat thai might go P-^-Yes.
You joined Uiem from fear? — ^Yes»
You proceeded from fear? — I did not know
what their proceedings were at first.
You did it at a hazard P— I certainly actfii
ttxy foolishly.
That is very 'tender, do not you think yom
acted , very infamously ? -* No, I caimot saj
that. '
10331
Jw High Tmawii
A. D. 189a
WHQi
Thmat MomimetU sworn. — Examined by
Mr. SoUcUor-GeneraL
' I betieve the last witness is your brother ?
—Yes.
Did you know of Yonr brother having seen
Thistlewood at Ford's?— Yes, I had heard
him mention it.
Did Thistlewood afterwards call npon him
mt his lodgings T — ^Yes, he did.
Do you live with your brother ?— <Yes.
' Did Thistlewood call alone, or in company
with any person ? — He called in company with
Brunt.
Did Thistlewood and yonr brother remain
in the room all Uie time f or what occurred ? —
They remained in the room some time, I sup-
pose about ten minutes, and then Thistlewood
asked my brother if he could speak to him.
Upon Thistlewood adding this of your bro-
ther, what happened ? — They went outside the
door. .
Did they afterwards letuminto the room?
—Yes.
Do you remember Brunt calling upon your
brother, on Tuesday the 22nd of February? —
Yes.
Do you recollect the conversation that pass*
ed at that time ? — ^Yes, I do ; Brunt brought
a man of the name of Tidd with him ; when
ibey came into the room, my brother said to
Brunt, " I thought I had lost you ;'' there was
something said concerning the king's death.
By whom P— My brother, I thiok, said the
king is dead since I saw you.
Do you recollect distinctly what was said
ftbout tiie king's death ? — ^No, I cannot recol-
lect exactly ; Brunt said the king's death had
made some alteration in their plans ; my bro-
ther said ''what plan?** he said their plans
were different, they had different objects in
▼iew ; then Brant said to Tidd, '' suppose we
give them the outline of the plan :" but I do
not know whether Tidd made any answer, and
Brunt told us we were to meet up a^ Tybum-
tumpike, on the following evening at six
o'clock ; then thev give us the pass word.
What was that f — It consisted of the letters
Who were to say the letters ft, «, < ?— We
were, and if any of their party were there, they
would answer tfO,n; and by that, we should
know them.
Was that all that passed at that time, that
yon recollect } — ^Yes, they went away then.
Do you remember Brunt coming the next
day? — ^Yes, it vras near five o'clock in the
evening.
What did he say ? — He asked my brother if
he was ready to go ; he said, he could not go
jitstthen, for we were about finishing some
work ; he told him if he called upon Tidd in
llole-in-the-wall*passage, he woula take him.
What time did your brother go, ns yearly as
yoo can recollect ?— >It was within a very few
^linutes of seven o'clock, when he left off.
ypu .did not see him again that night ? — I
never saw him afterwards^ till 1 saw him in
custody.
George (Mock sworn. — Examined by
Mr. LUtUdale.
Where do yon live ?-*AtNo. 2, Cato-street^
Do you remember on the 23rd of February
last, seeing any person that attracted your at-
tention in Cato«street ? — ^Yes.
Who was it ? — Mr. Harrison.
Yon had known him before i — ^Yes, I had.
Do you see him in court ?— Yes, he is ihe
gentleman ihatis standing there [pob^kig to
the bar].
Where did you see himP — ^He was goinr
into the stable, I asked him how he did, and
he the same to me.
Did you ask him what he was going there,
for? — ^zes, he said he had taken two chambers,
and was going to clean them up.
Had you any further conversation with him ?
—No, none.
In the course of the same evening, did you
see any persons going into and coming out of
the stable?— Yes.
At what time ? — From five to seven, I saw
different persons going in and out.
Lord Chief Juttice Dallas. — There is no
doubt that persons were going in and out ; they
were found there.
Mr. SoUeUor OeneraL — It is immaterial, cer-
tainly, my lord. I will call Ruthven.
Gtorge ThamoM Jotepk Bulhven sworn. — Exai>
mined by Mr. BoUantL
You are a constable at Bow-street ?— I am.
. In consequence of information, did you go
to Cato-street on the 23rd of Februaiy with ft
party of the officers ? — I did.
At what time did yon get there?— About
six.
Where did you muster ?— The first informa-
tion I had of goine to the stable was about
half-past eight; then we mustered mt the
comer.
What time did you enter the stable?— ^
About half-past eight, as near as could be.
Whom did you observe on going in?— I
observed a man walking backwards and fbfw
wards with a gun on his shoulder, and a sword
by his side, as a sentinel.
What sort of a man was that ?— I cannot
say, for I did not stop one instant. I said to
the party with me, ** secure that man," and
went up stairs.
There was a ladder? — ^Yes.
Who proceeded with you up stairs ? — ^My-^
self, then next Ellis, and then Smithers and
Gibbs, as I have been since told, but I did
not see him.
When you got into the loft, what did von
observe?— I observed several men standing
round a bench.
What do you mean by a bench?— There
was a carpeuttt^s bench in the room.
How many men might there be in the Mom^
lOa^l ^ GBORGB IV,
M «wHj«i yoD cfuiftate^-^Abpolfionr or ftiw
aiad tweoty.
Did you perceive any thing on the bendi ?
^-Tbere -was ; I heard ^ clattering of arms,
and saw some persons apparently sorting the
anns pu the h^ndi.
Did ypQ or Ellin s^ any thing ?<^ said,
<< W« tie ottwri; m^ their anas.''
Before you got up the et«ii«9 befeie yo»
gained the loft, had mytoing heea said by
any pffrfon below ?— I am PQt Mtms of it| I
cannot «all it to my raooUeotiaii.
Upon yoQrsi^i9| this, whaldid^nyonedo?
— Thistlewood looked up, caught up a sword,
ao4 JVptired i«IO a little ivofi ; I think there
ivere Jlbree or four retiosd ifite tlit littlf rofNn
and the others into the back part.
Wm theie ft little room going out of fhe
hiqper Hioiatf^There was, pd the right of the
bench as we went up.
Lord CA%f Bflr0n.^Whidi of the two side
rooms ? — ^The further one| my lord, ne^^t tfie
street.
Mr. BMoid. — Did you know the psison of
Uikaewood 7-^1 did, well.
How long bed yon bew eoqminted with
him ? — ^From the time of the state trials before,
two or three years ago.
Where was SmlthersT — Smith^vs thep ap-
peared on my right hand.
Did you MWr BHis «f eoy ihiiig to |he
pvty ?— I did n«l.
What did Smithers doT— I9 approa^ing th^
door where Hiistlewood bad reared,
Did he then approach the doorf — Yes.
Did he |»is yon fr^He did.
Upon his appnmdiiag thatdooTf ares uny
iUk^ done by any «^ the uirties wi|hi« thai
room?— -Thistlewood ttebbed him with a fword;
ho ^mM tenoing, to pur^Ml Mgr PMMu Ap-
proaching that door.
You saw him fencing htfom 9Wthfln tp-
pooaohed him ^i-Yes, and ob his appiuafhing
bm* h« pui hii aim forward in tfaif way*
Was any thing else done from that room Jtf^
No^tttfUlsaar.
Did ym heer any thing7-^A pistol was lired
^Imm iaataatly on Smitheai being Mabbed,
aad the lights were put out*
Whei happened when daiknew cane on 7»^
I then heard nom that oonier of the room irhere
Ae little room fwas, sosnp yoice crying ^ Kill
the bi»--T*r8, ihaow them down ataim.'*
Did 4he paities keep their pngioal etafioDs
in the room, or withdraw themselsses to the end
of it r— On their saying thet^ I hewd » rash
towards Uie otaJHPcase.
Did jrov jein in that rqah f-^ did.
Did you aagr any thiagft-J did, upon Iheir
saying ^Kill the b— rs, throw diem down
stain^ I and, ^ Aye damn dunn iUttthem,''
ar ^ Ape kill Iheav'^ar soaMthingof that kind.
Did you get down the ladder .?i^ did.
When )M 001 dawn was 4hera aayliglvt in
tiie sUbleMoifli^ThMivitf wHartaiJfei
damn*
Trial ^Jmnes lugi
[1030
Where did yon then goT— I got mto John*
street and met the soldiers.
Did you return to the stiUble ? — ^I did.
Upon getting to the alabledid yoneat aiiber
of the prisoners ? — ^I did ; Tidd.
Whare did m aae Tidd r.^ saw him cam-
ing from the door.
Do you mean onW coming from the doai^ Of
eomiiig oat of tha daar ^f-iMiog out of the
door; the door wm apan» and ha was oacmg
from it*
Was he widkiog or mnnhig ^Batween the
%w% a soft of shuffle.
Had he any thing in his hand f — I did aaH
ohserfie that at that time.
What did yott dot— I caUed to lomabady
folloniqg me lo lay hold of him, and imaia-
difttely npon my spring thai be lifted hia ana,
and I saw a pietoL
Upon yow iecing thai did you aeiie him ! —
I dio ; I &Ut and puUed bim ^i^a we na Iha
dung heap.
Did the soldieni eame ap and egtrioata you ?
—They did.
Who aicukatad yoa?-r<S9i3c«nt X^egg and
some of the rnant
Did you take Tidd any where ?— I did to a
pabUobanasaalled the Sorae and Cfooni^ the
corner of Cato-stieet.
Was he sean^ed ?-i-I seaapbad him.
What did yofi fiikdnpoa him?— Two baQ
cartridges.
Where ware tbay?*r4n Us bieadias pocket
Wm h^ acoontred al aU ?T-4ie had a belt
round his waist.
Was anv oth«r prisoner brought in, wbOe
poa wens tbare F-^Ibere wet Budbnra.
Did you seaidi btmt-*I did.
What did you dnd upon hia>? — In hi«
breeches podt^el I found eia ball oartndgeiy and
three loose balls.
Was he accoutrad at aU ? — ^Roond Ins waisl
there was a string fire or six times ronnd.
Would thai string have answered the pw^
pose of a belt far a pistol F— It would-
Was any oUiar priaoner brought in ? — David*
son.
What arms did he axhtbit ?— When he came
in he began to sing a song, ** Scots wha ha' wT
Wallace bled,'' lod damned any man that
would not diain liberty's canse* that be gloried
in it.
Was he at all accoutred ?— Idid not observa
it.
Did yen leaiab |iim?^l beliava he was
aeaacbad by anathee*
Ww Wilson bro«|^ in wlula you ^a«m
there?— He was.
I do not teopr vfaethar yfu aaaiched him or
notl^I did nau
After tbifl bad Mised at ibe pnbUo^oosi^
did yon ntnm'ta flie left 7-7-1 diif.
In wbal anae was tba loft, on vom satni*^
'-^Ther^ anexa iseattsal soldieis and Isur .of the
paeoners attebar iatbeaoom> and soma of
the officeia.
I Lord Chief Jtofjce Didbi.— What happened
10673
Jhr High Treiiion*,
A^D* IMO.
tioes
wbett 9aill)iefai rtedvad Mb ihratt with the
sword f — Ha fell back and said, " Oh, my
God/' or ^ Oh, I am doiie>" 1 do not kubw
whiih«
Mr. 6oUdnd.—tie very soon died?— tRrfectly,
t heard no tnore.
When you returned to the loft, did you find
Imyanns? — ^Yes, I did.
What aftnd did you And f— Two swords.
We have now a list of all the arms which
were found, fltod by whom ; have you made an
Inventory of those arms T — ^I have.
Look at that, and say, whether it is an ac-
curate account i did you make that yourself
[handing a piper to the loiAiesi].— I did, I found
two swords and one buUet, ten hand-grenades,
fmd two fire balls.
These, you personally found ? — Yes.
Is that a list of all the things in your cnslbdy,
stating the respective places where they were
found ?— Yes.
Co on with your Hst.
Mr. AdoMun^*-itBAe the places idiere tlMBf
Were found. *^Iikewise ope lav^e oYie that I
found, and which has beet in my ciufeodj^ ef itf
since.
Mr. BottHid.'^What is that r--A dbftig €XM
with powder; it is eomelhing tiailarlo the
othen, only nraeh Im^K
Hat it a ftise to H ?<^Y^
Read that list.— Thirty^eigfat btU cattmlgM^
found by seijeaut Loll ; sfiretok and a bi^ouet,
by 'corporal StrioklaBd; one ipcwder iksk, b^
Jnaes Edgaor; tfavee pistob and o«e swm^
wiA six bi^enel spikes sHlmisftothbelt; one
blflnderbusi ; o«e ^tol; foutteen: li^eHMt
spikes and three pointed files ; one bayonet}
0tt baronet spdLe ted one sw^id ieaMard ;
ooe -carbine and bayonet:; l^vo sweids; one
bullet $ ten faaBd>«renades ; two ttre balls ; otie
Urge gmMide flM bayon A ; the onfe I spoldb
^ aiKl that was foond in Wiy pMsenoe, dnd
tbat has been in ny oastody ever sinoe ; la icfp€
hMai; one K^ord ttiok ; folrW bidl oaHndg^M^
one bayonet and three loose oalls ; tMese weitt
alHeitnd iv4heloft{ lA'die pookel df BrfadblWn,
«K balbctatridgas; three bttUs vnd soaodtring
put round him to act as a belt ; one pi^lel iial
TMd^t^'^ a pistol thai Wiladn attempted to
Lord Chief Jmiice DdUsi.— Yon had not
mentioned that Tidd fired.r— The pistol that
Tidd lifted his arm to fire he did fire, after he
was partly lying on me on the ground. There
were found in the stable, a blundeibuss; a
sword, belt, and scabb^; one pistol; one
ditto and one sword ; twelve sticks with fer-
rules : in the pocket of Tidd, two ball cart*
^ridges, and roundhim a leathern belt ■
Mf. Bol2anef.-**-Wh«t sort of sififcks w^
those ?--They are long sticks, I should Ihink
tfhc or seVdn foet loog^'perfaa]» eight, I am not
qaitiB nose; in the eno there is a hole; two-
ball cartridges found facing the stable, and ten
ball cartridges found thrown away in Newn.
ham-street: one musket cut dcTwn, and one
sword taken from Davidson : one haversack ;
cross belts; oae nrieker; bayonet scabbaird;
cartouche box, ana a belt round %is b^y^ Ihoile
were On Davideon : two havenacks ^ 6ne belt
and tin powder olee tdien froln Ingss font
pistol balls ; one pistol key, and a knife dase
from IngB : a oese to receive a large knife ;
one haversaek^ 6Mitaining sevebteen ball eact-
ridges } tbi^ ballsj One pistol flint; one
pricker; one worm for drawing etotrkigai^
one knifo MA a tmm strew* I aleo got »ifick
which was left in the public-house.
Before yow kUk the publie^bonsrwbev^ Da-
vidson and Bmdbom etpreised tfaeinaelves as
yon have stated, did WUson^bcpvessany tkingf
*^Yefe ; he said he did not caie a damti^ be
knew it was all ov«r, they flight a* well kiU
hiforaow ns another tiinow
Before yon went to the stable did ywi go I*
llm Hofse and* Oroom?*-'! didi
While you were there did either of the pin*
s6n0rs obne teite T-^-XZioopir and Oiiefeist
came in.
Had CJoepir or Gilcfatttt aay ttaog with
Ihem ^--Coofker bfll a aMk
What feoft'of n itink wae ilN^^A mopKtidt
or broomstick.
Did lie leiMe ft id *•' honib or take it«mt
with him !-^fi»leit it in the^wise.
Did yoir tiiM possMioiror iir;t--4fo« dft-
}mt^4 I did s(toi wwds» thai night» aid i>H»
it now.
Did either of Aio prisooers eonn hmit for
thAt«lMk T-*GihMst^iii.
Yo««iy k is a moptddkl^it m
is thete^aay thing pasticolu'. about it ^«*tiilr
the end it is o«t rtfnUd that deptiif lib»4isiiij^
as if td reeeive tile seohet <aimaf tmog.
6eorse l^iomat JmoA Ibahveu crois-euminet^
by Mr. AdolphM,
Yon sat ^^ ^^ ^*K P<^ ^"^ I kowWteny
liglits wete there f-^^flAsiMarly as I can- tel^
in the two rooms, about eight* I tMnb ifoMI
fohs i]fr fkf e iif the flmitioii, tMeio^ nnd' tw(^
or three in the end room where they leihii
td^ bottUsIiguemedlhna tfao.glai« of fight
ikAtnpriealied^
Vbe fourier'fiveinlheMt, or^irtftiodfl^yM
eitald sec ?^I' (Amid*
You have no doubt there were four or fif»
ligUls ?(-^I have no doubt.
The words you said were veryphyperty tMi
oomintt up ^We are dffieen; seise their
annsi*-*-ies.
Nothmgelse? did Elfis eay any Oong else f
—Not that I heaitf .
Did Smithers^sa^ eny Aing moie tiiAn ^ Let
me oome forward,^ and when he leceived ite
bl<iw, «OhmyGodr or, '^Ohl^m^dene?'^
—No.
lliose were ftll the w^idi thu paiiedf—
Yefe, all that I beaid.
1039} 1 GEORGE iV.
Jamet EUU sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. Otcnaey.
Youy I beliere, are one of the condncton of
the patrol at Bow-street ?— I am.
On the eyening of Wednesday, the 23rd of
Febmaryy did you go with other officers to a
•table in Cato-street? — I did.
Did you enter the stable close to Rathven f
— ^As close as I possibly coold enter.
Did you find a light in the stable f—There
was a light.
Did you find any men in the stable ? — ^There
were two.
'Where was the man standing whom yoa
obserted first? — ^The first man I observed was
standing aboat half-way between the door at
which we entered, and the foot of the ladder
whidi goes up into the loft.
Is that ladder placed at the fiirther end of
the stable ? — ^At the further end, in the Teiy
comer, opposite the door at whidiwewent
in.
VHu) was that man ?^I belieTc him to be
Davidson.
The man of colour ?— Yes ; I look him by
the collar, and turned him half round, and
looked in his fiu^e, and I beliere him to be
Davidson.
How was he accoutred? — He had got a
short gun. or carbine, in his hand, cari3ring it
In somewhat of this manner [de9artbmg ir], and
at Us left-hand side a long sword banging, and
two white belts across his shoulden. .
- You say you took him by the collar, and
turned him half round? — Yes, and I looked in
hts foce, and saw he was a man of colour ; I
immediately d^red some of the others who
were with me to secure that man.
Did you observe any other man?— Yes,
there was another man in the further stall of
the stable, near the ladder; he appeared to be
a shorter man.
How was he dressed ? — ^I believe he had got
A dark coloured coat on, but I tock but Teiy
little notice of him.
Did you follow Ruthven up the ladder? —
I did.
Did you hear Davidson say any thing to (he
Eirsons above ?— I heard somebody from bfr>
w call out something — ** men,'* the last word
was ^ men,'' but I could not understand the
jrest.
Did you understand it to be a signal to those
above ? — ^I did.
You say you followed Rulhven up the lad-
der, who followed you ?— Richard Smithers.
As ^ou ascended the ladder, did you hear
any noise in the lofl ? — I did.
Wliat did you hear ? — I heard a noise, which
appeared to me to be a rattling of swords.
' When you got up the ladder who then
spoke ? — Ruthven.
What did he say to the best of your recol-
lection?—He called out, '<We are officers,
seize their arms," or, •'we are officers, sur-
render your arms," or to that efiect.
Trial of James lags
[1040
Were tfiere lights in the toft?— Yes, there
were.
What were they ?— •There were candies.
How many do you remember seeing ? — I ear
positive there were three or more, but I can-
not speak to how many there were ; there were
three lights or more in the loft; there were
lights in the little room, from the shade vrhich
I saw, but I could not see what lights they
were.
Where were those candles placed? — Ap«
parently on the carpenter's bench whidi stood
across the room.
Upon Ruthven, and yourself, and Smithers
getting into the loft, what did you observe
take place ? — ^The moment I gained the top of
the ladder, I observed a number of men fall-
ing back to the back pert of the loft, with their
backs to the wall, placing themselves against
the wall.
Did you see Thistlewood ? — I did.
What did he do ? —There were Thistlewood,
and two or three others between the end of
the carpenter's bench, and the door of the
little room ; and immediately on my gaining
the top of the laddd^, Tliistlewood presented
his sword at me, and shook lus hand in this
manner, as if to make a stab. I immediately
desired him to desist, or I would fire at him.
Had you a pistol in your hand ? — ^I had a
pistol in my rignt hand, and my truncheoo or
staff in my left hand, which I held out iu this
manner [de$cribmg Uy
Upon that what did Thistlewood do? —
Upon that he retreated, backing into the Uttle
room, through the little door ; at that moment
Smithers having gained the top of the ladder,
rushed forward to enter the door of the little
room.
What did Thistlewood do upon his approach-
ing the door P— At the moment that he reach*
ed the jamb of the door, Thistlewood made a
thrust and stabbed him in the right breast.
Upon Uiat what did Smithers say or do?—
He held np his hands in this way oyer his head,
and exdaimed, ^'Oh my God r' or words of
that kind.
Did he &11 immediate afterwards P— He
fell almost immediately, he staggersd past ase
and fell.
Upon this what did yon do?— At the mo«
ment that he threw up his hands and exdairn*
ed << Oh my God T 1 fired.
At whom ? — At Thistlewood.
You fired your pistol? — ^I did.
As soon as you nad done that, what became
of the lights? — ^The lights were all put out ihe-
moinent that I fired, the flash of my own
pistol was the last light I saw.
I presume great confusion took place imme-
diately ? — ^Tbere was a great confusion.
Were you forced down the ladder into the
stable ?— By the rush made against me I was
thrown down the ladder.
Were there any other shoU find?—Ther»
were several fired in the lofl while I was upon
the ladder.
104i] J^ High Treason,
bid you get to th^ Abor of the stable?—
'Upon recovering myself in the stable I got to
the door.
Were any shots fiVe'd then ? — ^There \vere fwo
or three shots filled then; two, I think, passed
mb hi the door.
• From whence do you think they were fired ?
■ — I cooJd not dfetinctiy tell. '
Did you perceive any fired from the window
of the little room? — ^There was another shot
fired in the stable by a man who stood near ttte
bottom of the ladder; he fired up the manger.
Wh^n yon got to the door did you observe
anyfiring from the window of the room above P
— ^There were some shots fired from the win-
doi^ of the little room above.
That room looks into Cato-street ? — It does.
• While you were at that door did you observe
any ihan in Cato-street ? — I heard the ciy of
^* IStop him/' and I observed a man running away.
Was he runirtrtg down Cato-street ?— Yes,
running towards Queen-street.
' What did ybd observe upon himf— I ob-
served he had got white belts. i
• Ob yon mean cross beljs P — ^Yes.
• Did Von pursue him ? — I pursued him.
bid you catch him T—^I caught him in C&to-
st^eet.
Whom did he turn out to be t — Davidson,
the man of colour.
\5p6t your laying hold of him what did he
do to you ? — He made something of a cut with
bift swbrj.
too yda mean a cut at you ? — I believe it
Was intended at me.
Did any other persons come up and assist
Jroti in sfecuring bini ?— Yes, they did.
Who were they ?— One of out people of (he
t»xDe bf t>lll, and another of thig name of
Chapman. .
' Did Vou Icftve him in the 'cust(5dy of your
liroth^bfircerS, and return to the stable T—|
did, as soon as I had secured him I returned
as quitk §S p<5sslble.
Did you. then find lieutenant Fitzclar^nce
ind the Soldiers there ?— I found the soldiers
ftere. t do not kfa6# whether lieUtienant Fitz-
6Tamit<6 wfui ill th&.pMce.
Did you find any of the prisoners who hsfd
HeAi tidcetf tit ibfe lof^ or the stable ?— There
were four men ; they were not in actual tus-
tody, but they could do do harm ; they were in
the loft among the soldiers. •
Who were they ? — I cannot speak very po-
sitively; Monument was one, and I believe
WiUoh was another, I think Strange was an-
other^ but I am not positive.
I believe you fetched Davidson to the loft ?
— As soqn as they were secured I fetched him
hiftf th(£ loft fd (hem.
. Then they were taken away to Bow-street ?
— Tes.
•I WUUam WtOcoatt sworn.— Eounhined by
Mr. Gufntg.
Tdb' arS aU o a conductor of (he patrol at
Bow-^reet? — lam.
VOL. XXXIII.
A. D. 18^. I*^b4&
• • •
Lord Chief Justice DMti. — Are you gbfng ta
fresh facts?
Mr. G»rw^.— Yes, my lord, I am.; did yon
accompany Ruthvcn and Fllis and the other
officers of Ihe stable in Cato-street ? — I did.
Yon, I believe, did not go up into the loft
at first ? — No, I did not.
When they had gone up did you hear any
noise of firing, or any confusion above ? — I did.
Did you observe any person in the stable ?
-^I did.
Whom did you observe? — Ings.
Tlie prisoner Ings ? — Yes.
At the first moment that you observed him
what wis he doing or attempting to do ? — I did
not see him attempt to do any thing ; he rushed
towards me as if attempting to get out of th^
stable. . "
What did you do? — I seized him by the
collar.
And did what? — And shoved him back
against the wall, at the foot of the ladder. •
What did he then do ? — He went to put his
hand of his right side ; upon that I hit him a
blow.
As you thought to get a weapon ? — Yes.
Upon that you hit him a blow ? — Yes, upon the
right side of the head, and knocked him down^
then they came tumbling down the ladder.
Then the officers came tumbling down the
ladder? — Yes, they did.
Did you hear the firing above ? — O yes.
After you had heard that firing above, and
they had tumbled down, did you see the fiash
of any pistol any where?—! did, from the
bottom of the ladder.
. Where did it appear to you "that pbtol was
fired into 7 — A s it appeared to me, it was fired
int6 the stable.
Did you then observe any person come down
whom you knew ? — I did.
Where was that? — When the man came
from the ladder into the stable, I saw it waa
Thistle wood.
Did that appear to you to be Ihe man .who
bad fired that pistol ? — Me did.
What did Thistlewood do ? — When he came
into the stable he tiiined round and presented
a pistol to my head, but I released Ings, and I
put n)y hand up to save myself, aiid the ball
came here [poirUi?'ig to his arm].
Did the pistol go off? — Yes it did ; t put,
my hand up to save my bead, and found my-'
self wounded.
Did the pistol go off? — ^Yes, it did.
You left Ings to protect yourself? — Yes. ^
You found a pistol presented at you and it
went off f— Yes.
And weiil where ? — I found it had wounded,
niy hand, and there were three holes in my
hat, and one on tlie right side did not come
through. I received then a violent blow on the
right side of my headr ^^^ I ^^^^'
Did il hurt your hand ?— Yes.
Did it perforate the sleeve?— Yes, it went'
right through.
And through the ha"(? — Tes.'
3X
* * ■•
10481 ^ GEORGE IV.
As yoa fell did you observe Thistlewood do i
any thing? — He immediately cut at me with a
sword.
And what did he do then ? — He rushed out
at the stable door.
I omitted to ask you whether when Ruthven,
ElliSy and Smithers went up the ladder, you
heard either of them say any tning to the persons
in the loft ?— 'I heard somebody say something,
but who it was I cannot say : I heard some-
body say something, but I cannot say what.
A Juryman* — What became of Ings when he
knocked you down ? — He made his escape out
of the stable.
When you raised your arm to ward off the
blow that was aimed from a musket or pistol,
by Thistlewood, you let Ings go? — Yes.
And he made bis escape ? — Yes.
Luke ifixon sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Qumey,
Are yoa a Bow-street patrol? — Yes.
Did you go with the other officers to this
stable in Cato-street? — Yes, I did.
Did you see Westcoatt in conflict with any
person there in the stable ? — ^Yes.
With whom?— With that man there.
Which, Ings r— Yes.
Did you see Ings leave the stable ? — I did,
I made a snatch at him to catch him, but missed
him.
Was that after Thistlewood had got away ?
—No, I do not think he had got away then.
You made a snatch at him to catch him ? —
Yes, and he got out; 1 ran after him up John-
street, but he was got so far.
Did you meet him in custody.'— As I was
going up John*street, I heard a pistol fired, or
something of that kind.
You heard a pistol fired ? — Yes.
Did you find nim in custody of any persons ?
— I found him in the custody of Brooks and
Champion.
Joieph CAoinpiofi sworn.— -Examined
by Mr. Solkiior General,
You are one of the Bow-street patrol? —
Yes.
Did yott go to this place, Cato-street, on the
erening of Uie 23rd of February P — Yes.
Do yoa remembV* Ruthven going into the
stabler— I do.
Did you follow hi^ to the foot of the
ladder } — I was about the sixth or seventh man
behind him ; I was at the foot of the ladder
when he was at the top.
Whom did you see at the bottom ?-^Ings.
Did he cry out any thing? — He held up his
head towards the top of the ladder, and said,
* * Look out, look out above/'
Was any attempt made at that time to
secure him, that you know of? — Yes ; West-
coatt was at that time in front of him, en-
deavouring to secure him.
Do you know whether he made his escape ?
-*Ite did ; I turned to the top of the ladder,
Trial of James Ings
[1044
and as I was going up I saw . the lower part of
a man's body in the rack. I proceeded ink-
mediately to strike him on the legs, and
endeavoured to force him back, and when I
tamed round, Ings was gone.
You heard Ings cry out, and went up the
ladder part of the way, you heard a contest
with Westcoatt, and Ings made his escape ? —
Yes.
Was be afterwards taken into custody?—*
He was.
Where ? — In the Edgware-road.
Did yon go to the spot? — Yes, I laid hold
of him immediately after the watchman.
You found him m custody, and Brooks was
one of the persons who had him in cnstody ? —
Yes.
Did you search him? — We took him to
Mary-le-bone watch*house, and searched himu
What did you find upon him P — ^Four pistol
ball:}, the key of a pistol, and a knife-case made
of blue cloth.
What kind of knife, small or large ? — ^Pretty
large.
Hare you seen the knife produced here tbv
other day ? — ^Yes, I have, it fits it exactly. •
There was no knife about him ? — ^No, not al
the time we searched him.
The knife-case fitted the botcher's knife that
was produced the other day ? — ^Yes.
Had the knife any wax-end about the
handle?— It had.
In addition to that did you find any thing
else about him, any bags ? — Brooks did ; I
saw them taken from his person ; he took his
great coat off, and there were two baversadLSt
one under each arm, and in one there was a
tin case nearly full of loose powder; he had
idso a cloth bdt round his body, with pistol
hobters.
In addition to the haTcrsacks there was a
cloth belt round his waist ? — ^Yes, wbich Brooks
took firom him.
Was that adapted to receire pistols?— It
was.
Was that all that was found upon him that
you know of P— There was a paoer relating to
some club, which I believe Brooks returned to
him.
Mr. SolkUar Genera/.— Do yoa ask this wiu
ness any qaestions?
Mr. Adobkm^Vo.
John Wright sworn .^-Examined by
Mr. Solidtor general.
You also are one of the Aow-street patrol?—^
Yes.
Were you at this stable on the 23ni of
February r-^-Yes.
Did you go to the foot of the ladder ? — ^Yes^
I did.
Whom did yon see at the foot of the ladder P
— I saw a man in the further stall in the stable.
Do you know whether or not it was the
prisoner at the bar, Ings P— I do not.
Was it a man of about the same size
About the same size.
10451
for High Treason.
A. D. 1820.
11046
Did you take any thiDg from him ? — I took
B knife and a sword.
What kind of knife was it you took from
him P — A butcher's knife.
Was there any thing twisted round the handle?
i— Wax-end tied round it.
What kind of sword ? — A sword about three
feet long, with a brass handle, and a piece of
string tied round it.
After this what happened to yon?— I re-
ceived a blow, and was knocked down, and
Kceived a stab in my side.
Lord Chief Jmtke Dallas.— Yon did not
know the man.
Mr. SoUcitcr General, — No, but he says he
was a roan in point of size like the prisoner.
Mr. Justice BkAardson, — And standing in a
sUll at Ike foot of the ladder?
Witness. — In the further stall.
Mr. Solicitor General^^You say you were
knocked down, and had a stab in your side ;
after you recovered did you find that roan
gone ?— Yes.
. Mr. Solicitor GeneraL'^l shall not ask the
witness as to the rest, I onlv ad;: as to that which
affects the prisoner at the oar ; did you search
Wilton ? — Yes, I searched Wilson.
What did Wilson say r— He said nothiug
particular^
WiUiam Charles Brooks sworn. — Examined by
t Mr. Solicitor GeneraL
Were you one of the Bow- street patrol ?~
Yes.
Were you in Cato-street? — No, in John-
street.
What did you perceive in John-street?
-—I saw tlie prisoner Ings running up the
street, and when I crossed the street, there was
another of my partners with a cutlass, and I
tiad a pistol, and when I got on the road, he
fired at me.
Fired at whom ?~He fired at me, he told me
he would shoot me.
Did the ball strike you ?— Yes, I snatched at
the pistol, and the powder scorched my hand,
tbe nail went through the wrist of my great
coat, through the collar of that coat, and
tlirodgh the shoulder of my waistcoat, it bruit-
ed my shoulder about the space of half^a-crown,
and went out at the back I believe.
What was the effect of that ?— It staggered
me to the right.
Did he run on ? — No, he came into the road
to avoid my partner, I suppose, and ran into
the £dgware-road, and flung the pistol away.
Wa2i there a watchman there?— A little mr-
ther on there was.
• What was his name ? — Moay.
' Did he take him f~He laid hold of him just
did.
Did you ever lose sight of him ?— No, I was
iibt further from him than I am to that gentle-
jnan [a yord or two].
You still pursued him P — Yes.
And between you he was taken? — Yes.
After you had taken him, what conversation
passed between you? — I said to him, vou
rascal, why did you fire at me, a man you had
never seen before ? he said, to kill you, and I
wish I had done it.
Did he say any thing more? — He repeated
it, both to my partner and to the soldiers, he
told one of the soldiers so afterwards.
William Lee sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gumey.
Are you one of the Bow-street patrol ?—
Yes.
Did you go to the public house, the Horse
and Groom, in the evening, before the officer*--
went to the stable? — ^Yes.
Did you observe any persons in the Horse
and Groom, who were afterwards taken ? — ^No,
I did not.
Did vou see Cooper and Gilchrist there ?—
I saw them go in there.
Were they taken that night among the per-
sons there? — ^They were.
And taken to Bow-street ? — ^Yes.
UeuUnmt Frederick Fitzclarencef sworn. —
Examined by Mr. BoUand,
1 believe you are a lieutenant in his ma-
jesty*s Coldistream regiment of guards f — I
am.
Were you, on the 23rd of February, applied
to by the Magistrates of Bow-street, to go to
Cato-street ? — I was.
Did you take a picquet with you? — I did.
What time did you arrive there ? — ^A few
minutes after eight.
What ume was it that you entered the
stable ?— I should think three or four minutes
after eight.
What did you observe? — ^The first thing I
saw, going under the gateway leading into
the street, was a police officer, who cried out
" soldiers I soldiers 1 stable doorl stable door I"
I went on and met two persons coming out of
the door-way ; one of whom presented a pistol
at me, I am not sure that it was a pistol, but
he presented something at me, at the same
time a sword made a cut at me, which I par-
ried and seeing the body of soldiers coming
up, he ran into the stable ; I followed him, and
the moment I got into the stable, 1 ran up
against a man, who surrendered himself saying,
'* do not kill me, and I will tell you all;'' I gave
him over to the picquet, and went forward
into the stable, where I went up into one of
the stalls, and took another man out, whom
I delivered over to the picquet, also ; I then
led my men up the steps into the loft.
Lord Chief Justice Dallas,— -There was only
room for one at a time ? — No.
You headed your men? — ^Yes; the first
thing I trod over was the leg of poor Smithert,
and in ascending the steps, I saw three, orfoor^
or five persons in th« room ; tlie light aftcN
wards went out.
1047] 1 GEORGE IV.
Did yoa see anj arms in Uie loft ?— A large
quantity.
^at description of arms?— One blunder-
buss, or more, swords, pistols, pikes.
Were any arms pick^ up in the stable be-
low ? — ^Ycs, there were.
They were delivered OTer by your directions
to the soldiers?— Yesy the soldiers took them
away.
Serjeant WUUam Le^ sworn.— Examined by
Mr. UUkd4de,
Trial qfJMmn Ings
[104f
I believe you are a serjeant in the second
Coldstream guards ? — Yes.
Did you go along with the party that was
commanded by lieutenaDl Fitzclarence in
Cato-street ? — Yes,
In consequence of any intimation that you
had, did you direct your party to advance
quicker than they bad, in double quick time t
—Yes, in double quick time.
Did you get to the gateway which is near a
public house, on the left-hand side of the
street ? — Yes.
Just before then had you heard the report
of pistols? — Yes.
Did you perceive a man standing with his
back against the wall, by the suble in Cato-
street ? — Yes.
liad he a pistol in his hand ? — Ye&
Did he level it ?— He levelled it at lioutenant
Fitzclarence.
Did it go off or was it turned away ?— It
vas turned away by my pike.
Did the pistol go off?— I then seized the
pistol with my left hand, and a scuffle ensued
between the prisoner and me
Who was the prisoner ? — ^Tidd.
Did the pistol go off?— Yes» after sOme
time.
In whose hand ?— In both hands : I had.
bold of the trigger at the time it went off.
1 believe it tore your coat ?— Yes, it did.
I believe you afterwards delivered Tidd to
the police ? — Yes,
lUve you got the pistol still ? — ^Yes, tb«
pistol is here*
Mr. Qttmey. — It will be produced among
the other things.
Mr. Ii</ferfc&.— What other prisoner did
you take ? — I took no other t after going up,
in the loft I saw three others who had surren-
dered.
Whom did you see in the loft ?— Cooper,
Momiment, and Gilchrist.
Samuel Hercules TaunUm sworp. — Examined,
by Mr. SolicUor Generfll.
I believe you belong to the public office at
Bow-street ? — Yes, I do.
Did you on Thursday morning, the 24th; of
February, go to Brunf s lodgings'? — I did.
Did you see Brunt there ?— I did, and ap-
prehended him.
Did you search the apartments which are
bccupied by him ? — I did, but found noihing;^
in the front room.
Did yoa aeaich the apttEtBaits that were
occupied by him ? — I did*
There you found notbiiig ^--NothiDg.
Having searched those apartments, did yoi|
go into the back room ? — I did.
What did you find in the.back room ?•— Two
rush baskets.
Were they both done up? — Both packed
up, one tied up in an apron.
What ooloujT, Uue ?— Blue.
Did you ask Brunt about those bas^els ? — \
did- ^ , .
What did you ask him?— When I went into
the room there was notliiiig jn tke room but
two baskets and a pike handle.
Did you ask Brant anything about those
baskets ? — ^I did.
What did you ask him ? — ^He said he knew
nothing of them.
Were the baskets present at the tiiiie yo«
asked him that question?— I brought the
baskets out into the other room.
You asked him what was in the bas^eta ^—
Yes.
And he said he knew nothing about them!
—He knew nothing about tliem.
Did yoa afterwJds open the baskets ?— Yes,
I did.
When you opened the baskeU what did yoik
find in them.?— Nine papers of lope-yan, and
tar, ao4 other ingredients in Mparate pap«s.
Were they calculated easily to take fire?— t
Yes, I think they were j I tried some in the
fire, and it burnt.
Besides this, what else did yoa find in the
l)aakets ?— There were some steel filings.
Were there any hand-grenades? — ^Y^es, there
were.
How many ? — ^Ten, I think grenades.
What else were there ?-— Three papera of
rope-yarn, and other ingredients.
Having that paper in your hand, read what
was contained in one basket, and what was
contained in the other ?— Nine papers of rope-
yarn, and tar and other ingredients, some sted.
filings, in one basket ; in the second basket
there were four grenades, three papers of rope-
yarn, tar, and other ingredient^, two bags of
powder, one pound each.
What kind of bags were these ?—WTiile-
flannel bags.
; About SIX inches long?— Abqut six indies
i long, or rather longer.
And contained gunpowder ? — ^Yes. ;
Were there any flannel bags that had no
powder in them ? — ^Five flannel bags empty.
Of. the. same form ? — Of the same sort.
Any thing else ?— One small paper of gunr»
Eowder^ one leatlier bag containin^sixty-threej
alls.
Leaden balls, bullets ?— BuUet? ; that is. the.
whole that was contained ip.the<secon4V?^ai^
Did. you fiod any thln^ els^ ij^ thetTOoaa/r-
One iron pot.' i
Did it ]wpear that t\iat iro^^pot. l^a^.^. ^
boifed!^ in. it ?— Yjes, ▼erV; re<»ntly, ; aadj oijej.
i pike handle I ibimd in the a^^iQO%
1
10491
fgrHig^ X^f^fWh
Was therea fivnle at tb«^ aa4 in4i a
aock^t ? — V^ these wa«.
A rough stick ?— Yea.
Was £41 all that you found sU the lodgiogi
^t Brunt's ?— That ^as all.
Did you afterwards go to Hole-ia-tiie»waU
passage to TiddV?— Yes, I did..
How soon afterwaids f — It might be three
quarters of an hour, or an hour after ; it was
about nii^e o'clpck in the^ morning; 1 waa at
Tidd's.
Did yon search Ui^se lodgings \ — I did*
What did. you $nd these, haye you got % Ijat
of thpm ? — X es.
Aead them in ocdex?*^Four hundred and
thirty-four balls, in a haversack. On^ huo*
died and seventy-one baU cartridges.
Loose were they? — Loose; Sixty-nine baU
cartridges without powder f a brown paper
parcel with three poonds of gun-powder ; in
a brown paper, these was tea grenades : eleven
bags of gun-powder, one pound each.
Were the oags constructed in the same way
'as the flannel bags that you found at Brunt's ?
—Yes, the very same.
About six inches long f — ^Rather longer.
With a. pound of gun-powder i^ eaph? —
Yes.
Any bags of the same description empty ? —
Ten flannel bags empty; a small linen bag
with powder, a powder-flask with some gun^
powder in it; sixty eight balls.
By that you mean bullets, I suppose ? — Yes*
Four ftiqts, and twenty-seven pike-handles.
Were t])e pike-handles of Ihe same descrip-
tion as you have already m9ntioqed?-r-Tne
very same.
Rough sticks, fouc or ihre feet long ?— lYi^s.
With sockets at the end for a pike ?— Yes.
Did you find any box there ?— i found a box
containing nine hundred and sixty-five ball-
cartridges.
Was that all that you found at Ttdd's P—
That was all I found.
Samuel Bercukt Taunton cross-examined by
"NLr, Adalpkus*
There has been a person named Palin men-,
tioned in the course of this cause ; have you
made any seanch after him ? — ^Yes, we have.'
There is a le^e reward of 500/. for appre-
hending him? — Two hundred pounds reward.
Palin and Cook ; have you. searched after
them too ?
Mr, Solicitor General. — Haive ypu personally
searched after them ? — Not I. I haye not.
Mr. Adolp/uu. — ^Has search been- made aflUHr-
them by the ofiicers? — I do not know what- the
magistrates might have ordered.
Samuel EercuUi Taunion re-examined by
Mr. ScikUarOenefaL
Atows^ Wfi&oiMred foe. Palin T-tRYei^
Has he absconded in conseqviva^ ofi tlK^
pa^ he took in t^is trf^^sactip^i ?— Yes«
Mr. Oirupp^-^Uphikuti^o^aii^ thc^ is 1^
Mr« iSWM^ Gemral.'^V^ lewurd vva^ to
apprehend him for the p^rt he tpfk^ ia Ihili
business ? — ^X^s, it was.
Dante/ Bithop called.
Mr. G«m^.-<-It is necessary now to predafi^
the things found at Tid^\ andalsp at BmnCs^
apd ijs Cato-street.
Mr. Curwood, — It is candle light, it vrtU do'
in the morning.
Lord Chirf 3,u4¥s^ IktUof.-^ V^yifi* you, no
other witness ?
Mr. GifTfiey. — Only one or two ; tlwic ovft«t
dence will be very shprt; we wiU produce
them in ^e morning.
ford Chief JuUice DqUas, — Gentlemen, it is
quite impossible to conclude to-night; we,
must now adjourn to nine to-morrow morning.'
S Adjourned to to-morrow morning, niQ^
ock.]
Jiimes Ipg^. was, sfii to the bar ; and Jbhn
Thomas. Qroat, J^cbard Tidd^ WiUnm!
Davidson,^ James William. Wilson, Johx^
Harrison, ' Ridiard Bradbum, John Shaw
Strange, James Gilchrist, and Charles Cooper
weva placed at the bar behindu
Baniel Bi^qp sworn. — Examined hj
Mr. Gtfmey.
Did you apprehend. ArUiiirThisllewood?*^
I did, on the i4th of Febniaiy^
At what time of the day f — Between ten and,
eleven in thetforenpon.
Where did you find him? — J^i Vo» 8^ White-,
street) Little Moorfi.elds*
Wa9 t^^t hif owQ imdm^ Qi tlie^hp|iee:ofi
another person ?--Tha apartmemfs- ofi a» Mia*.
Harris.
I believe he lived in Stanhop^^reet^ Glaafrtf
market? — He did.
Did you find .hini up, . or. in bed ?<— In .bed* *
With any part of his clothes on^— Ub^
breecbea ana stockjnga.
Upon yoiM^ opeoing'tha doQr of the ipom im
which he was m bed, what took place ?^II#<
juat held up his head..
i[rpm under what'/-r-FrQm.^p4te th^* bedn:
clothes. I had got a pistol in one hand, apd a\
staff ii^ the othar^. I immediately threw: myself
op the bed upon him j L said, ** Mr* Xhistie««
vcood> my name is Bishoj^ aJBoFHrtrfielattcaiv
I have a warrant against yom^
Apd he surrendered f— He. satd»/' I shaU(
in^. no. rjesis^s^ce*"'
Were his coat and- waistcoat: by^ the bed^ ,
side^-rrlJif^.weEe.
VMy^iKL^^ anyj thing to the>poolcet qC thd«.
wai«|Qpati?-rJ[Qi thia pocM. of . thotaMiitcoatl
foimdf ttifee ImAnh balli» a^ balltearUidge^ %
blank cartridge amd? two flints^ audi a amaU
1051] 1 GEORGE IV.
You took him into custody, and took him to
low-ttreet P-^I did.
Daniel Bishop cross-examined by Mr. Adolphut.
How did you 6nd out where he was ? — It
'^ras in consequence of some information that
was handed to me and my brother officers.
Information that he was not at his own house
but was there ? — Yes.
Was that information from your brother of-
ficers ? — No, it was not.
< Was it from a Mr. Bdwards T — ^No.
Mr. Gumey. — I should have objected to that
question.
' Lord Chief Justice I>a//ai.~Tbat is not a
proper question.
Witness. — ^I do not know a person of that
name.
Mr. Adolphus, — I should not hare asked it if
I had considered it irregular ; but the moment
your lordship gives that intimationi I stop.
Lord Chi^ Justice Dallas.^U these questions
are to be asked it will break down all rules.
' Mr. Ado^phm. — I submit, my lord, to the
intimation of your lordship's opinion.
George Thomas Joseph Ruthven called again. —
Examined by Mr. Qumey.
Are there now placed upon the table the
things which were taken in Cato-street-— Yes.
You gave us an enumeration yesterday of
thirty-eight ball cartridges, firelock and bayo-
net, one powder flask, t^ree pistols, and one
sword, with six bayonet spikes, and cloth belt,
one blunderbuss, pistol, fourteen bayonet
spikes, and three pointed files, one bayonet,
one bayonet spike^ and one sword scabbard,
one carbine and bayonet, two swords, one
ballet, ten hand-grenades ; I do not see them ?
«-^Here they are f m a hag\
We must have them on the table, \jhey
were emptied out,"]
There is one hand-grenade much larger than
the rest ; that is what you call the large hand-
grenade ?-*Yes.
Show the jury the fuse to it ? [if was shown
to the Jwyj] — There are some iron spikes
tucked in.
Hand one of the small hand-grenades to
the jury with a fuse ? [it was handed ta the
j'^y-l
Are there any fire balls there ? [one was
shown to the jury] — I will give you an account
gentlemen, by another witness, of the compo-
sition of these, I observe here are some bayo-
nets with screws at the end, and some sharp-
ened files with screws at the end ? — ^There are
[^h^ toere shown to th^tHy,"],
Irodttcethe pike staves? — [they were pro-
duced.] Take one of the pike staves from the
rest, and show the adaptation of it, [Ihe wit"
ness screwed in one of the pike heads\. They are
all made to receive a screw t— Yes.
Have they a ferrule at the top ?— They have.
Trial ^Javus Ingt
riosi
Will you produce the belt and the knife-
case found upon the prisoner 7 \ihey were pro^
dueDd!\ Hand that knife with the knife-case
and the belt to the jury : you observe, gentle-
men, the knife-case and the belt are of the
i same cloth.
Jngs. — ^The knife was not found upon me,
my lord.
Mr. Gumey. — ^You observe the handle of
the knife, gentlemen, is bound round with
wax-end ? lit was shown to the jury.] — ^Wbere
are the two naversacks that were found upon
the prisoner ? [they were handed to the jury.\
Show the jury the brass-barrelled blunderbuss,
ft* was shown 4o the jury.]— '"Which were the
rike staves found inCato-streett—The bundle
have just shown.
. John Hector Morison called again. —
£xumned by Mr. Gumty.
In whose service are you? — Mr. Henry
Underwood*s, in Drury-laue.
You have spoken to a sword having been
brought you by the prisoner to sharpen? —
Yes.
Is that one of the two swords which the
prisoner brought to yon ?— Yes, this is the first.
What were the instructions you had par-
ticularly respecting sharpening that sword? —
To grind and set it from the heel to the point,
and to f^arpen the point particularly on both
sides, as sharp as a needle, he said.
And it IS sharp P — Yes; since I ground it, it
appears to have been rubbed upon a stone to
help the keenness of the edge.
Samuel Hercules Taunton called again. —
Examined by Mr. Gtmey.
Have vou there the things which you found
at Brunt^s room ? — I have.
Produce them distinctly ? — ^This Imsket oodh
tains nine papers of rope-yam, tar, and other
ingredients.
A Juryman, — ^They appear to be the same
kind of things ; they are what are called illo-
mination balls.
Witness. — ^There are also some steel filings.
Mr. Giirney. — Now produce to us the things
out of the basket covered with the blue apron I
— ^These are flannel bags full of gunpowder;
there are also some empty [prodwang them].
A Juryman. — There is powder in those
bags, lliere is. [One rf the hags was opened^
and the contents shown to the jury].
Mr. Gumey. — The bags contain one pound
each, I believe ? — ^Yes.
Are there four hand-grenades f — There are
[they were handed to the jury],
A Juryman. — ^There appears to be nails in
all dif'ections.
Mr. Oumey. — We will call a witness who
will give an account tif their x;ontents« Will
1053^
Jii* High Treatofti
A. D. 1820.
[1054
yoifr produce the pike^haodle which was fonnd
there ? [ii wa» produced.] Is that filed at the
end so as to receive a pi£e?— Yes, and it has
a ferrule oq.
You spoke of an iron pot, that had an ap-
pearance of melted tar. [it wat produced^] Is
there tar in the bottom ? — ^There is.
You found also sixty-three bullets ?^I did;
here they are. [jproducmg them\.
They are in a leathern bag or pouch? —
They are.
Produce the things which you found at
Tidd's lodgings : those were found the same
morning, the Thursday morning ? — Yes.
You stated that in a haversack there were
434 balls ; 171 ball cartridges, and 69 without
powder, [the wUneu produced the some. J There
were three poundsV>fguopowder ?— There were.
\jprodudng them\, '
You have opened that paper? — I have, and
it contains gunpowder.
Mr. Gumey. — It shall be opened for your
inspection, if you wish it, gentlemen.
Foreman of the Jury, — No, it is not neces-
sary.
Mr. (jurm*-^ Produce the coarse canvass
cloth, and the grenades you found in it;
eleven bags of gunpowder of a pound each ;
ten empty bags ; a small bag with a powder
flask with some powder?— -Yes.
Those are flannel bags of the same descrip-
tion as the other ?^ Yes, they are.
The full and the empty are all of the same
description ? — ^They are.
You found there, also, twenty-seven pike-
handles ? — I did.
Are they of the same description as the
others ? — ^They are,
Mr. Gumey, — You observe, gentlemen^
they are all ferruled, and filed to receive pikes ?
T-They were all of them ferruled, but with
the greenness of the wood some of the ferrules
have since dropped ofi*.
Produce the box you found with the ball
cartridges [U wa$ produced]. There are 065
ball cartridges in that box, are there ? — There
They are in parcels of how many? — ^In
parcels of five.
George Thomas Joseph Rutkoen, called again.
—Examined by Mr. Gvmey.
There is one question I omitted to ask yon :
were those fire arms found at Cato«8treet,
loaded ? — ^They were most of them : there were
one or two of them fired off.
Most of them you found loaded ? — Yes.
, They were drawn last Monday? — Yes.
Lord Chief Juetke Dallas. — ^Ask him whe-
ther those which were not loaded, appeared to
have been recently fired off.
Mr. Gumey, — ^Did those which were not
loaded appear to have been recently dis-
charged ? — I did not examine that.
Were those that were loaded, loaded with
ball?— They were. .
Serjeant JEdu)ard Hanson sworn. — Examined
by Mr. Gumey.
I believe yon are a seijeant in the Royal-*
artillery ? — ^Yes.
Have the goodness to look at those fire-balls,
what do they appear to be composed of ?-:»
Tbev are oakum, tar, and rosin.
If they were set on fire, and thrown into any
buildings, are they well calculated to produce
conflagration? — Yes, they would set wood on
fire.
If they were thrown through a window om
to a floor, would they be likely to set a house
on fire ? — There is. not a doubt of it.
If thrown into a hay-loft, still more likely f
— Oh yes.
How long do you suppose they wonld bum ?
— ^This is a very small one ; I have seen much
larger than this, among those before the court.
How long would they bum ? — ^They would
bum three or four mihutes.
Look at these flannel bags with gunpowder?
—That is a flannel cartridge, for a six-pounder.
That is the way in which powder is made up,
for the purpose of loading cannon ? — Yes, it is ;
only yours is a different kind of flannel, it is
twilled.
That will answer the purpose, though not so
neatlv ? — Oh yes, perfectly.
Take one of the hand-ffrenades ; you have
examined two of them before ? — ^Yes, I have.
Take that tQ pieces, and show us of what it
is composed [t^ toas taken to pieces in the pre»
sence of the Jury], The other prisoners may
retire now, we shall have no occasion for their
being present.
Lord Chief Justice Dallas. — ^You may now
remove the other prisoners from the batr^
\They were removed accordingly,]
Mr. Gumey. — Is that exterior tight binding
material to give force to the powder when it
explodes ? — i es, verv material, it would not
have half the effect if it were not tights
Have you come to any thing different ? —
Yes, here is a bandage of woollen cloth or
bombazine.
Is that cemented on ? — ^Yes, very fast.
What do you find that immediately to in-
close ?-'Four nails.
Do you mean nails used to rivet the tire of
cart wheels on? — ^Yes \it toas handed to the
Jujy],
Supposing you found inside that a tin case
containing powder, .which is lit by means of
that fuse; would that explode and disperse
those nails about like so many shot?— Certain-*
ly it would.
The binding you say by the rope-yarn would
give greater eflect to the explosion ?•— Yes, it
would be a larger explosion ; the faster it is tied^
the more strong that makes the explosion.
A Juryman fMr. Young), — Could any body
manufacture a thing of that kind, unless he is
toss] 1 GfiORGB IV.
tMmdetM Witk tW MTif T^thtl Is QOthinff
like our aitillery-greDades, thtte are filled with
pistol or musket balls. Mid then the vacaocy
between the musket balls, is filled with powder.
. Mr. MriM^.— It is not nade artifiefftlly like
the army-grenade ?— No.
J Jwvman f Mr. Afii^fc^.— Would it have the
Sftme effect ?— Certainty, t^s would be rety
dangerous ; they would be sute to bedisttibnted
tDUdd wherever they were thrown.
Mr* G«nMy.— Supponag they were thrown
into a room, the fuse woiUd bum, I belie?e
About hall*a-mili«te?-*~Yes» diereaboqtii
These nails wb<ild on the explosion, fly
about killing and wounding the petsens in the
toMB?— Most assuttdly.
Take out the nails and see whether yoife find
^ tin ease filM with gunpowder ?-^HeM is
part of a blanket cDvering the tin oase.
The fhse is inserted in 3ie tin case ?<^Yes, it
is brued iiiy-add en4h end is brazed on.
We will trouble .you to foree open diat tih
tase. [ik$wii1m$\rokbufikefim midp9wrei
mi the powder.']
How much powder is diere in it?^->>I diEire
^ay there is abont the rinme Quantity as thei«
was in the laat^ Which I weighed i that was
about three ounces and a half; it appeals to be
the saMe si^.
Is it good gunpowder T-^Verycood*
That WQuki be n quantity of gnnpon^der
tofficifeit to Canle the exphmon you speak of ?
•^Y4S| there is tather more Hiuk We put to
bvrsi a nine-inch shell.
I need scarcely ask yoa, wheAer tiiat gre^
nade would be a most formidable and destruct-
ire instrument ? — It certainly would.
Mr« AttenUy OeAeittf.^Tbkt, nty Iord| is
tbcr case on the part of the Grown.
DtTtVCt,
Mr, Cunoooff.^ Centleroen of the jury ;— I
know not whether any of you Were in court
diirifkg the inqUifjr which has already taken
nlace: but, Whetheir yOii Wete or Were not, the
tact of the convictioh Whidh has occurred can-
ik6t be Unknown to yoti. ' fiideed, my learned
friend the Solicitor-General, when he opened
this case to ycfu, did (hat which every man
would expect from hlni— he totd you that if
that fact bad come to your knowledge, it ought
not to have the slightest weight on your minds
hi the considenltion of the case which is now
brought before you. But notwithstanding that
iny leianied friend the Solicitor-general has so
told you, I do feel, or rather I should feel un-
der other circumstances, that it Was a fact
Which Would W6igh ^6ry heatily upon me : be-
Wise I know that howerer good your inten-
tions may be, such is the frame ana construc-
tion of (he human mind, that it cannot dismiss
ftbm its consideration matters which at times,
if men were more perf^t, it ought to dismiss.
Bofl flet (hat fiict weigliing less heaTily upon
M, be«MMe the hfte teTdiet was obtatned by eti-
TVM of James Ings
Ziosfs
ideaee, at I hope I shall be able m A«w yM,
aaterialiy diilbrent from the evideBce which is
giien itt this due. For in this caae th^w b
wanting a most material confirmation tyf tka
evideac^ df the acbomplice, which Was given
by a witikees who was called in the last
and is not cidled in the present : I mean
Dwyfer.
Mr, Attorney Gener^, — My lord, I mnst
terpose for the sake of regularity.
tjordCli^ JuMee Dld2!iit.-— We cannot go
into wh4t pasded on a fi^rmer trial. The Sdlt-
citor-general roost humanely and ttoost correctly
began by depnecatlng the effect of that cOdvie-
tionln anyway uiwil themlnd^ ofthejurf;
and sure I ftm, that thouah that caution niignt
be deemed by the Solicitor-general to be
necessary, it was not necessaty with the jury,
fot they would themselves have confined their
attention to the evidence in this case, without
at idl regarding what pastfbd upon a fortner
trial which is not now before them, nor nnder
their consideration ; and whether this or that
witness Was then dall^, dr WhfethlK^ ttie bhwf
be now different, they have no means of jndff-
ing^ and into theM matters I cannol n<>w sailer
counsel to go. The jury are sworn to try the
case presenled tb them in evidence. I need
not tell yon, geBtlomen^ I am sufe, dMi it is
your duty to rorgeC, eMCpl so far as it is di
proof, that there is suoh a person as Tlaitle-
wood — at aU events to forget his convidion.
Mr. Cunooodl— Gentiemeui I receive, wilh
all deference, the correction of his k>tdbhip»
and I am sure I need not say to him, that I did
not intentionally step beyond the line which I
ought in correctness to pursue. PeHia|)Sy in
the anxiety I feel on the present occasion I
iflay have done that which, if I had more sdf
Fossession thtln I confess I have at this AQinenl^
should not have doUe. But, when bis lerd^
ship has told me, thai I have trespassed beyond
the, strict line of my duty, k shall be tey most
eai^est endeatour so tb gnard mf eondnot,
tiiilt I ihay not repeat Ae same faiilt. fiat fhS
ttiich I may Wilb p«ri(ect fegnlari^ sijr; that
you will not suppose (having heard of the forAtf
f 4rdieO thitt it ptoceedcd npoti etidence ^o>
cisely such as has been given in this casOw TiM
will not suppose that the evidence whMh
vrarrflnted that former conviction is pr^cbi^y
the same as is now before yon. But you wiU
jodg^ of this ^videtoce is tfiouffh y6tt had never
heard of thtf t fortt^v case.
My teamed fHend, (he S6libitof^teiieiiI;M
told you (what I, and I am sore idl tsM wn
readi^ admit) that in the exAiiMibn df the dttty
v^ich hewas called upon tor peHbHa^ hd Was
onfy aaxipus to aisqinf hiiBself as mMhfhl
servant of the public^ by presaatiiiig fiilly aoA
fairly the circumsta.aces of this ease for year
consideration, and that as for as hit own
^itofial feeling^' Wetft, vrhea ha hajd dopcT hii
dtitt, be Was re|(«iaiMiof the njt^
men, I| eqoalff #ttti tf¥&|^ ittaB WHcrKBo^iMMI^
10S7]
Jia High TreauHi
A. D. 1880.
Cio^a
giTe him faVL credit fyt that assertion ; I hope
yoa wiU giTe me credit alio^ by belieTing
(though my task is a more irksome one than
bis) that I have the same feeling, that I adf
anxtoas to do my duty to the unfortunate man
at the bar ; but, I am also anxious at the same
time, to do my duty to my country and myself.
i am equally sure, that those amongst vou who
having been on Uie former jury, and conse-
quently having heard the evidence, and given
a verdict in the former case, whatever may
have been your previous feelings and impres-
sions, will discharge your present duty, regard*
less of what may he said by mankind upon an^
supposed contradiction of conduct, ana Uiat if
you are not satisfied that the crime is proved
against the prisoner by the present evidence,
you will gladly deliver him by a verdict of not
guilty.
The Solicitor-General also told you that the
law in this case is so clear, that he did not feel
it necessary to state it to yon. The law of this
oase is very clear, but I think it most material
that the very precise point yon have to try
should be stated to you. fiecause, the question
here is not between guilt or innocence in the
abstract, for certainly, I must admit, there is a
strong suspicion, at least, if not conclusive
proof, of a certain degree of moral guilt against
these men ; but the question you have to decide
is whether their guih amounts to that which is
charged upou this record ? namely, whether it
be high treason ? and not only whether it be
high treason, but whether it be that specific and
direct high treason which is charged upon him
by this indictment ? In order, therefore, to
enable you to do your duty fiiirly, fully, and
inpsurtially, yoa must not onlv take into your
consideration, and understand distinctly, what
k the precise charge you have to try, but you
must also apply the evidence and see that the
evidence not only makes out guilt, but makes
out that very specific high treason which is
charaed upon these men.
I dare say, though you are not lawyers, you
know enough of the history of your country,
to know that almost eveiy man who has written
vpon the history of the constitution of our
country, has stated thai the firmest bulwark of
the liberties of the subject is, that the law of
high treason should be well defined : and most
carefully was that done by our ancestors, by
the statute of 25 Edward 3rd. Many things
had before that time grown up to be thought
treasons, many indistinct accusations had b^n
adjudged treasons, so that no man could know
whether he was safe or not from the oppression
•f power, in his eondnct through Um. — But
when that statute- was passed, in a few short
and distinct words, it gave the subjects of the
country to know what the law of treason was,
and better still, it informed them what was not
treason. A statute which one of the greatest
lawven that ever graced the English bench,
ay lord Coke, has called a blessed statute ; and
blessed is the country that has such a statute
lor iis4{vidanpe, for in proportion as we lose
VOL, XXXIII.
the advantages of that statute, in that pro*,
portion do we recede from that blessed state of
security, which it conferred upon us.
That statute says distinctly (I mean to stat^
as much of it as may apply to the case under
consideration), first, that whosoever shall com-
pass or imagine the death of the king, shall be
guilty of high treason : — secondly, that whoso-
ever shall levy war against the king in his
realm, shall be guilty of high treason. Now
here are two distinct fiicts stated in a few short
and distinct words ; men cannot fail to know
whether tkev transgress these enactments, or
not ; and, although, from that period to the
present, a number of other treasons have grown
up, or rather a number of other enactments of
treason have grown up at diferent times ; yet^
always, under virtuous administrations, and by
patriotic governors, they have been swept away
as noxious weeds, poisoning the healthy soil,
of our country, and we have invariably returned
to that blessed statute in every good and sound
^state of the constitution^
I lament to say, that in the reig^ of his late
majesty, a statute passed which extended the
law of treason ;— Mr. Attorney-general seems
rather surprised at what I am now saying, but
I repeat that I lament such a statute ever
passed ; I lament every deviation from the
ancient law of treasons; and even if it be
justified on the ground that the necessity of the
times called for it, tlien I lament that there
should exist such a necessity in the state. — ^The
latter statute to which I allude, and upon which
a part of the charges in this indictment is
founded, is the statute of the 36th of his late
majesty's reign, which enacted '* that if any
person aAer the passing of this act, during the
life of the king, and until the end of the next
session of parliament, after the demise of the
crown, shall within the realm or without, com-
pass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend death
or destruction, or any bodily harm tending t9
death or destruction, maim or wounding, im-
prisonment or restraint of the person of the
same, our sovereign lord the kmg, his heirs
and successors, or to deprive or depose him^
her, or them from the style, honour, or kingly
name of the Imperial Crown of this realm.''
Now here is created another new treason, and
which is also diarged upon this indictment ; by •
the statute of Edward it was made treason to
compass or imagine the death of the king ; by
this statute it is made treason, to cpnspire or
attempt to dqHue.him from his kingly office.—
By the statute of Edward it was made treasop,
actually to levy war against his majesty within
his realm ; by this statute it is made treason to
oofiipire to levy war — and upon this last treason
is founded another count ot this indictment ; so
that the four questions you have to try will be
these.~Did the prisoner at the bar, compass
or imagine the death of the king ? did he con^
spire to depose him from his imperial dif^nity 7,
did he actually levy war against his majesty i
or lastly, did be compire to levy war (though W
did. not actually levy war) with an intent \^
3Y
lOAO]
1 GEORGB IV.
IVifil ofJamtu bigt
nosa
compel by force his niajesty to change the mea-
sures ef his goTemroeiit. These are the pre-
cise issues yoa have to try, and whatever may
'ht your opiDion of the guilt of the prisoner as
to other roatterSy — however atrocious you may
ttiink his conduct may be in. a moral point of
▼iewy — ^however criminal he may be in other
resoects, — however he may have brought him-
felt within the fangs of other criminal laws, —
if you do not think he has aetaally oommitted
one of these four offences, charged upon him by
this indictment, you are bound to find him not
guilty ; and to leave Mm to take his trial upon
other indictments, which will reach him, ir he
bas been guilty of any other offenee.--It will
therefore be your bounden duty, most aeoxH
rately to scan the evidence which has been
given in this case, and apply it to the eharge
of the present indietaieaty and not to any other
offence.
My learned friend, the Solicitor- general, has
admitted to yon, that this case does not come
proved to you in all respects by unequivocal
testimony ; and he apologizes ibr this by say-
ing, that in all cases of conspiracies you must
of necessity call some of the conspirators, be-
cause without some of the conspirators you
cannot know what passed in their dark con-
0ultations« This is another miserable cons^
quence of departing fh>m the ancient and well-
oonsidered statute of treasons. That admirable
statute, amongst other things, enacts, that
before a man shtil be found guilty of any of
the treasons there set out, he shall be arovabfy
convicted of the same. I do not believe in
any other statute of the realm, that the same
guarded caution is enacted, or the same word
used ; and the great lawyer to whom I have
referred you before, lord Coke^ writes a whole
section upon the word provabfy. He says that
it does not mean prooably, but that a man
must be convict by that clear and distinct
evidence which no man can doubt of. While
that law remained unimpaired, the result was,
that you could have no accusations of treason,
bht such as were capable of clear and demon-
strable proof. Then men's Kves were safe.
But when you depart from the spirit of that
ancient statute, and enact these new treasons
which depend upon supposed conspiracies and
secret consultations, you must call in the aid
of witnesses such as you have heard upon the
present occasion. Then it is that men's lives
are no longer safe, but they may bold their
existence, fame, and fortune, upon the testi-
mony of the most worthless ana inihmous of
mankind.
Bearing in your minds, as 1 hope you will
do, these preliminary observations, examine
the facts tnat have been proved in evidence
before yoii, and say how far you think those
witnesses, whom my learned fHend theSoli-
citor«general admits to be bad witnesses, are
confiraied by purer testimony ; because he has
told VOtt himself that they are not to be be-
lieved unless they are confirmed in material
cifciimstances. It is not confirming an infth
mous witness in some trivial etocimistanees,
that will give him credit to ai^ infiunoos tale
he may tell you : you, at least, ought to have
IRro confirmed as to so much of the important
matters which he relates, that you, laying your
hands on your hearts, can say you believe the
rest of his tale. And here another difficnliy
in this case prsseots itself, for it would be io
vain for me to stand up and say, tikese wit*
neeses are not oonfimed in a great deal of
important matter : but you are to discrimimtte
whether they are coafirmed in any of that
matter vthidi toastimtes the crime, high tfe»->
son. If yoa do not find them confirmed in »
single iota of that matter winch alone oonsti-
ttttes high treason, though they are confirmed
in otAer matters, it will be your duty to find
this man not gvJlty. And h«re is the danger
(and let me warn you of it as one) of not <us*
criminatiag cleany to what extent they are
confirmed. If you shall be of opinion they
are confirmed to the foil extent of the hoirid
plan of the assassination of his majesty's mi-
nisters, yet, inasmuch as I do not know of an^
law which makes that atrocious plan of issas
sination of the cabinet conncil amount to high
treason, if yon do not believe that there was
an ulterior intention to levy war against his
maiesty, then yon must find the prisoner not
guilty.
It is impossible for me to deny that there is
a great deal of matter in evidence before yo»
which must make a man shrink back with
horror ; but if it were not for that cireumsCanoe -
which throws a shade over the whole of the
ease, I think there never was so ridicnloos m
plot detailed in evidence since the records of
nistory began. It exceeds in absurdity all
that was ever recorded in real history, or
imagined in fiction. The plot vrhieh has been
detailed to yon to-^ay, and which yon are
required to believe was actaaUy adopted as of
practicable execution, for the purpose of over-
turning the existing government of this oom-
try, is a plot so perfectly ridiculous, that it is
wholly incredible. I would ask yon this, if
you had been told of this sdieme of rebellkMi
Sa really existing and adopted plan; — if it
d been gravely related by a man of ordinary
veracity, in whom you had ordinary confidence^
unconnected with all the other circntnstsnces
of assassinatibn, and the murder of the unfisr-
tunate man who met his death at Cato street
(all of which I know must have its efiect apeit
your minds, and adds weight to the nltericr
charge of treasott)^-^r aric yon if yon had bee»
told of this plot to oveclum the govemmeBt,
precisely in the phtase and language of the
witness, with the same exhibition of mihiniy
stores, would not yon have reeiived the inle
with a smile of contemnt and inerednHijT
Then, if you would not beKene a statement o»
the r^ation of a man in whose general vein-
city you might have some confidenoOy wiU yno
believe it upon the testimony of a self*coo«-
victed and most infiunous witness? The nb*'
snrditystrikei ok ip fironglyy notwiatttandioi^
1061]
\fmt High TriatoH.
A. O. iBiO.
[106f
all I have te«o, and all I have haaid, that untU i ba ona Id this atrocious conspiracy, fully bent
you tell me by your verdict you do believe it, I to carry it into effect ; and never does he till
I will not give credit to the possibility of your the baiter is about his neck recede from that
having socm belief. ' intention. And then he thinks to make a
We will fissi see what the alleged facts are ; merit — by wha( f — ^by still greater baseness 1
as detailed to yon by this man Adams. And
here let me remark, that every witness is sup>«
posed to give hit testimony under the sanction
of an oath, the consequences of which he at
least ought to believe are, that according to
the truth or falsehood of the circumstances
which he relates he will meet bis reward, not
only by the sanctions of the law of men, but
by the special interpositions of Providence in
this world, and by Uie laws of God hereafter.
To begin with this witness, — what does be
tell you ?*^that he has been an apostate in re-
ligion, and has forsworn his God ; that God
to whom he appeals for the truth of his evi-
dence ! That IS the first view in which this
witness presents himself. Such is the man
who has to tell you a story, incredible in itself,
and upon whose testimony you are required to
believe it. But to proceed, he says that he
became acquainted with Brunt, one oi the
other men diarged in this indictment, at Cam-
bray, in France, about three years ago ; that
on the 13th of January last he wa% introduced
to Thistlewood ; upon which Thistlewood said
had almost said, — when I say, '* still greater
baseness,*' I am afraid of using an expression
that can in tha least be supposed to take off
from the baseness of his nrst conduct,— I
hardly know how to express myself;— I was
going to say, greater baseness in betraying his
companions. I am afraid, in using the ex«
pression, of being supposed to say that such
things as these ought not to be disclosed : but
this I say, that in a man who goes the whole
length, which he. states he did, towards per-
petrating a deed of unparalleled wickedness—
m him it is the last trace of baseness that ho
should be the betrayer of his companions;
low as they may be sunk in the pit of infamy,
a still lower deep is bis portion : and not one
spark remains which can redeem him from
universal and unutterable abhorrence. Thus
it is, that this men stands before yon, and upon
his evidence alone it is, I say, that all the facta
stand which constitute high treason, as I will
shew you hereafter, and it is upon his evidence
alone that you must convict the prisoner of
high treason 5 although I admit his evidence is
fo him :— ^ Oh, you are the man ; you have I abundantly confirmed, as to the other parts of
been a soldier in the Guards.'' We need not
go thnM(^ the whole of the conversation, for
it comes to this. — ^ I suppose you are a good
swordsman.''-^'' No, I am not so good a
swordsman as I once was, but I can defend
asyself.'' And then comes the convenation
•bout the present state of society ; that ** the
people are aristocrats, and are all working
under one system to support the government.''
Now yon are to take it as a clear fact, that a
plot was in agitation to overturn the govern-
ment, and that so mnch was to be expected
firom the hand of this single swordsman, that
Mr. Thistlewood,**a man not insane, how-
ever wicked,-^at once unbosoms himself to
bim at their first interview, and tells him he
wants his assistance, as you are to infer, though
lie did not directly tell him so in terms :— that
he wanted his assistance to overturn the go-
vernment—-the powerfcd assistance of him, a
single swordsman 1
Then he gives you an acconnt of his meet*
log the conspirators several times at the White
Hiirt pnblio-iionse, and then he goes to Brunt's,
sphere be bears langoage, sud), that if he had
bed one spark of honesty or feeling in his
heart, be never would have gone a second
time, but srast have instantly disclosed it to
the magistracy of the country. He there
hears distinctly, according to his own account,
• plan in agitation fer the destruction, at one
blow, of the whole of tiie cabinet council of
this country. Does he revest at this 7— No I
he goes on and joins them ; be meets them
datf flfter da^ in tfaeir consultations on this
plan-^^-btnMdf professmg, and, if you believe
nis 0sm wotds^ truly intending at this time to
the case, namely, as to the horrible plan of
assassination.
You will always bear in mind what it is that
constitutes the treason. I have told you that
every act of levyiog war against the king, or
conspiring so to do, with an intention by force
to make him idter his measures of government
is high ti-eason. Now all which you can infer
against thb prisoner of his guilt, with respect
to this species of high treason, is from certain
supposed conversations on Tuesday the 22nd,
and Wednesday the 23rd of February. Adams
tells you, that in addition to the plan to as-
sassinate his majesty's ministers, they had it
in design to do what ?— to seize two cannon in
Gra/s-inn-lane ; to seize six cannon in the
Artillery-ground; to send to different out-ports,
and seise those out ports. But that which
most distinctly marks the intention of high
treason, was a proclamation which he is
pleased to say was fabricated by Thistlewood,
and of which proclamation there is not a trace
of confirmation in any other part of the cause.
Now I know that the learned Attorney-general
may say there is confirmation of this by an
unsuspected and uncontaminated witness. He
will tell you that Hale, the servant of Brunt,
was called to fetch six sheets of cartridges
paper; and he will tell you also, that the
witness, Adams, said the proclamation was
written on cartridge-paper. Gentlemen, is
that a confirmation of the contents of this
supposed proclamation? You do not want
confirmation of the fact of six alieets of
paper being sent for ; consider what they were
about at that time:— they were preparing
their arms, not for the plan of high treason, as
10631
1 GEORGE IV.
I say, bat for other most Mfariotis plans ; they
inrere then making cartridges, and wkat so fit, '
and what so likely, as that they should want
cartridge-paper for that purpose ?— 'And, in- !
deed, there is a passage in the testimony of
Hale, which, as far as it gives confirmation
either way, gives a confirmation to my state-
ment, rather than to the supposition of the
learned Attorney-general ; for Hale tells you^
that among the articles in the cupboard they
found fragments of the cartridge-paper ; most
evidently, therefore, they had been using
this cartridge-paper, not for the purpose
of fabricating proclamations, but of fabri-
cating cartridges. Take this proclamation
out of the cause, and there is nothing that
can indicate that their intention was levy-
ing war against the state, so as to make their
mcts amount to high treason. There is a great
deal in the cause to lead one to suppose, that
they might contemplate a desperate riot, and
a dreadful murder; that you might perhaps
fairly infer, if that were Uie matter tor your
consideration ; but that is not the charge upon
this record : if you believe every tittle of the
evidence up to that extent, yet you cannot
consistently with your duty to God, to your
countiy, and to yourselves, find the prisoner
guilty of an intention to lev^ war ; even if yon
could believe the other circumstances, that
Aey meant to take the cannon, that they
meant to fire the houses, and that they meant
other acts of violence, which do not amount,
or may not amount to a levying of war. And
what you are most particularly to guard your-
selves against is this, that you are not to eon-
*vict on constructive high treasons. I know
very well that there have been constructive
levyings of war, but still levying of war is a
question of f>ict. You are to consider, under
all the circumstances, what shall and what
shsU not amount to a levying of war : there
are great and dreadful riots which do not
amount to levying of war, and if you are
of opinion this would be only riot and not
levying of war then the prisoner is not guilty
'of the matter of this Indictment. When I say
there may be great and dreadful riots which do
not amount to levying of war, and that you
ought to be most careful about extending the
law of treason by construction and implication,
I would rather state it you from the language
of one of the greatest judges that ever adorned
the English bench, aye, and one of the best
of men ; — I mean my lord Hale, whom bishop
Burnet calls ''that great lawver, and that
honest man :*' an honest man he was as yon
^11 judge from this short anecddte I will
tell you of him. During the usurpation of
' Cromwell, so high was his credit as a lav?yer,
that that great and able man (for so he was,
though an usurper) felt it for the honour of his
government to employ my lord Hale ; though
my lord Hale had the boldness to tell him,
that he doubted the legality of bis accession to
the throne of power where he had seated him-
self, and would act under no commissiop from
Trial ofJomet Ings [1064
him which should require faim to pass a sen-
tence of death on any man ; notwiibstanding
this, he was so highly revered by that usurper,
that he was madeehief justice of his Court of
Common Pleas. Still higher was he honoured
by his legitimate sovereign, when restored to
the throne of his ancestors ; he was placed in a
more exaltel station. But under both govern-
ments he was an honest man, who never warped
the law to serve the power of the usurper, or
gratify the wishes of the dissolute ministers of
d)e monarch. He never forgot his duty to his
country, but was ever the firm friend of the
legal liberty of the subject. I will tell yoa
with respect to constructive treasons, what that
learned judge and good man says. He states
that the statute of £dward is distinit vrith re-
spect to the levying of war, but he says, levy-
ing of war may be actual or etmUnuiwe; that
is, constructive such as great riots, or for ge-
neral purposes ; but he shews what he thinks
of those lawyers who have extended the simple
law of treason by implication and constraction.
And with respect to constructive treasons, I
will myself say, and I am sorry to say it, they
have been the device of bad lawyers to further
the oppressions of wicked statesmen. Judges
of the present day must be bound by the reso-
lutions of their predecessors, and take the law
of treason as they find it recorded ; so says hnd
Hale, who, after having stated several con-
structive treasons, says, ^ These resolotionB
being made and settled, we must moquktoe in
them,**— he says not a word of their fnroprietj,
or of his approbation of them, but yon n^
see plainly what was the bearing of bis owb
mind. — ^These resolutions being made and
settled, we must ne^toesce in them ; ** bat, ia
my opinion, if new cases happen for the fotnre
that have not an express resolution in point,
nor are expresslr within the words of the
statute of 25th Edward 3rd, though th^ may
seem to have a parity of reason ;— 'it is the safest
way, and most agreeable to the wisdom of die
great act of S5th Edward 3rd, first to oonsoll
the parliament, and have their declaration, and
to be very wary in multiplying oonstmctive
and interpretative treasons, for we know not
where it will end/' Thank God, gentlemen
of the jury, it is in your power to pot a stop to
their dangerous progress : — if you find venuets
on these constructive treasons, God only knows
where they may end; but once let Englisli
juries oppose them firmly by their verdicts, and
whenever they have a case of constmctive
treason brou^t before them, of whi^ tke
Crown lavvyers can shew no precedent exactly
in point, let them exert their glorious privilege,
and deny to them a verdict of guilty on tSch
constructive treasons. Do this, gentlemen, aod
save your country. You thus interpose mm
impenetrable barrier against the progress of
power. I am one of the last men. in the woiM
to ask you to do any thing that should sfaaka
the confidence all men have in the laws; bttt
I do ask you, fselingJthat I am doing my duty,
to oppose yourselves to this dangeBous tiibt ii
10651
Jor High Treason*
constractive tmsons ; and if my learned inend
4he AttonKjF^eoeral caonot show yon an exact
precedent in point, rather than follow his ad-
▼ice, follow the advice of that great and learned
judge, oppose the constitutional barrier of your
▼erdict to it^ and rear up no more oonstructiTe
treasons.
• There is in this case so much matter of grare
and serious import, that I cannot treat the
other part of the case which remains with the
levity and ridicule with which it well deserves
to be treated,— I mean so much of the plot as
relates to the overthrow of government. Good
God 1 is it in a British Court of Justice that we
mre trying a plot for the overthrow of the British
government with materials of war such as those
lying before you ? What is the greatest uum-
^r of men that we have it in evidence were to
be brought into the field for the destruction of
this mighty empire ? — ^Forty men 1 What
were those forty men to do ? — They were first
to assassinate the whole cabinet council ; they
were to send a detachment to seise two pieces
of cannon — not a single horse among them :
they were to send another detachment to seize
other six pieces of cannon 1 they were to seize
on several out-ports I they were more particu-
lariy to take Brighton with a force ; the de-
tachment for this purpose, I presume, was to
Jiave gone down on the outside of some one of
the quick travelling coaches, and to have taken
the town by surprise I They were to surround
London, as I believe it is stated in the evidence
in this cause, that the^ were to be so much on
the alert with the residue of their forty men,
ihat not even an orderiy was to be allowed to
leave London for Windsor ; but that truly even
if an orderly were despatched, and were lucky
<enough to evade their vigilance and reach
Windsor, they had nothing to fear, for the
troops, having been up all night at the funeral
of his majesty, could not return to town time
enough to rescue London from the hands of
this formidable band of warriors I Such is the
-istory upon which you are to find these men
"guilty of hiffh treason !
I have told you that there is no confirmation
^f that part of the story which relates to the
facts constituting high treason, and that (thongh
it may be tedious to you to repeat it so often)
ia the venr essence of this cause, and 'which
you should never dismiss from your minds.
You are to look how far this man is confirmed ;
•if he is merely confirmed up to the point of
the assassination (which perhaps I may admit,
Ibrwhat is found in Cato-street, and the oc-
cnrrences which iJiere took place, may confirm
him up to that extent), there remains no con-
-ftmation upon that part of the case which alone
you are now callea upon to decide, and on
•wfaidi alone yon oan say high treason was in
-the contemplation of tiiese men. But before
•I dismiss the evidenco of this man— -(and I do
It with the less reluctance, because my learned
fiiend who is to follow me, though we came
lale tnstrudled into the cause, yet, from the
Kspite the Court granted him the other night,
A. D. 1820. ( 1066
came so well prepared that it relieved my mind
from the griet I felt from not being able to do
my duty in the manner I wished to have done .
it, though I have omitted a great deal, there is
but little my learned friend will omit ; you will
hear from him the evidence roost minutely
dissected in every part). — But, before I quit
this man, let us seriously pause.— Who is he
that tells US this tale, and demands our belief
in his testimony? Who is this man? Let
him. answer for himself; he stands here upon
his own confession — a betrayer of his compar
nions 1 — a traitor to his king !-^a rebel against
his country I— an avowed intended murderer
and assassin !— an apostate from his religion ! —
and a denier of his God 1 — Good heavens 1 Is
it in a British court of Justice P — Is it here where
we have met to administer justice according to
the manner of our forefathers in this her an*
cient sanctuary ? — Is it here before a British
jury that the lives of eleven men are to be
sacrificed, upon the evidence of such a witness^
and not merely their lives, but— if the law is
to be literally put in force — their lives with
torture? Can a British jury condemn their
countrymen to death and torture — their names
to eternal infamy-Hind their families to utter
ruin, upon the evidence of such a self-convicted
wretch as this ?
As I prefer, upon all occasions, the authority
of great men, 1 would refer you, in this case,
to what I have heard fall from my learned
friend the Solicitor-general, without alluding
to what cause, or when it was, or how long
ago. But, upon an occasion when a witness
was called to prove that another witness was
not worthy of being believed upon his oath, the
witness called to impeach the credit of the
other, upon his cross-examination stated, that
the man who he said was not worthy to be ber
lieved upon his oath, had made a proposition
to him to go together into the park, for the
purpose of extorting money from others by
certain nefarious threats, and that he went
with him but without having committed any
guilt of that sort. When the Solicitor-general
came to comment upon this testimony* the
natural feelings of his mind broke out, and his
exclamation was, ** would an honest man, en-
titled to credit in a court of justice, act the
part that this witness has acted ?" — namely :
would an honest man, entitled tp credit in a
court of justice, for a moment assent to a pro-
position to extort money from another? Then
let me apply this reasoning to my learned
friend. — is the witness that he has produced—
is a man who could act the part he has acted,
entitled to credit in a court of justice? Is an
apostate I a traitor ! a rebel I a betrayer of his
companions 1 an assassin 1 a murderer 1 all of
which this witness Adams admits that he has
been, and intended. In the language of my
learned friend, is such a man entitled to cre-
dit in a court of justice ? And yet my learned
friends^ the officers of the Crown^ put up such
* See the preceding, case. , ■
1007] 1 GEORGE IV.
A man Uusday (or at leait yesterday) as a laaa
worthy of credit in a court of justice. Can he
be worthy of credit, unless indeed (which I
think no lawyer will ever contend) he is
worthy of credit when produced by the Grown
to seek men's lives, but not worthy of credit
when he comes into a court of justice to
give evidence on their behalf: unless my learn*
ed friends, the Crown lawyers, can reconcile
this contradiction, out of their own months I
kave it, that such a witness is unworthy of
credit in a British court of justice.
I know what answer may be attempted to
be given to this observation. Tliey will tell
yon, perhaps, that this witness is confirmed by
other witnesses. I beg of vou to examine the
testimony throughout, and see whether you
can find this witness, as to the material point
which you are to try, confirmed by any, aye
by even an infieunous witness, much less by
an unsuspected witness. You will not take
all this paraphernalia of war, if I may so call
it, and the bead roll of wijtnesses you have
heard as confirming him as to matters in which
be ought to be confirmed. They mav confirm
him in insignificant points, but you will look for
confirmation in the matter of the alleged tree*
son, and if you find no confirmation as to that
point, I beg you, upon the authority of the
teamed Solicitor-general, to dismiss him with
shame from this court of justice, as a man un-
worthy here to be believed upon his oath. If
even he were confirmed by other witnesses no
better than himself, as to the plot of insurrec-
tion and rebellion, it is no support to one in-
famous witness to confirm him by the testimony
of other vritnesses almost or equally infamous
with himself. Look then to the evidence care*
fully, and see whether you can find a confir*
mation of this man in any respect by an un*
suspected witness : look whether you can find
a confirmation even by those other witnesses
who are equally or nearly as devoid of credit
as himself.
The witnesses who speak to the actual trans*
action, I believe, sm but three in number.
Now, after you have done with Adams, you
come to Hiden. Let us see what sort of a
rosn. Hiden is. Hiden says, he was formerly
member of a shoemakers' dub, that is, in plain
language, of a seditious club ; that he met Wil-
son a few days before the 23rd of February,
and then what do you find upon his own tesb
ttmony is the first tiling that passes between
bim and Wilson ? He has the efirontery to
tell you, that the very first proposition thai
was made to him, without disguise and with-
out reserve, was, '< Will you be one to murder
bis majesty's ministers ?'' Good heaven 1 what
must a man be who receives such a propo-
sition, and does not instantly revolt at it?
Is he a worse man, or a better man, than the
man who goes into the park to extort money
by threatening to accuse another of certain
offences ? Is a man who can at once assent
to a plot to murder the whole of fats majesty's
ministers^ who, to ose the language of my
3Vm/ of Jama Ingi
[1068
fly.
learned firiend the Soliciler-general, can bo
guilty of such conduct, worthy of credit in a
oonrt of justice? The answer he would giv«
you to that is, that be is not. Iben, if ha be
not worthy of credit, what confirmation does
he give to that ia&mous witness Adams ? I
do not know that it may be necessary to go
through the whole of the evidence, but be do-
tails a long oonvenation between himnflf and
Wilson all tending to this point, that they had
a design in view to murder his mijeaty's nm-
istera ; bol there is not one word of oonfinm^
tion as to that BMtter which alone as thechmge
before you, and in which you are to decider
Not one word of confirmation of any of those
fiscts and deliberations which amonnt to h^
treason. It is true, Wilson teUs him (an be
says) that there were some persons lo go and
seise the cannon at the ArtiHeiy-^^ronnd, nad
that they were to retreat to the Mansion^onse;
but all this is perfectly consistent with the
case of a great not; aU this is perfectly con-
sistent with a case that may be anoonnec^
ed with the charge of higli treason : it nxf be
true to the whole extent of this statement, bot it
does not prove the diarge of which akme yon
are to find the prisoner guilty. And then, at the
close of this grave matter, conies what ? why
this most ridiculous excuse.-^** No, I cannot
stop to help yon ;*-I approve of your
I wish you successful — I cannot stop to
der his majesty's mimsters at present, ~
I have got to get a quart of cream for a ft
by whidt I shall make a profit of a
It this statement is divested of the horror we
must alt feel at the recital of this ahoasipable
proposition of assassinatioo ; if it stood aiB»-
ply on the plot to raise rebellion, conld I state
the fact, and the means of its accomplishment
without at once exciting yon to broad laughter?
But what is the conduct of that witness when
examined 1 According to his own account,
be, without hesitation, joined in Uiis nefeiioni
plan ; he shewed no horror or repugnaiice st
It, but said be would be with theaa; and it
last merely excused hiihself in the way I have
stated.
The next witness is Monument — he states a
conversation he had with Thisdewood. And
the thing that presses most in his evidenee is
this ; 'that Thtstlewood said to him, he oogbt
to get arms ; for that all his friends had aima.
You will attend lo the particular drmimstencr
of the time, when this was said — I cannot, I do
not, stand here to deny, that there was a gieaf
deal of ferment at this lime in the country. It
was shortly after a transaction took phwe, or
at least while it was atill recent in the aaindB
of meoy-'fi transaction, ten wbidi no traD»>
action that I reooUect in my tisse, faaa been
matter of more publie disciiesJen^*— 4 mean
the transaction which took nlaee at Manahsa
ter in August last, of whkdil wiU speak itt tife
• Vide 41 Hans. ParKDeb. pp. 357, 370^508^
887, 1180; 5 Hans. FtuU Deb* N» & pffc
713,719,775.
lOBOl
fo/t High Treasati^
ttrms indieatiTe of way own opinion. Bat
fins I may ininly my to yon, t&at it was a
tianaaction of which many men thought Teiy
diierently from each other^ — many who were
in general warm friends to all the measnves of
government, thought that a tiansactioni where
sp many British subjects had lost their Htos,
l^ an armed force attacking an unarmed mob,
was at least matter of grave inquiry and i»-
▼cstigation ; and that before anjr public ex«
pretsion of approbation was given to that
meatare, at least it was fit first to be inquired
into.—- Others again , on the other side, who
thought that the measure admitted of no paU
liation, did not hesitate to call it in plain
language a massacre. Certain laws a^nst
pnmic meetings followed upon that, which
many men who were violent in their temper
shewed a disposition to resist; and it was
said among those, who thought public meet-
ings neoessaiT to secure public liberty, we
will meet,^md under these circumstances we
win go armed to resist the attempts of the
soldiery to disperse us. This fully explains
what Thistlewood's meaning might be —
^ I and my friends who have this view of
the public transactions, are determined that
we will have our meetings as usual ; and
as we see that these meetings are interrupted
br an armed force, we will have our arms
aiso, and will attend armed." I do not
mean to deny that this is a desperate re*
sistance to the taw ; but be it so* It is not
high treason. And never dismiss from your
minds if you think it not high treason, you
must find the prisoner — not guilty, •— High
treason is what alone you are to try, and not
disobedience to and dissatisfiiction with the
laws. So that even with this part of the
witness's testimony, brought in confirmation
of AdasM, it is no confirmation of that in
which he ought to be confirmed, though it may
be confirms lion of a very seditious and wicked
Intention on the part of those people*
Ibis witness Monument, however, I should
telt you, was at the meeting in Cato-street, on
the 9drd of February, where the whole plan of
insurrection, if you believe Adams, was to
(sommence ; and now I pray you, does he con-
firm that part of Adams s evidenoe, which goes
to shew they had a design beyond the murder
of ministers f He confirms the whole plot of
assassination. The transactions in Cat(^
street, I do admit, confirm so much of the
plan as detailed by Adams ; but does he con-
ilnn that most important fact, the existence of
a supposed proclamation, which was to give a
cbaiacter to the whole meeting f Thistlewood
'would probably have had tluit proclamation
witli him, if it had existence, lind would
mlwaUy have stated it to the conspirators.
Can you believe that if that had been the ease
be would not have eonfirmed that important
ihot t Does he tell you that any such^ocla-
iMUion was produced or alluded to by Thistle-
n*M»d ? or that any thing more was agitated at
that meethif I ^n a dtsigo of liot, asd this
A. D« IBSO. [107<^
inleiided plan of ssurder or assassinatioir?
But the same observation applies to this wit-
ness, as applied to Hiden ; and here let- ma
call to my aid the observation of the learned
S<diettor-general. Is a witness, who could so-
conduct himself, worthy of credit in a court of
justice? Then here you have one infamous
witness, not fully but partly confirmed by
another infamdos witness. Then comes a third
infamous witness. Is it an aggregate of infamy
that will ever make truth? What was his
conduct in the witness-box to-day, when I
asked what he thought of himself in joining in
this ne&rious scheme ? — ^ I was very much
to blame/' — ^Do not yon consider yourself •
most atrocious villain? — ''In truth I Was
bkuneabk;" I think such vras his very ex-
ptession, but it was some most trivial and in-
significant phrase, expressive of no- remorse of
conscience, and which shewed that his formeir
conduct had made no deep impression upon
his heart, and that he contmued the same un*
fueling villain as when he set out upon the'
cold-blooded expedition of intended murder.
It may be argued (for I have heard it S9
argued before, and it may be so argued affain),
that there are witnesses who, if Adams, Hiden,
and Monument speak fidsely, might be called
to contradict them — ^there is Palin — there is
Cook— and there is some other man, who it is
said might be called by the prisoner to con-
tradict them. Oeotleraen,is not that illusory?
I have told you all along these conspirators
are not innocent men devoid of all crime ; and
can you expect that we can call men here in
behidf of the prisoner, who vrill voluntarilr
come to give evidence in his fiivour with'
baiters round their own necks. I might put it
to the learned attorney-general, if one of them
were to venture into this court and place him-
self in that witnesses box, wou^d he suff*er him
to depart the court with impunity. Then, if
men must come under such circumstances, can
you suppose that they will come at all ? Let
not that argument, therefore, have any weight
with you. Let not it weigh against the prison-
ers at the bar, that they do not call men, who
if they were to come here, though they might
contradict the witnesses for the Crown, as to
all that part of their evidence which relates to
the facts constituting treason, must confess
themselves guilty of a great deal which would
bring them within the grasp of criminal law.
Under these circumstances, therefore, it is not
to be expected that any such witnesses can be
called. — ^If, therefore, Adams receives no con-
firmation from his two associates to wlnnn I
have referred; see whether he receives any
conformation from the other string of witnesses ;
when I say confirmation, I cannot repeat it
too often, I mean confirmation as to that
matter which makes the treason. Confirma«
tion, as to other circumstances, I know there
is enough.
Immediately after Adams has been ea»r
mined, Eleanor Walker and Mary Rogers
are oaUed. What confirmation do they givef
10711 1 GEORGE IV.
They coftfirm the fact, that Brunt took a 'room'
— the back room in bis own house, professedly
for logs, but r«a11y for certain meetings. I
cannot deny that they had that room nor
that they had consultations there, peihaps
for nefarious purposes; but the question
is, did their consultations there refer to
high treason? And you will always bear
in view, as far as the confirmation of those
witnesses goes, it amounts to nothing at all as
connected with the matters and facts which
are necessary to eonstitute the crime of high
treason.
After these, Hale is examined ; he confirms
nothing further than that they held meetings
io that room ; but I think there is a piece of
his testimonj important to the prisoner : He
found the migments of the cartridge-paper,
unwritten upon ; that cartridge*paper, whidi
was sent for^ I say, for the purpose of wrap-
ping up cartridges, but which Adams
chooses to say was sent for for the purpose of
writing the proclamations. Then they call
Smart, Bissiz, and Gillan, three unsuspected
witness^ I admit, but what do they prove? —
that they saw a man watdiinff in Grosveoor-
square, opposite lord Harrowbjr's house : that
is confirmatory of the charge of assassination,
which I do not in the present inquiry dispute ;
but as far as respects high treasoui it carries
the eridence not one tittle further.
I shall pass over, or leave to my learned
friend, all that passed at Cato-street ; because
here I am bound to admit to you, that the
transactions which t^ok place there are so in-
eotttestibly proved, that I should deserve very
little credit at your hands if I were to attempt
to deny any part of them. But still it comes
back to the same question ^^in : you have to
ask yourselves this question, was any thing
done there indicative of the ulterior plan of
treason? Much may be found there which
confirms the nefarious plan of assassination of
his majesty's ministers, but nothing is found
there which confirms the ulterior plan alleged
against this man of levying war against his
majesty. And you are to be convinced that
these parties were conspiring not only to kill
his majesty's ministers, but to levy war against
his majesty ; and if on a view of the whole
case you shall be of opinion 4hey did not con-
spire to levy war against his majesty, although
you may be satisfied they intended to kiU his
ministers, it is no proof to support this in-
dictment charging treason.
Then comes the (question, what is a levying
of war? because, if when they had carried
their plan unto execution it did not amount to
a levying of war ; of course the conspiracy to
carry that plan into execution could not be
a conspiracy to levy war. Now, levying war
is entirely a question of fact. I know no tech-
nicalities which are to guide you ; it is a ques*
tion you are to put to your own good under-
standings, and say, what is war P War, in its
common acceptation, we know consists in two
sutes arrayed agamM each other,^ with forces
Trial of James Tags
1107Z
organized and dtsetplined, commanded hf
officers* and supplied with all the material oi
war. Civil war is but the same thing, then
one part of a state is arrayed against another
part of the same state,— and, therefore you are
to consider whether if this plan had been car*
ried into execution, you see enough to say
there would have beat a levying of war. When
I say it is a question of fact, I state to yon the-
opinion of the same great and learned jndise^
whom I before quoted*— lord Hale. He
states, *^ what shall be said to be a levying of
war," and that is the question for yim hm,.
^ it is partly a question of fact. For it is Doa
every unlawful or riotoss assembly of many
persons to do an unlawful act, though de/mt»
they commit the act they intend, that mdtce
a levyint; of war, for then every riot would be
treason." So here, if you think they had laid
a deep plan of wicked and extensive plunder,
or of riot, or of murder, if it be not a levying
of war, it is not high treason. But to contiiMie
the words of the learned judge, he says, ** it
must be such an assembly as carries vritb k
maem bellif that is, the appearance of war.**
Now, let me pause here, and ask you in the
language of this learned judge, did all thai
was proposed by this assembly carry with it
^ the appearance of war." Forty men I Cms
you say an assemblage of forty men, for what*
ever purpose assembled, carries with it the
appearance of war P He goes on—** as if ^tuer
nde or mareh, vesiUu esp&atk^ that is "^ vrith
unforled banners;'' forty men marddng witb
unfurled banners to taxe possession of two
cannon^ to take the mansion-house, and
overthrow a mightv empire, is that a levy*
ing a war P '* Or if they be formed into com-
panies.'' Are they formed into compantes
here ? I have heard of no companies, nor ^
any commanders. — ** Or if they are so circum-
stanced that it may be reasonably couclnded
they are in a posture of war, which circum-
stances are so various that it is hard to define
them all particularly." — So says the learned
judge, and from what I read to you belbie
written by the same great man, when it is hmd
to define them particularly, er they cannot be
defined, then the jury are to judge of those
circumstances, whether they amount to a levy*
ing of war or not. And if the learned Attor-
ney-general can shew you no case preciaely
like this, it is safer not to let in constructive
treasons, but to exercise your just power, and
to acquit the parties of any such accusatioa.
If my learned friend the Attomey^general
can furnish you with no parallel case, I think
your own recollections will furnish you with
something like one. I dare say you all re-^
member Uiree years ago, there was an indict^
ment for high treason something like the pre-
sent. If I remember the circumstances of
that case aright, all the same atrocities were
there given in evidence, by a witness much
like Adams, and who was disbelieved^ aft
Adams, I trust, will be to^ay. That witneaa
stated ciitwnitaAces equal^ atiocious with ite
10731
Jbr High Treasoitt
A. D. 1820.
[1074
K
present ; for ^ough the murder was not then
directed against his majesty's ministers, it was
stated that the soldiers were to be murdered in
their barracks ; that the town was to be fired ;
nay, more, it was in evidence there that great
parlies did actually assemble, and you recol«
lect that a gun-smith's shop was plundered of
anns, and other arms were found upon rioters ;
they marched also with flags and banners, and
yet with all these circumstances in proof^ the
juiy then (judging justly, as I trust you will
judge to-day) did not say that the parties were
free of all guilt ; no 1 they could not say that ; for
if they had been indicted for a great and enor-
mous riot, no doubt they must have been con-
victed ; but they said upon the testimony of
that day, that which I trust you will say upon
tbtf testimony of this day, that whatever that
case was, it was not a levying of war, and there-
fore not the high treason imputed.
With these observations I will dismiss this
Eirt of the case; only let me once more (per-
ips I may be tedioust but a man would be
ramer tedious than fail in his duty) call your
minds to this point : — It is not a question of
guilt or innocence of the prisoner. It is a
question of treason, and no other question you
liaye now to try. There are other indictments
DOW pending for the other offences. The
question of treason, and that alone, is the one
you have to judge of on the present indictment.
I do not apprehend the other parts of the
charge will be much relied upon. But I will
just say a word as to them. It is charged in
two of the counts of this indictment/ that there
was a compassing and imagining the death
of the Idog ; and also that there was ' a design
to depose him from bis royal style and dignity.
As far as you have any evidence before you
(even putting out of your consideration the
contamination of the material witnesses), there
is no evidence whatever of any hostile inten-
tion against the person of the king. And it is
4o«day, for the nrst time, that I am to hear
(though I dare say it is a very convenient doc-
trine to the ministers) that they consider them-
selves so unalienably united to nis majesty, that
all conspiracy against them and their places
must be considered as a conspiracy against
majesty itself. To deprive them of their places
certainly is not high treason, because there al-
ways has been, and ever will be, parties who
think the present administration, — ^when I say
th^ 'present administration, I mean the exist-
ing administration of the day, — ^may be fairly
opposedand removed, and that another ad-
xninistration can be formed, who will manage
the affiiirs of the country much better. This
is the uniform hu^age held by some persons
in a certain great assembly in this country.
Iliere is a constant endeavour to persuade the
conntiy to that effect ; and, therefore, the de-
priving his majesty's ministers of their places
IS DO. treason. Has conspiring to deprive his
majesty of one or two of them by force, evei'
besn held to be high treason ? Certainly not.
Jknd I do reoolleet to bavs read .in jome por-
VOL. XXXIII.
tion of bur history (whether this reign or the
last, I will not undertake to say) that certain
grivy councillors themselves have gone into the
elds and pointed their pistols to each othei^
each intending, no doubt, to deprive a minister
of his place and his majesty of a counsellor.
Now^ those gentlemen would have thought
theiaselves very strangely treated, if an indict^
ment for high treason had been preferred
against them, though if the event of their battle
had been different, they might have been
treated with an indictment of another de-
scription. Then, to go one step further, is
depriving his majesty of all his ministers at
once bv force, high treason ? I say it is not.
And though I feel all the horror which must
be excited in the breast of an Englishman at a
plan of this sort, I cannot sacrifice my duty to
my feelings, and refrain from warning you not
to pervert the laws from their just ends — not
even to punish guilt. For the protection
of the lives and liberties of us all, which are
only safe while the law is inflexibly adminis*
tered, you will, I am sure, attend to the matter
alone in the charge before you, and consider
whether or not the prisoner has been guilty of
high treason, and high treason alone.
It is a great consolation to me that I am to
be followed by my learned friend, who with
far more eloquence and ability than I possess,
will point out the discrepancies in this evi-
dence. I have been anxious to do my duty to
the prisoner •> not forgetting that duty which I
hold every lawyer owes to his country. I have
told you the danger, and have read from the
highest legal authority the fatal consequences
of letting in a flood of constructive treasons,
which, thank God, it is in your power to pre-
vent. And be assured of this, that whatever
you may feel as to the particular circumstances
of this case, you are best serving vour country
when you confine yourselves strictly to the con-
sideration of the offence charged by the indict-
ment before you. You will, therefore, take all
the circumstances of this case into your con^-
sideration ; you will say whether ^ou can find
upon the whole testimony, includmg the con-
taminated testimony of Hiden and Monument,
those facts proved, from which you oan infer,
that there was a plan of levying war against his
majesty, in Order to force him to change his
measures : weigh all the circumstances, if you
do find them fully proved, I cannot expect you
will find any other thaiv a verdict of— guilty :
if you do not find them fully proved, lam sure
you will not hesitate to pronounce a verdict of
— not guilty. Consider it well. I can say no
more. May that Being in whose Jiaads are
the issues of life and death^ 4irect your minds
to a right conclusion.
EVIDEWCX ton THE PRISOVSR.
Thomas Chamben sworn. — Examined by ,
Mr. Adolp/tus,
Where do yon live? — No. 3, Heathcock^
court, in the Strand, ^ * •
3Z
to my place,
him?—
1075] 1 GEORGE 1F«
• TImt is neaity oppottle the AdelpU, I be
Here! — ^YcSyitii.
D^yoa know a oBan of the
^— YeSy I have aeeo hitOp be
In ^boae eompany ^id yon
Edwards's.
Aboat what lime did you aee
« week before the Cato-slieet
^laoe.
Where did joq see bim ?— -In hit room*
Whe were then ?— Myself aad Edwards.
And Adams ?-— Yes.
Tell as what passed then?—
Mr. Gumey.'^U my learned friend is propo-
Inng to give any contradiction to Adams, he
should put a distinct question.
Mr. Ji(i(pA«i.*With all my heart, I sbotdd
lather do it so. Did Adams and Edwards
come in company or separately ? — They came
toffetber.
I>id they make any proposal to yon abont
the assassination of his auyesty's ministers ?—
Ves.
. Did Adams say to von that thev would do
ft, and that they would have blood and wine
or their supper?— Yes ; Edwards asked me to
go with them, and I would not go.
Then what did Adams say ?— -I refused ; hot
1 ought to state before that, after I learnt
No ; you ought not to state that. Did
Adams say to you that they were going to kill
bb majesty's ministers, and that they would
bare blood and wine for supper f — ^Yes.
Did Adams and Edwards, at any time,
come to you again at your lodgings ?~0n the
!Monday night in the week that the Cato-
street business took place, it was a very wet
Aight.
Did you see them again at your lodgings on
that night?— Yes.
Was that the same night or another night?—
Ihe Monday night.
On the night of this affair, in Cato-street, did
the two come to you again ? — No.
XrM ^Jamti Itigs
llOT«
I know that; tfaal it not en ta^Werto asy
^nestiott? — How long have I kaown baa? I
cauMKaay.
Aboat bow long ? — I caosMil aqr.
Yea laaUy cannol say hew lengf — ^No; I
■ do not sappoae I have been in bis
? — Aboet above twiee, or three times.
look; At what places?— The fiislptece I ever
1 him to speaa to him was near the cowt
I live, at a fanqihlet shop.
Is that Ibe thop where Ibcy sdl
DwaHs aad Medasas?— Yes.
Kept by wfaomP — ^Let me see; I do
know ; Watlin^, i believe.
You are qmte right. Give me one of tke
other places at wbwh yoa have seea him f •*!
canaot stale where I have seen him.
Oh ves, yea can? — ^I am sere I cannot in
troth chaige mv memory with it.
I must tronble that meoiory of Towa, bc>-
eaese when you have seen a man three tinies
you most know where. ShaH 1 help
memory ? — ^i cannot stale wktete it was.
Do you kaow a hoase ealled the
anns ? — Yes.
Where is that P— In Bonad^eoart in te
Stmnd.
That is not ht ttvm year lodgingB yen
know ?— It is not
Did net yon see him theref — No^
WiU yoa swear that ?— Yes.
Positively ?-Yes.
You have been there ?— >Yes.
When? — ^Three times.
When were those times?— Befeee Chi
Who was in the chair the first oi|^? —
There vras ao chair where I was, nor any
business going on.
Mr. Adolphm, — ^I submit that to ask who
was in the chair, when these prisoners are not
proved to be there, is not eviaeoce.
Mr. Garafy.— -My learned friend is
paling what probably may come oat.
Who came then ? — No one, not that day. • ^ , *x
When then?— On the Monday before the Lor J Chief Justice Dailtai.— I cannot antici*
Wednesday.
Did they bring any thing with them?— Yes.
What ?— A large bag;
. Mf* Otmey^— Speaktag from feooUeeiSon I
9V0«ild uppeafto year kwdihip's netes, whether
there waa such a^nesiianpat In Adams.
Mr. dti^km^^l was not able to take «i
nele^ a^ eroiMsamiattSoa, and tbereftttef
^eaoaol speiAt to it t I *tHn net press Itthte.
' Did j«n see them agrfn f— Yes, with alarge
Img which they wanted to leave.
Thdmas Chamhert cross-examined by
Mr, Qvrnejf,
What are you ?-*A bopt maker.
liow long have you known the prisoner ! have since heard was tbe'filaek Bog, 'onae.
Ings ?— Where Is the prisoner Ings f Who was in the chair then ?— There mn no
Turn to the bar and look ?— I might have ■ diair dien, it %as iti a little parhmr.
nten him, but not to have anykaowMge of What was the siae of thb^eompany ^-ll
^^^' anglt^ be about MveBtAoniihntkese.^
pate what may come out in the evidence.
Mr. GtrM^f.-^I am not iwrsotng it wibilyl
assnre yonr lordship. Who was in the ohasrf
—Them was no person sittiag ia a cfaalK..
But there might be a-ebatimaa withent thatP
««>6nt*I -tei say there^was net.
•How many ^fvbre 4lRse^-4 eannot tei^ I
was tn-the tap loeak
No-elfcerToom bnt«tbe4Bp4nomf«-'Knc
The^oOier nlght^/yna Snrtwtheie, num yen
in no other room 'bat the tapiroom f-Mmie
times is all the4imte*^nraB^th*a^ ajJad^aMnys
in the tap»r6ora.
Do you kaow the fifaek Oog iaOrayViah-
lane ?'^I have bisen at a-pabKc hoose, whieh'I
10771
fit Higk TrtiuoH.
A. D. 1890.
1107^
MHien was it? — ^On a Sunday night.
In what month?—! cannot state.
Before or after Christmaa?*— I cannot posi-
tively «ay%
1 dare say yoa could give me the names of
those seven, all ol them ?— I am sure I could
BOl>
Give me the names of those you do re-
member?— I was invited there by a man of the
name of Bryant.
When you went there whom did you 6nd ?
— ^I cannot exactly say.
Just give me some of them? — ^I was in-
vited to take a pint of beer with him, he was
going to the Cape of Good Hope.
Who were there invited to take leave of your
liriend Bryant T — They were all strangers to me
except one.
Who was that one ?—That was Mr. Thistle-
wood.
Do you know BrmK ? — Very well.
Will you swear Bnint was not there ? — ^Yes.
You wtll?~I wiO; not when I w^ks in the
foom he was not.
Do you know Pdin ? — ^No, I do not think I
do know Paiin, I never had any conversation
with him to mv knowledge.
That might be ; but will you swear you do
not know him ? — ^No, I will not do that ; for I
nay have seen him in a publio-lMmse.
Did vou attend the meeting at Smithfield in
December last? — ^Yon mean the last meeting
tiiat was held there.
You might go to the int as well as the last ?
—I was at all of them.
Who catried the black flag ?-«That I cannot
state.
Ifrhat flag did yeu carry ?— I carried no flag
the last meeting.
Any meeting? the last but one, perhaps ? —
Ijet me see ; I have carried two flags.
Did you carrv the black flag either of the
times ? — ^No, I did not.
What flag did you carry? — It had inscribed
mpofi it ** ne Manchester Massacre.''
Did you carry the flag with the inscription
^ Let us die like Freemen, and not be sola like
slaves?"— I never saw such a flag as that.
At either of the Smithfleld meetings you
never saw such a flag T — Not to my knowledge.
Did you carry a flag on the triumphal entry
iof Mr. Hunt into London ?•— ^^ The Massacre of
liaochesterr no; the ''Trial by Jury,** that
vms the flag I carried.
Yott have told me you know Brant very
-well, and that you know Thistlewood ; do you
know Davidson ? — ^Yes.
And Tidd P-^No ; I have not much know-
ledge of Tidd ; I may know him by seeing him
so our stock meetings, in eonducttng our trade
Dnyeuknow Wilson ?~YeS| I have seen
Wilsoa.
How cAtB hove you seen him? — I cannot
exactly say.
Do vou know Hatrison ?-^Very ynSk.
And Jlvadbom ? < No ; BmdbuffB^ I ba;re not
inuch knowledge of.
Strange? — ^No: I do not know Strange ar
all.
Gilchrist ?— No, I do not.
Or Cooper ?— Nor Cooper,
These you do not know ? — No.
How long have you known Mr. Thistlewood ?
— Ever since Mr. Hunt's triumphal entry.
You, I dare say, were excessively shocked
at this proposition, made by Adams and Ed-
wards, to you, to go and assist in assassinating'
his m^esty*s ministers ? — It shocked me so I
wouM not go to do any such thing.
And as Bow-street is a very little distance
from you, I dare say that induced you to go
and lay information P — No.
Ihnrnu Chamhert re-examined by
Mr. Adofyhui.
Did Edwards or Adams know of your ac-
quaintance with those other persons when they
came to your house ? — I cannot say how Ed-
wards came to know of it.
Bat, however, they came ? — ^Yes, they did.
Maiy Baker sworn. — Examined by
Mr* CunooocL
Are you Mr. Richard Tidd's daughter P —
Yes, I am.
Tliere were certain things found at his house
by the police officers ? — Yes.
8ome powder? — ^Yes.
And grenades, as they are called ? — Yes.
And some balls ? — Yes.
Who brought them there? — They were
brought in in the morning that they were
seised.
Who brought them ? — A man and a boy.
Do you know a man of the name of Ed-
wards ? — ^Yes ; he brought some of the hand-
grenades.
Did he bring them there the morning they
were seized ? — No.
But before ? — ^Yes.
When were they taken away after they were
first brought ? — ^They ivere taken and returned.
Did you see Edwards on the morning of the
33rd ?— Yes.
What did he do then P — He came and took
some of the grenades and powder away.
Were any of ^ them brought back again ?— •
No, not by him.'
By any body ?— I dare say they might be
the same that were brought back on the 24th,
but I do not know.
Waff there one very large one, do you recol-
lect ?--Yes.
Who brought that first? — Adams.
Was that brought back again t— 'No.
Mary Baker cross-examined by
Mr. fhdiciior Qenerai,
The box, I beUeve, wa^ not taken away ? —
It was taken by the oiBScers.
How long might the box have been there ? —
It might have been there two or three days.
How long had the grenades been ^re that
were taken away on diet Wednesday f--I d^
1079J 1 GEORGE IV.
not know, they might have been there a fort-
night, I cannot say as to the precise time.
What time of the day, on the Wednesday,
was it they were taken away?~ln the morning
part.
Mary Baker re-examined by Mr. Cunoood,
Was the box fastened or corded f — Corded.
Had it been opened at all to your knowledge?
— Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Cttnooo(f.^We shall not trouble your
lordship with any more witnesses.
Mr. Adotphm, — Gentlemen of the Jury >—
The course of this cause has now reached that
period when it becomes my duty to address to
you such observations as appear to me likely
to be favourable to the prisoner, who stands
Jbefore yon for his life or death ; and if there
wanted no other motive to induce you to give
a serious attention and a kind indulgence
where it shall be necessary to the arguments I
have to submit to you, this consideration
would be sufficient, that probably the few
feeble sentences I shall utter, will, if your
opinion should not coincide in that which I
have to say, be the last favourable words con-
cerning that unhappy man, which he will ever
bear in this world. When I say favourable
words, I do not mean that the learned judge,
who is to sum up the evidence to you, will
not make every suggestion in his favour that
the law and the facts enable him to make,
but that you will not hear from any person
after myself, an address purely in favour of
his cause, you will hear, recommended with
all the weight of authority, and all the force
iif talent, a strong set of observations against
Jiim, against all that has been advanced by my
learned friend, and against all that I shall
advance; but in his favour you will hear
nothing but those deductions which the evi-
dence draws forth from the learned judge, and
which, I hope, to whatever extent they may
go, will also find with you a most favourable
acceptance.
Having so very lately performed for another
person the dutv which I am now called upon
to perform, I feel most sensibly that languor
of mind, and that sensation approaching, if I
may be allowed the expression here, to dis-
laste, which ever attends those who have to
tread twice over the same ground — those who
bave to advance, for a second time, the argu*
jnents and the topics they have advanced once
before. I can have no means of varying my
statements, except by abridging them ; I can
have no means of adding to their force, unless
I were to call in aid^that which I have not —
a renovated mind and extended abilities, such
as within the short period which has passed
.between Wednesday and this day, of course
cannot be expected. But I advance to the
performance of this difficult task with a mind
the more clear, and with faculties the more
unfettered, because I am enabled to lay my
hand upon my heart, and to say that no one
Trial qfJamet Ings
UtIlO
opinion T'hicblhave had theiiOBOor tonb-
mit to the former jury, has since beea impsiRd
in my mind ; but, on the contrary, that ibe
transactions upon the present trial, aad Ibe
variances from the evidence which I hevd
before, very much confirm and advance thoN
opinions which I formerly held, and make me
flatter myself that I shall not, wiihoatpio-
ducing the effect of conviction, addren to yoo
some of my arguments and observations.
You have ^n told, in the fervid and elo-
quent opening of this case, by the letmed
Solicitor-general — and you have heard it since
from my lord, in a way that I hope I shattaot
cause it to be mentioned again— that the w-
diet whidi has passed, oui^ht to be as ondi
out of your minds, as if it had never occund.
I agree perfectly in that ; I recommend it; and
I pray it may be so, but at the same tioie I
know how difficult it is— nay, how tliwt
impossible it is — for any men, howefer coned
their minds may be, not to let their jtid|aMBts
be in some degree influenced by their meno-
ries, not to permit their minds to be swap
by some consideration of that which twelw
virtuous, discreet and honest men have doie
before them. I am therefore, to piay yoQ»
exercise on behalf of this unhappy mta, wits
its utmost rigour, that difficult dnty of all^tIi^
tion and self-denial— to forget every ^
except what you have heard in theooonew
yesterday and to-day, as much as if yon w«rt
totally unconscious of its having pMwd ; a»«
this man were brought to a separate trial, »J
had no connexion with any other P«"JJJT
has undergone, or is to undergo the jadgB»«
of a court and jury. .
When I speak of my own '^«"""**;;;|^
own labouting under something appwaw
to distaste in entering on the trial of thn pW"
oner, I cannot help contrasting iBy»dJ«»*
the learned Solicitor^general, andbisendeniij
joyous and happy situation— he is gojj
journey, as he expresses it himselli ^ ,
assumed confidence, that he canaot w^
arriving ultimately at the point of •^"**?^
put it to you that he did not state ^^'?2
pected to prove, but what he knew be sW»J
be able to prove ; he did not put it tbat« »*
any doubt or difficulty about in>k»"«[.°*^*J
case, but that experience had ttngh*™";"*
he knew what he should be aWe to n^jT
because the witnesses had undergone esaw*
nation before, and he could calculate ^
their disclosures would be. To rae theie »J
be no such advantage ; to me the vwy
advantage I shall have, will be to shew ^
hereafter, by the comparison of AdaiM* ^
timony, as he varied it himself from ooefl»J
to the other, that if 1 could be P«P»^
answer the facU then disclosed, "*f "J
were in reserve, and I should have a n^ ^
from the same witness, he haring *1jv«
things whi(;h he thooghi fit notthea to«>"
It uwery. usual with ns, when ^^^
the talent we hav« to bring to th« W^
10811
■for Hi^ Trtatou.
A. D. 1820.
ciosa
be OYerbttlanoedy either 1^ the popularity of
the cause, or the ability of the advocate you
have already heard, to pray you will dismiss
from your minds certain topics which have
been introduced. In the course pf the speech
of the Solicitor-general, there was a great deal
of fervid de6lamation applicable to the horrors
which might have been produced by these
speculative enterprises — I must beg you to
avert yoar minda from those descriptions, to
think only of that which is actually proved to
have been meditated and done, to carry your-
selves no further than the witnesses carry you,
and to examine the testimony of those wit-
nesses with that strictness, from which alone
the result of justice can be obtained.
The learnt Solicitor»general seeing rightly
(I cannot call it foreseeing, for it was rather
taking a retrospective view) seeing exactly
what the course of his evidence would be, and
what the course of the examination of his wit-
nesses would turn out, proposed to prove his
ease by two means ; the one by an accomplice,
and the other by witnesses who should support
that accomplice ; and which witnesses he said to
you (and particularly applied the observation
to one of the name of Hiden) should be uoim-
peached and unimpeachable. The: learned
ooiicitop-general then proceeded to state the
law with respect to the examination of accom*
plices ; certainly, it would be impossible to lay
down positions of law- with more eloquence
than he did upon that occasion ; but I cannot
help thinking, with ihe deference due to his
high station, and that character he has maintain-
ed through life, that a little accuracy might be
added to his propositions, by talents much in*
ferior to his own. In considering the evidence
of an accomf^e, this is most true, that you
must consider him as a witness, whom necessity
puts into the hands of a prosecutor, and for
whose antecedent delinquency, they who
bring him into court are in no way answerable ;
•o far he can be used by a prosecutor, without
throwing any stain on a prosecution, or those
who conduct it. They do not willingly con*
laminate themselves with a bad man, but they
do that which the Solicitor-general intimated
to you they alone can do, they pursue the
course of the conspiracy, by having recourse to
the eye-sight and knowledge of those who have
been in the dark recesses of those conspiracies,
and can alone state what happened there.
Thus far I agree most implicitly with the So-
lieitor-general ; but when juries and a court
have accomplices before them, there is a great
deal more to be done than the learned Solici-
tor«general pointed out to you, which, indeed,
amounted to no more than that you were to
look at him with the same eyes as you would
4it the most respectable witness ; for he says,
lint, you are to examine the interest he has in
tiie evidence he giv«s ; so you are if the most
jrespeetable man I see in court were to come
-to give evidence ; if there is any interest or
«ven any feeling arising out of partiality or af-
itotioD^yoa wiS take that into your coosidera-
.1
tioo, in forming your estimate of the evideaccy
whoever may be the witness : in that, therefore,
an accomplice would not stand in a different
situation nrom the mostbonourable of mankind;
but he does stand in a different situation, and
it is over this that the talent of the Solicitor-
general has been employed to throw a clo^k ;
he asks, has Adams any interest to add to the
deepness with which the crime is already in-
vested ? Has he an interest to represent mat-
ters worse than they really were ? has he an in-
terest to carry any point in the cause ? Yes,
gentlemen ; yes is the answer to every one of
those propositions; he has the strongest in-
terest; ne nas procured a conditional indemnity,
as we are to suppose from the concession of
the Solicitor-general, by proposing to come
forward as a witness ; but he comes in chuns
and in custody, he comes, not as a free man,
speaking spontaneously the dictates of his own
mind, and standing upon his honour and eon*
science; but he speaks as a man who must carry
certain points, to earn that which has. been
promisea him, and without which he has no
reason to think he shall obtain either indemnity
or advantage; they are to depend upon the suc-
cess which attends his evidence. In this I do
not rely on assertions which may be made ; I
shall refer myself to your own good sense, to
the eiperience you must have- of the nature
and operations of the human mind, whether
you can give the same belief to a man vHio
comes into court in chains and in cnstody*
which you would to a man who comes free
from fear, and exempt from bias, especicdly
when he comes in the chains and custody of
those who can prosecute him at the same mo-
ment for the offence which he comes to prove
against others. I do not say that he. is in-
capable of being received as a witness, but
that he must be received with much more care
and caution than would be necessary with a
witness of any other description.
We are asked again, does this witness ex-
pose himself to contradiction, and is he con-
tradicted? the same question, too, applies to
every other witness, in every other case ^—
every witness must, take that which an ac-
complice must take, the chance of being con-
tradicted, if his evidence is capable of con-
tradiction. But the accomplice, whatever may
be said about him in other respects, has this
advantage over an honest witness, unless a
proper deduction is made from his testimony
by the jury, — that, in a matter of conspiracy,
particularly all those, or nearly all those, who
could contradict him, are tied up and prevented
from doing so by being included in the indict-
ment; and whether they be convicted or not,
they cannot be witnesses to contradict him.
If this prisoner, for example, were acquitted,
undoubtedly he could be a witness for others;
but until he is acquitted, the law does not give
a man that advantage which he would have, if
the individuals who might give evidence for
-him were charged in a separate indictment ;
and being supposed iuQocent until pronounced
10831 I GEORGE IV.
gvRly, nrigM be reenred as witnesses befofs
tbetr trial. Tbtis, therefore, tbosemost capable
of contradictnig the aoeonplioe, are tied up
and prereoted gtriog their evideace ; but when
we are asked, are the witnesses cootradicted
that have been brought forward, I cannot help
thinking it sonMthing more of a taonting ques-
tion than I should have expected. If there
are men who are not named in the indictment,
and who may be cognisant of some of the
timnsactions on which it is founded, can it be
supposed, when a witness for the Crown is
brought into court under a guard, and in cus-
tody, that he vrho should come against the
Crown, would fail to expect that his day would
come ; tiiat ere long he would appear in court
in a very different character from that of wit-
ness?— Can it be supposed, for example, that
Palin, who has been named by the learned
counsel for the Crown, can come here as a
witness? It must be known he is beyond the
reach of any sobposna ; but even if he oould be
Ibond, could it be expected that he would come
forward? What then avaib us the offer that
we may produce him, when he who makes
the offsr most know that which the witness
Tannton tells you upon his oath, that Irom the
meosent of this affair taking place, PaKn had
been a fositive» and a large reward offered for
npproheoding him. Thily, the offer is most
gracious to us : you may call PaKn, when Palin
could not come, if we could find him, without
the certainty of going to prison; but Palin
cannot be found, because all the yigilance of
the police officers, stimulated b^ a Urge re*
ward, does not enable them to discover bim ;
sudi an offer, therefore, does seem rather an
essay upon our weakness, than a suggestion
of &e means of extricating ourselves from
peril.
When the statute passed, which directs that
a list of the witnesses shall be given to the
prisoner, it certainly was with the benevolent
▼iew, that by knowins who should appear
against them, tbey might know what sort of
evidence to prepare, in order to repel the tes-
timony of those witnesses. The prisoners here
have a list of, I think, one hundred and
sixty-eight individuals ; nothing to guide their
judgment, no knowledge but such as their own
feeble and unwarranted expectations enabled
them to form of who would be likely to be
called against them, and whom the^ should be
able to contradict ; they give their instructions
accordingly, and when they are prepared with
instructions to contradict a witness whom they
expect to be produced, because he has been
mentioned throughout the transaction, he is
not brought forward. When another witness
is calledi and some evidence has been offered
to prove him nnworflhy of belief, when we have
other witnesses on the ioor tc prove him a
man to whom no csedk ought to be given,
we find him withdrawn, and that eapensc has
beggared still more an exhausted pnrse, and
those wiiMsses who have come tc paitioolar
TiM qfjMWtu Ing$
[lOU
Mr. Jbtmmuy QemrA-^^ia^, my leid, I
meet iotcrpcse.
Mr. 4dfrfji*Ms»^ was viAi« two word* sC
finishing ^y sentence.
Mr. Attoney Central —If it is dooA it ii
not worth while to object.
Mr. Jdvipha.-^! shmM be sotiy to my oqF
thing imgolar. . II I am wrong I shall mboiit
to correction from my lord. I tniit I wis
making no observatioo that was net peifedlf
wanantcd bv the opening. It was put to jos,
gentlemen, tlmt you might believe tbenitocMi
to be produced for the Crown, nalsss the pii-
soner contradioled thens by witnesses. Ints
shewing yen how difficult it was for the ptiMo-
ers to produce that evideooe, and I wss ihen-
ing yon more particnlarly that the bsl of 168,
which by formaline of law has been delirenA
to them, presented no certain intteatios vbs
would be called ; and that even if that ciieso*
stMnoe could have guided their judgment, «
influcBOod their inteatkm, that some how «
other^ hf the subtpactico of some eridcseer
that judgaaent was exercised in vain. K«V|
though you have heaid a rnmch moie abls i^
gument o« the other side than IshallhtaUf
lo make, I should think in ceoMMa Unmt
and commcB candour, I have a right to sasev
the aiguments of the Sciieitor-goacnl, ssd Is
say th^ you are not without witnenm bett«e
we are not able to produce thesQ, hat ^c^*"*
when we have gone to the labour sad ^^^
obtaining them, the expense is thrown avsjry »*
the witnesses anneoiioBd to us are not hiongfat
forward by the Crown ; and whauvcr rmaooi
we may mive had for believing they «iU »
called, to our great disnppointmettt they m
not so.
It is said there aie other witnesses, Go4
and Harris, who Iuitc been present st sosk m
those conversations, and may be called. I
deny that there are any such witncvss; til
witness, Adams, has to4d you that which ■
untrue; there are no apch peaonswhomv*
could adduce ; there are each peisoBS is fiM
other room, whom the Crown could call, m
then we sbould see whether they would sweitf
to that whick the informing witneis hsi ad*
vanced; but if I had produced to yoa a «>|l^
new of the naase of Harris or Cook, ws nip
have been told *' very tme^ that Uairis or tMl
Cook says he nerer ms at such a msetiBf ;
but he is not the man alluded to." ^^^
the side of the prisoner, do not knpv ^'^^'Vjf
find him, and we shoyld be treated vith a ion
of indifference as to the eflcsi we hsd made
(for I will not use any other expresiieoX ^
be told we had proved nothing. ^^LsstefaHr
eays the SoUckwr^neraW^^Yeu are tsolH
serve whether the aoccmplior witaess ie o'*
not confirmed e' net last of all, genllenien, m
firstofall. I say it is a piims«y pwpoiiM*
in the admioistratioo of law, that an aoflPi|^
pUeeommct be beUsfvcdttnlesshe isadfHlQSi4
confirmed ; 4httlbe is, an the Seli€il0Nr«*^
I085J
Jinr Higk Treditm.
A.D. 1820.
[lOM
Mtysy a comptetont sad a credible witDen ; nayi
I can produce the dicta of judges, thai lie is
capable of being heard, although there is no
confirmation of his testimony, but shall ever
treasure in my mind the suooeeding words of
the same learned judge : '' When I hare gnated
all this," he said, ** I have conceded merely a
barren truism, for it has always been the prac*
dee, and I believe always will be the practice
of judges to tell jaries that they cannot beliere
aa accomplice unless he be ooofirraed, or, at
all events, not to make up thctr minds to a
verdict on such endence uneoBfirmed ''--Hioft
confirmed, I admit, in eviery proposition, but
so confirmed in some particular essential to the
issue, as to make it safe lor a jury to bebeve
the whole of his evidence.
There are other points to which I will call
your attention, which will shew what oredit
ought to be giveii io an accomplioe, and whe^-
tber he ought to be believed or not ; and I
consider this of the more importance because,
in defiance of aU I have beard or maj hear
fiwm any quarter, I do and must maintaia,
that the treasonoMe intention upon which
alone you can find the prisoner at the bar
guflty of high treason, lies in the mouth of the
acoompliM alone, and if he is unfit to be be*
lieved, and yoli erase, as you then must do,
his testimony entirely from your memoiy and
Judgment, there is not a shadow of pR>of against
the prisoner to covnct -htm of high treason.
When I speak of the confirmation of a witness,
I do not speak of those nn important confirma*
tions whidi in some parts the aecompKce has
received ; I do not speak of games of domino,
of lighting of candles, of flannel bags, and ball-
cartridges, which may have been intended for
tone purpose or another, but of some direct ap-
plication of that intentinn, which at present
lies only in the mouth of a witness whom I
t^alX maintain to be, on his own showing,
vtterly incapable of being supported, except
Iqr complete confirmation.
- ^Ilie points to which your attention ought to
be directed are these :^Is the account which
'Adams has given, probable or even possible ?
is the conduct of the witness such as to entitle
liiaQ to belief? Or docs he throw doubt and
SQBpicion upon himself? Is he contradicted
liy uil the witnesses produced on the one side ;
and is he confirmed as far as he might be ; or
eve ivitnesses widiheld for iear that that which
ie intended for confirmation should turn out to
he contradiction? Those are the points to
^vbich I think you onght to direct your atten-
tioB. When I say you ought, I say it with
Bttbaiistion to your own better judgments and
the directions you may receive from above;
iMit I say <tn every ene of these points the evi-
dence of Adams will be found .^^ter than the
mar or the vapour which ^fioats upon it.
- iAtt to the probability of his story, it is almost
'«0nc0dc$d by the other side that it is* utterly
^oid of probability ; they ^o not afibct to say,
titts is a narrative we should have believed iy
«tnel4 tkfaottglh we^ not admit that fte^gMNind
on which it is impeached, namely, its impro-
bability, applies to that more than to other
conspiracies which have existed within our own
observation. I deny that, gentlemen ; that im-
probable plots may have arisen within our own
observation, or been stated in history, I admit ;
but I asser^ that no one so improbable as the
r resent ever existed in truth or fiction ; whm
say never, I do not pretend to have read
every thing ; but, in all my reading, I am not
aware that any one so improbable ever existed
either in Great Britain or elsewhere. I am
not cash enough to say, and never will say,
that because a plot is improbable, you are,
therefone, to disbelieve its existence; but that
if a witness comes fi>rwafd, of a most suspioi*
ous and odious description, and gives you an
account of a transaction -void of all bumav
probability, it is not his positive swearing ihat
such a plot existed, that will induce you to
believe it did exist ; but on the contrary, yon ^
have to weigh this ; have a dozen men, or any
certain number of men, not being under the
care of aiieeper of madmen, or wearing a strait
waistcoat, concurred in a plan which no fauman
being can believe P Or is it the malignaHt
fiction of one, who knowing. already to what
degree they were tainted by an inteaded miir«
der, and how far they were endangered under
lord Ellenborough's act, ibr shooting at ibe
officers, throw in such additional cirourastaneet
as might include them all under a charge of
high treason ? The witness himself is arrested
upon a charge of this kind — he is obliged to
swear to tbat which will recommend him— 'he
is obliged to swear deeply — he is obliged, in
swearing, to assume the sembknoe of a Chris*
tian — ^he is obliged to aim at consistency, be-
cause he dares not move one tittle out of the
line, for the consequences to him would be
fatal; he caokes before you in .the midst of
these urgent interests and pressing necessities.
And can you think, that firom such a mouth
such a plot receives the sanction of probability ?
My learned friend Mr. Garwood, antici-
Satea that I should go minutely into the evi-
enoe, to shew its discrepancies, and the im-
possibility of its being true. I did so once,
out I confess I am neither prepared nor de-
sirous to go through it again, because I think
that the leading points may be easily selected
and arranged, and that the absurdities will be
so glaring, that when once shewn, you will
have a full notion of the extent to which you
must carry your credulity before you deter-
mine in favour of the testimony of a witness
like Adaras.
It seems that at some time in January, an
interview took place between Thistlewood,
Brunt, and the witness Adams, at which some-
thing was proposed about the assassination of
the cabinet ministers; that he beeame ac-
quainted with Thistlewood, on the tsth ^df *
January, and that at some time between tbat
and his going -to prison on the 16th, this ex-
traordinary conversation took place. I tmv^ a
note ot hu examination on the. former
10871 ^ GEORGE IV.
sioD, and I directed his attention to that, and
adverted to some circumstances to i»hich I
shall not now advert, but shall notice in my
further address to you^ but that this plot was
amnged in some degree, and was communi-
cated to this man, who was then going to
prison for so small a sum as six and twenty
shillings, and who was shut up for that sum
lor fifteen days. Consider who this man is
—« bom subject of our lord the king — a
soldier who has received his pay — a man who
is bound at his time of life (for, as I should
think, from his looks he must be nearly fifty),
to have due and right views of the obligations
of society — ^he keeps his secret in his own
breast, determined neither to act upon it nor
to disclose it, and restrained by what ? by fear,
•ays the soldier I fear acted upon me, even as
early as the 15th of January, or the day before
I went to White-cross 'Street, when I was with-
in four walls. — ^Why did you not go and tell
the Secretary of State or my Lord Ma/or (for it
was in London) of this, plot, and claim the pro-
teotaon, of the prison-walls, till those persons
were secured P He tells you that he felt fear,
and yet he did not take the means of 8afety-r-«
gl^ious specimen of the consistency you are to
expect; but this man fears, and therefore hates ;
for no man fears that he does not hate ; but
these persons so feared and yet so hated, are
the very first [persons to whom he addresses
himself on getting out. He is discharged on
the 30th, and on the 31st of January he is
with them again ; on the 2nd of February again,
and their plan is then disclosed — a committee
is formed — the chair taken — ^resolutions are
passed as matters of business, and all this in
ue presence of a man of the name of Edwards,
but he never mentions one tittle to any one on
the face of .the earth.
Gentlemen, do you believe in the fear ? do
yoo believe in the motive ? Is he not, in iact,
the suborned witness of another man, to state
something which never did occur, to bring
these men whose lives may be forfeited, or are
endangered for crimes. of another description,
within that of high treason, becanse that is a
more acceptable mode of sacrifice, and may do
for him that which another accusation would
not have done? because ss to every thing
which relates to the intention of massacre at
lordHarrowby*s bouse, as to every thing which
relates to the death of Smithers, or any other
part of the subject you are now trying, there
vras evidence enough vrithout this accomplice,
and therefore, the election must have been
made somewhere rather to convict these peo-
Sle of high treason, and to make them a sacri-
ce for that, than to convict them of crimes of
which they could have been proved guilty, by
the most unexceptionable witnesses, if they
reallv are guilty ; and so to rid the country of
any- danger from tbem, and prevent others mm
enterinic into such combinations in future.
Going through the whole of the evidence
given on this part of the ease, I premise that
that is .a perpetually glaring absurdity which
Tnial of James Ings
[1088
nothing but the most abominable audaeity
could ever have detailed. I beg you to attend
to the statement of the steps that were taken,
of ihe propositions made, of the feeble fi>Ke
with wfaach it was intended to execute the looat
extensive plot ever known in this country, and
all this not taken up rashly, or on the spur of any
occasion, but debated and methodised, disctisa-
ed and argued for the space of five weeks, no
one having the wisdom to discover that this
project was like the baseless fabric of a viskm.
Even supposing they are all staundi and liraa,
even supposing^that which he gives you rea-
son to understand they could not possibly s<i|>-
pose<— that thev had no spies or traitors anioiig
them, even if it were left to its own natural
imbecility, the acts. of plunder and mofder,
the conflagration of houses, and seixure of pro-
perty might have taken place, but ignoraaoe
and stupidity are not so great as to indiiee
men to believe that any thing further could be
effected* ^
You have had that which produces a!wa3Ps a
sort of mechanical effect. I do not vaeam to
pay an ill compliment to your understandings^
out you have had a display of visibte obyeda^
— pikes and swords, and gans and blunder-
busses have been put before you, #0 the end
that this feeling mav be excited in every raaa's
mind, '* how should I like to have this sort oi
thing put to my breast ? how should I feel if
this were applied to my chimney, and that to
my stair-case," and so on : that is, that the in*
dividual feeling of each man may make Kioa
separate himself from society, may make hiniy
through the medium of his own perscNial
hatred of violence or apprehension of danger^
think that this contemptible exhibitioii of im-
perfect armoury could operate on a town filled
oy a million of loyal inhabitants, or could give
the means of overwhelming the empire* Wlien
touched by reason, theyjshrink to nothing, aad
vrill never produce a verdict contrary to the
evidence of facts : it is like displaying t^
bloody robe of a man who has been stabbed or
murdered ; it 6 like the trick practised at eveiy
'sessions, where we see a witness poll oat scMne
cloak or handkerchief dipped in blood of the
person, to produce conviction through &a
medium of commiseration ; they do not trust
to description, but rely upon display. That is
the effect of the production of these arms; bet
to suppose that, with such a oollectioD howt-
ever nimished, vrith such a combinatioQ of
miserable means, four or five and twenty mea
(for that appears to be the number con-
cerned ; fifteen or sixteen the largest number
that ever met to resolve) could conceive thej
could accomplish these mighty designs, dees
exceed all belief, unless supported by msdb
better evidence.
But we are told that it is not because a plot
is rash, or ill-conceived, that therefore the be-
lief of it is to be rejected . I agree to that, pi»-
vided it be competently proved. It is tfatd^
all plots, in all histories, tiaive been msh sad
ill-advised; in that I .do. aot jU(iBe:-.the
1089]
Jbr High Treaton.
A. D. 1820.
LlOOO
Strength of combioatioD^ the force of influence,
or the weight and application of phytical
power has charaeterizea every one I have read
of; and where rashness has been displayed,
it has been from a mere miscalculation, and
not where the parties have, perceiving the
hopelessness of their attempts, yet persevered
in them. I have turned my mind to the case
of the earl of Essex, in the reign of queen
Elizabeth, and I agree that that was a most
rash and ill-concertel plot ; but that illustrious
nobleman had formed a plot in which he was
countenanced by, and connected with, some of
the first persons in the realm. The rashness
of his enterprise consisted in the idea, on his
psrt, that the great popularity of his enterprise
would engage in his behalf the countenance of
all the citizens of London. He went out
with two hundred followers, and when he
found himself coldly received, returned to his
own palace, and there defended himself: he
betrayed himself by his own rashness; he
shewed, it is (rue, a want of knowledge of the
minds of the people among whom he was to
move, and a vizjki of sufficient insight into the
resources and wisdom of the government of
aneen Elizalieth, which he attempted to over-
irow; but his was a very different case from
a combination which has no support from in-
fluence, or from monev ; from powerful names,
or overwhelming numbers.
Gentlemen, something may be said about a
parallel to be found to this plot, in the plot of
colonel Despard. Colonel Despard himself a
soldier, unaerstanding the art of leading sol-
diers, is said to have engaged in a plot fuU^
as absurd as this. I shall be astonished if
such parallel is attempted in the present case ;
— I was present at the trial of that unfortunate
roan and his associates ; but from something I
have heard on this subject, I thought time
must have obliterated the circumstances from
my memory, and I was obliged to refer back
to the book, to see that it is as different from
the plot you are required to believe, as it is
possible one plot should be from another.
There are it is true, gentlemen, fundamental
similarities ; the leader of that plot, had a feel-
ing of resentment against one person, which it
mav be said is parallel with this in that respect,
and he had ulterior objects ; — ^he, the leader, a
soldier, professed that he had four hundred
soldiers at his disposal, and that with the in-
fluence of an explosion, he could get the rest
of the soldiers, and all the people to be on his
side* — Colonel Despard said, I have a hun-
dred men who will advance, and take the
lower; is that the case here? here are eight
iiMn to advance, and take six pieces of artil-
leiT, and to march to the Mansion house. The
dewnfie of colonel Despard rested a great deal
oo the improbability even of his plot; but
there was a damning frict oo the very face of
it, which no art could surmount, which no
eloqaeoce could palliate, his particular malice
was directed against one individual, and that
ivas the beloved and veaerable sov«reiffii then
VOL, XXX ill.
on the throne ; his object was, to take posses-
sion of the great cannon in the park, ana shoot
the king as he went to the house of parlia«
ment.— If that was believed, as I know it was
believed, then there could be no doubt or diffi-
culty that it was a direct treason against the
life of the sovereign himself ; and however ab-
surd might be his ulterior views, that by itself
constituted the guilt charged in the indictment
against him. But this is not at all like the
plan of an attack on the lives of his majesty's
ministers ;— however valuable individually, or
however important their services collectively,
an intention ,to attack, or even the actual mur-
ther of them, is not treason. I know what I
myself felt on that occasion, and I believe, the
feeling extended to every one present, least of
all excepting the jury, when witness after wit-
nesscame into court, and deposed as to this part
of the plan, and that the colonel being renson-
strated with, as to its cruelty to otlwrs who
might be in the way of the cannon shot, and
the impropriety of murdering a man so well
belove J as the late king, said, ** I have exa-
mined the matter well, myheart is callous, and
I am resolved to do it/' Shall it be said that
the rash plot of these persons, stands in the
slightest degree of comparison with that, al-
though in Despard's plot there was all the in-
ferior apparatus of a provisional government :
of the taking of castles; of securing ports; and
occupying roads : but there was as a previous
guarantee, an oath of Bdelity to the provisional
government, which it was pretended already
existed, and the concurrence in tliis was
brought home to every one of the conspirators.
There were proceedings which implied the ex-
istence of such a body, and it was held out
that men and money from France would not
be wanting, and it was proved that they were
confidently expected. — Is this a plot to be put
into competition vrith the Cato-street conspi-
racy ?— one wonders that such a parallel should
be resorted to.— I shall be surprised even if it
can be forced on the learned Attorney-general,
and be treated bv him as one tenable, even for
the purpose of illustrating a thought, or turn-
ing a period.
I am not unread in the history of my coun-
try.— I know the plots and conspiracies which
have been formed oy vile men. I vrill not re-
fer you to such as that of Long-beard the
lawyer, who held his preaching in Cheapside ;
but as a conspicuous example, look at Wat
Tyler's insurrection ; had that the least sirni*
larity, or was it so much within the scope of
improbability as this is? It arose out or the
anger of one man, for an insult offered to his
own family within his own walls ; but far from
its being the efibrt of an individual, the Chro«
niclers who enter most minutely into the his-
tory of the times (I think HoUinshed for one)
have said, not only Tyler was exasperated by
such an insult, but, that other persons were so
In every county and almost in eveiy town io
England; and it is much doubted whether
Tyler was the beginner of the insarrecfi^, or
4 A
lOOil 1 GEORGE IV.
w]i«tlier another man in Essex did not bring it
on before Tyler was a party.
* But if the popular ^ling was roused be-
yond the possibility of restraint, by the rnsult
offered to Tyler of Dartford, it is evident that
there was in the minds of men in general a
)Mnse of injury and proneness to resentment
which wanted only an immediate provocation ;
for it is stated that on an insult offered to this
tnan's daughter by a tax-gatherer, which flesh
and blood woald not endure, under pretence
of levying a poll-tax, Tyler hearing a noise in
his house, and entering with his lathing-staff
in his hand, wrought the officer such a rap on
the pate, that his brains flew out and he died
Instantly. That was the circumstance which
roused the country, and occasioned that tre-
mendous insurrection, in which records were
destroyed, learning proscribed, nobility tram-
pled under foot, ana royalty itself defied and
tnenaced. Is that to be compared to the feeble
combination of a dozen persons in a back room,
getting at a very small expense such a parcel
of trash together, and supposing that by these
they could over-run the country, and over-turn
the empire ? That was during the reign of an
inexperienced infant king, advised by impru-
dent ministers, and deserted or feebly sup-
ported by timid friends : that aided by popu-
lar feeling of grinding and insulting oppres-
sion, ran throughout the kingdom, and pre-
vented the exertions which might have suc-
coured the Crown and relieved the capital :
how unlike the feebleness of the present pre*
lended combination ; where the strength, the
feeling and the influence are all on the side of
government, and those who are supposed to
meditate its overthrow are distinguished only
by their beegary and their obscurity.
Jack Cade is another person, who raised one
of these insurrections ; but for what ? to feel
the pulse of the country towards a disputed
title — his conspiracy is known and recorded
in history, to have been supported by those
who wished to put the Lancaster title in issue,
and who ga?e their support under hand, to
that false traitor, as he is called in our statutes.
— ^That is as different, as any hiritorical case
can be ; as different as the evidence before
you is from reason, consistency, and truth.
Then I ask you again, is Adamses evidence
incredible, as it will appear when it comes to
be stated, in all its details? and using the
same mode of supplication you have heard
from my learned fnend,— Pegging you to keep
those observations in your mind, and tiy the
iBvidence by that test — to forget the garnish of
arms, a display more convincing than even all
of the eloquence and weight of my two learned
friends, who, before' the verdict upon this man
shall have been submitted to your considera-
tiotr, will have had to address you. — I ask
trhether this is a plot ^on would believe out
tif the mouth of one witness whoever he might
be, aiid much more ont of the mouth of such a
wretch as that is ?
I proceed to the next point I have to treat
Trial ofJamsi Ingt
[1093
en. Does Adams entitle himself to credit?
Is there, in the account he gives of himself and
the manner in which he answers qxiestioDS,
either in chief or in cross-examination, that
which should induceyou to give credit tohis tes-
timony ? There is, I am told, in aneighbourinj
country (or at least there was) a time when t
display was made by the timid and fiilse-
hearted of what they termed a cockade of cir-
cumstances ; it had two sides, each represent*
ing devotion to a different cause ; if Buona-
parte was uppermost, the side was sheini
whic^ presented the three colours ; if Loais
was in power, then it was while. Soch seems
to be the description of Adams's conscieace;
he wears his religion as these time-serriDgmeQ
wore their cockades.
A man may change his party through fickle-
ness, or may comply with those in power
through mere inertness, without bad intention;
but he who has received baptismal rites st the
font, never renounces his faith in his Redeessff
without disqualifying himself for erer hm
being received as a witness. What is the
volume which touched his lips when he engij-
ged to tell you the truth, the whole tnith, m
nothing but the truth ? The narratite of the
sufferings on earth of that Blessed Sarioor
whom he denies ; the precepts of a religiw
which he has renounced ; the book on wwdt
we Christians place our hopes of heteafleiv
and by which we endeavour, as far as the
frailty of man will permit, to regulate oar
conduct here; a book which he threw awayp
idle trashy because he had read as he expressed
it, the accursed vrork of Thomas ^^[^
book which he has denied as the basis of fai*
and the anchorage of hope, and yet he no*
comes before you as a renovated man, and
asks you to give implicit credit to his oath.
What book has answered the book of Thwwj
Paine in his mind ? What has giten him that
light by which the errors of the *^«*'*.*|~j2
head have been corrected? No inspnee
volume has wrought the blessed change; the
handcuffs upon his wrists, and the iw*
on his legs have been his only tnloBj
and as he found it necessary to come iwo
court to be a witness, he found it con^i«*
to profess himself again a Christian ? Fh"J
pretext — abominable delusion ! IncapaWeJ
obtaining credit for tite smallest assertion $«»
a man should make, bnt iooomparaWy tooio-
sigiiificant, to induce a jury of Christian>*J
hesitate for a moment in dismissing fr^tntt*!
minds this man, whose statements txtt W
pollute their ears and corrupt their jtidgm«^
Apostacy, odious as it is, does not form t»
whole odium of this wretch's charact*^?"
adds to this, as my learned friend has siW
disloyalty to Vijs sovereign— treascm to »
country— treacheiy to his companioo8--'W»
h^ crowns hie inlkmy by a bmten impweaw
in delivering bis evidence.' Bring him to »
test of his own observttioBiis^I vM m
upon repeated occasions; stating to him w
that evidence had been, and stating m
k
10933
for lli^ I'reasoH.
A. D. 1826.
C1094
ttiider the oonect, I do not tay the seTert^
▼igilance of my learned friend on the other
side, reprehending me very properly when I
mistook any thing — I asked, now came you to
omity from your statement the other day, facts
so important as many of those you have related
to-day? <'Oh, why,*' said he, '*I did not think
they were of any importance in the cause :
the prisoner ahout whom these statements are
made, was not then upon his trial ; my memory
did not serve me^ and I have a great many
<»diejr things in my memory that I shall pro-
duce against other prisoners.'* This was his
own voluntary statement, and this, gentlemen,
from a man who is sworn to telU not the truth
partially, not the truth as he may conceive it
necessaiy, but to tell the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, and to act upon
that, so help him God. If he bad never
renounced bis Redeemer, or blasphemed
the book of life, as he ha^ done, does he
entitle himself to be believed by you, when
lie acknowledges that he is ready to put a
construction upon that oath, different from
that which all men must ? and he sets up as an
apology that he did not state these thinss upon
the former occasion, because they did not
relate to the prisoner upon his trial ! Now,
let us try that — ^the first addition he makes to
bis evidence is'this^" Brunt said, he had two
men to call upon in Carnaby-market. He
asked Mr. Thistlewood whether he would
walk with him, which Thistlewood declined,
and I went with Brunt and logs.*' Does that
relate in any manner more to the trial on which
he was examined yesterday, than it related to
the trial of Thisdewood, on which he was
here before? Is his account of his suppressing
CsctSy because they do not relate to the case
true, or is it true that he invents new matter
as he thinks the occasion will require? Again,
he telb a long story of Ings doing something
at a meeting at which Thistlewood was present,
and which would have been of the utmost im-
portance on Thistlewood*s trial, if true ; that
Ings pulled a pistol from his pocket and
declared what he was ready to do, and went
to do, when his Royal Highness the Prince
Regent was going to the Parliament House,
stating it in the midst of a conference with
Thistlewood, who was then on his trial, and
yet not one word of that did this fellow state ;
but he takes three days to invent it, against the
prisoner now before you comes ypon his trial,
when he thinks he can more deeply impress
bis statements by the help of additional cir-
cumstances. We have been asked why we
require juries to disbelieve witnesses, and yet
produce no evidence to contradict them.
Gentlemen, can we give locality and substance
to the fleeting form of a pliantom ? Can we
eoncentiata and fix the glittering rays reflected
from the polished- surface of a mirror ? Unless
we could do these things we cannot apply
eflBectual contradiction to so unstable a witness
B9 AdsJn* ;. when we think we shall be able to
jdo sO| be avoids us ; and when we have posi-
tive evidence in answer to another whom we
expect, that witness is kept back from us,
although .used and mainlv relied upon as a
supporter of Adams on a U>rraer occasion.
In these respects, has Adams entitled him-
self to credit at your hands from his own
shewing ? Unless the experience of a small
number of years compared with the rest of my
learned friends at the bar — unless the know-
ledge I have of juries which those years have
given me— unless the observation of thirty*
Bwe years, more or less, constantly applied to
courts of justice, deceive me, it does not wanjt
the feeble exposition I can give to it to make
an^ honest and discreet jury say, '< on the
evidence of this man we would not hurt ^
mouse or a beetle ; his evidence with us must
go for nothing.*'
But I advance this matter a step further :
you have seen that he is, in the first place, the
narrator of a most improbable story ; you have
seen in tlie next place what character he gives
of himself, and how he disentitles himself to
your credit ; is he to be disbelieved the more
because the witnesses for the Crown expressly
contradict him in many material points ? It
is a material point for your consideration ip
the case that is now before you, what passed
in Cato-street at the unfortunate time when
Smithers lost his life, and when many other
valuable lives were in danger ; certainly you
will see it is. Now is this man supported or
contradicted in that? — A person has been
brought of the name of Monument, who has
been sought as a confirmatory witness ; let us
see in what does their evidence differ* That
there was such a meeting in Cato^treet — that
there were arms — that there was gunpowder
— that there was a man killed — that all those
circumstances occurred which every newspaper
would have given you, and every newspaper
had given you for two full days before Adams
was taken into custody — - three days before
he gave his evidence, all this was known, and
about that he would require no confirmationi
and certainly receives no support: but is he
confirmed, as to his being inere, by anv wit-
ness ? In the first place, as to the number of men,
he states most distinctly upon his oath, that
Thistlewood*s declaration was, that there were
twenty men ; eighteen above, and two below
stairs; that fourteen would be sufficient to
nish into lord Harrowby's dining room; the
number was stated specifically, that six would
manage the servants, even if they were sixteen
in number. If this passed in a room, fifteen
feet long, and ten broad, could Monument
have been ignorant of it ? — but, on the con-,
trary, on quite another mode of interrogatory,
and quite another occasion, although it is in
relation to the same fiict and ending in the
same way. Monument tells you most distinctly
that the number stated was twenty-five then
f>resent — that it was needless to count them,
or Thistlewood knew there were twentv«
five — and that they would be enough to da
the business. That must have been the sama
1095] 1 GEORGE IV.
con?€rsatioD, only with this difference, that
the mind of Adams, if he was there, was en-
gaged in the Introdnction of those wlio were
to frustrate their object, while the mind of
, Monument was engaged on what passed, and
he told the truth. He says further that there
was but one candle a-tight when the officer
came in ; that when that one candle was put
out, the whole, place was in dai^ness. And
that he swears most positively. Both the officers
swear that there were more, one that there
were five candles in the great room, and he
should guess by the quantity of light, at least
three in the back room.
Were the words he states uttered by the
officer ? or are they a fabrication to answer one
purpose if they will not answer another? take
those words seriously into your consideration.
— Adams stated that when the officers came
in, they said, '' Here is a pretty nest of yon,
we are officers, and have a warrant to appro*
bend you ; as such, we hope, gentlemen, yon
will surrender quietlv.'' — It those words were
said, all defence of these men must fail on
another indictment ; for they would, without
doubt, be guilty of murder; but did the
officers say ko ?— both the officers examined to
it, most distinctly, honestly, and fairly giving
their evidence, state all that we said was (for
I put down the very words, and they say they
were the same in substance), ** We are officers,
seize their arms;'' no word about a pretty
nest; no word about a warrant; no word
about yielding, or surrendering:— all this is
the vile fiction of this wretched witness, who,
therefore, on every test he goes through, is
unconfirmed, contradicted, imd deprived of
the veiy semblance of truth.
I shall be told, perhaps, it does not apply in
the slightest degree to the basis and body of
this conspiracy, whether there were three
candles or eight candles, or one, and whether
there were certain words uttered or not. Per-
haps some of you have done your duly either
here or ebewhere, on the trial of other crimi-
nal cases ; you have heard prisoners at tlie bar
caH witness after witness, to prove an alibi ;
those witnesses have been kept apart by the
policy of die law, and after their examination
in chief to the principal point, they hive been
asked what had you for dinner-^ what person
did you sit next — were there one or more can-
dles, on the table— did you get up to help
yourself, or was there a footman in hvery, or a
maid serrant ; and a discrepancy in the evi«
dence has turned the fate or the prisoner ; it
would be in vain for counsel to get up and
say, my lord, it does not signify a farthing to
the case before a jufy, whether they ate roast
beef or boiled mutton, or whether they had wax
lights, or tallow candles, or whether they had a
footman or a maid seryant, the judge would
say, no, sir, but we must see from the account
they give whether the witness can be believed
in any other respect ; then I apply this ta the
witness, Adams; supposing there were no
ehjeetiOB arising out of liis own mouth, when
Trial ofjamtt lugs
11066
he is contradicted on three points bj wimcsm
called on his own side, is he a man to be be-
lieved, to hang up men by eleven at atine^
when he gives his evidence from time to tioe,
to carry the inculpation to the prisoners »
they proceed in the trials? I hope a better
judgment will prevail, and that my client fill
have the benefit of that better jadgmeoL
It is said an accomplice ought to be cos-
firmed, I say (and I trust I shall have the
opinion of his lordship with me apoo tint
subject) that he ought to be Goafiimed asfa
as he can be confirmed, for the veiy term con-
firmation implies doubt, and every eircosH
stance by which doubt can be elucidated ii t
circumstance by which his evidence cas be
confirmed ; if Uiere is any thing this conupt
and tainted witness knows, it belongs to thM
who bring such cases forward to see wbelber
it is or is not within the knowledge of sone
other who is more fit to be believed.-! iif
this, I hope, not lightly or lasUy, I '^°*^"|^
being once told on a prosecution by a leaned
judge, for whose iudgroent I shall ever bive
the utmost veneraUon, that the duty cfcoand
for a prosecution is as sacred astbatoftte
judge himself, that if there was any tbiog
within the knowledge of the prosecoior tfat
could elucidate it, it ought to be broogbt for-
ward, for that the life of a roan' is not a oaticr
merely of forensic trial ; the ohject is not Jo
get a verdict, but to enable all maokiod todo
justice, and to see that the ends of P"^?'
tice are fairiy and fully aecompHsbed. aw
is true in a private or ordinary nrosecutioo, a
it not pecuharly so in this caser yet, feBtv*
men, it is ; for whether eleven men iball «
shall not be consigned to the rope of t^J^
man and the axe of the executioner, is oMW
utmost importance to each of these indinw*
als; to them it is as important as if ob tfacir
breath depended the safety of the empire, ra
to each man his own li<e is roost dear m
most cherished ; we ding to life amidst lono*
and sickness, in depression, and even in d^
pair. When hope lias fled, the love ofW
remains, and it is for life that the onfortooaie
man at the bar now appeals to yoor jte^
and to your discernment. But importu* «
the question is to the parties, it ends aiij
them with the day of their suffering, bot « >
public record, as a monument of the !iin»>"
remains for ever. This conspiracy ia ^^^
posed cloud which has overshadowed the aa«a
of the new reign ; whether it is of that dW
which is supposed, or whether it coold beiW-
sipated by a putf of wind, ought to be »
main object or the present ?«»«»*"»"•» 2
in order to shew that in its real cdooTS, wv
evidence ought to be resorted to> and none »
be kept back. If there is any thing to»
gained by these trials it u the si>«»9»^
of government in the confidence o^^he pwj
by & knowledge of the danger to wtoj* ^
government has been exposed, it >**J*^
Slause of those "wordiy ministers^wh© •*
etected and brought tp pumshmeal iw*
10071
Jbr High Trtatmi.
A. D. 1890.
[1098
coofpirmcy as thisy and it is upon that alone
4hat the hopes of to-daj can rest. Your ver-
<^iGt will decide the fate of that man : for the
Testy Europe as well as Britain will judge at
the fHresent moment, and posterity will judge
for cTer : if therefore, any means of elucidation
are withheld, all the testimony not produced
will, in history and politics, be taken against
those who keep it back, and thus not only
hardship is wrought against the indiTiduaf,
but the Tery main spring which should ani-
mate loyalty and engage our affections in such
a cause as this, will be taken away, ne
cause belongs first to that unhappy man, who
must lay down his life, if you believe the wit-
nesses against him ; but it belongs afterwards
to you, to me, and to every member of the
British community, for our honour is concerned
in the honour of our oountrv, and in propor-
tion as that is set high, so shall we rise in the
estimation of other nations, and so will our
fespectabiltty and gratification be increased.
I have done, I hope, except as to one point,
with the witness Adams ; but there is one part
of his evidence to which I beg to direct your
particular attention, which will shew you that
thst is particularly true, in one instance, which
1 impute to Mm as the governing motive of
bis whole conduct — that he has charged upon
others those crimes and that guilt, of which he
is the author, and which he perhaps alone is
capable of forming ; he tells you that Brunt
professed opinions approaching to atheism;
that be said, when he was told that he should
have an opportunity of murdering all the min^
isters at once, that now he believed there was
a God, that he had often prayed they might
be brought together, and that now God had
deliver^ those persons into their hands. That
a man who has read the accursed worics of
Paine, till he has renounced the faith of Jesus,
should use such expressions is probable ; but
call Brunt a murderer, call him an assassin,
cidl him a traitor, a robber, or what you will,
it is not to be credited out of the mouth of
■neb a wretch as Adams— himself an avowed
eootemner of his bible and his Redeemer — that
he who commits crime in this world cuts him-
self off from the hope of penitence, and that
be has not that which the thief on the cross
had, a hope that the penitent acknowledgment
of his crime might enable him to enter into a
state of mercy. I implore you for charity's
flake not to impute this to Brunt on the tes-
timony of such a wretch, when they might
famve called Edwards and others lo prove it —
Bdwards, who is stated to have been present
at that conversation, but who is not called to
confirm this man in that or any other par-
ticnlar.
There is another point on which you will
consider vrhether Adams is to be believed »—
he swears distinctly, that he never had been
sit the lodging of a man of the name of Chambers,
in a court odled Heathcock-court, in • the
Sttand : and that we might be sure that it was
not the D«me of the court that might lead to an
equivocation, I took the pains to fix that on
him, ^supposing it is not Heathcock-court, did
you go to any such man, and make a proposal
to any such man." — No, no, — ^no was the regu-
lar answer I have called the man who proved
what he said, and what he did, and what he
wanted to leave, and 1 have proved that every
thing he said upon that was like that which he
has said upon all other points, an effusion of
rashness, or a concoction of premeditated fals^
hood. I saw the scope of the cross-examination,
and I could not fail to see that Chambers was
one of the men whom they call radicals— that
he was one of those who had carried forward
and assisted at meetings of these people —
that he was deeply engaged in the exterior
of these proceedings. No man can doubt that
he was, for if he had not been something of
the kind he would not have been a fit person
for Edwards and Adams to practise upon —
if he had not had the discernment and good
sense to see through their treacherous designs,
he too would have been at the bar as one of
this traitorous conspiracy — ^his mouth would
have been shut by his being indicted with
the others; he is not a witness I should prefer
to call, but he is a witness whom the treachery
of Adams has rendered necessaiy, and you
must weigh his evidence against that of Adams.
This, however, is quite clear, from the cross-
examination— -Chambers was mentioned yes-
terday ; due industry has not been spared in
the mean time ; all the particulars of his life
are well known, and it is not pretended that
the height of his crimination goes beyond
this, that he was an acquaintance of Tbistl»*
wood, and had drunk with him in a public*
house, that he was so far transported with the
miserable politics infused into the minds of the
vulgar, that he carried a flag at the Sroithfield
meeting, and the triumphal entry of Mr. Hunt.
Is he a Deist ? Is he a betrayer of his friends ?
Is he a traitor to his king, except so far as the
circumstance of the Smithfield meeting goes ?
— No, no — no is the answer to all those ques-
tions, and his evidence most be confronted
with the evidence of a man who is all these.
How far such a man ought to be confirmed I
will not say, but, standing as he does, I will
say that he ought to be dismissed entirely from
your consideration in the investigation of this
cause. But is there evidence enough without
him ? for I take this to be a clear proposition,
if a witness*s credit is doubtful, before he comes
into tlie box, that doubt may be removed by
confirmation ; but if he has in the box disabled
the jury from believing some material proposi-
tion he has stated, he is self-convicted of per-
jury, and the jury must dismiss his testimony
from their recollection, and hold him as no
witness at all, and so 1 contend you must con-
sider Adams. It is not for juries to sift and
garble testimonvi they must believe the wit^
nesses on the whole, or they must dismiss them
from their consideration altogether— indeed it
would.be an insult upon your understandings
to say, in this matter the man is perjured — ift
10091 1 GEORGE IV.
such a matter he is not — we will believe so
mach : — the very word perjured shuts up the
leaf of his eTidence, it becomes dry and
withered, and you read no more ; and if there-
fore you believe, as I contend you must, that
this is a false and peijured witness, his evi-
dence goes for nothing, and he is removed eiv-
tirely from the cause.
I come now to another witness, or to other
witnesses ; and let me see how far they confirm
Adams as to any thing that is material. Hiden
certainly stands in a favourable point of view.
In one respect, my learned friend, Mr. Cur-
wood, made a mistake respecting him, that he
was a man who received the knowledge of the
crime and afterwards concealed it : he is not
such a man ; there is this favourable circum-
t^unce in the testimony of Hiden (if you believe
iiim) that when a communication was made of
a supposed plot, he disclosed that to lord
Harrowby at the Arst jpossible opportunity;
but we are a long way from believmg Hiden
for that. That Hiden may have had some know-
ledge of the intended meeting in Cato-street,
and the intention to murder his majesty*s min-
isters, there is every probability ; that he learn-
ed that from Wilson is a matter of much more
doubt ; that he may have derived it from Ed-
wards or firom Adams is extremely probable,
and extremely consistent with the whole of the
atory, for, with all the wish in the world,—
aupposing him a conscientious, an l^onest, and
an unprejudiced person, — to give that man
credit tor what he said, for God*s sake examine,
whether he is a witness of that untainted kind
that ought to make up for the deficiency of
testimony in Adams. I asked him where he
lived, he told me he lived in Manchester-roews,
Manchester-streeL I was told afterwards, with
•ome heat, that he had said he had lived there, or
that he had been living there, or something of
the kind ; upon all these subjects you are the
arbitrators, and I put it to you whether, until
I had pursued my cross-examination to the ex-
tent ot several questions, if you had been asked
on going out of that box, to say who is the
witness Hiden ; you would not have answered
he is a milk-seller, and lives in Manchester-
mews, Manchester-street. Would not that
have been the impression upon tlie minds of
every one of you ? Could you have had any
surmise that he had been for several days a
prisoner in the Marshalsea-prison, haying been
translated into the KingVbench for a debt
which had been due several* months, and for
which he had been absconding from Man-
chester-mews ? Can you then receive this man
as confirmatory of the evidence in general
which has been given by Adams ?
But I go a step further : does he by himself
(for that is necessary if I am right as it respects
this case) does he pretend to know the name of
logs at all ? You aro trying Ings; I know it
is part of the apparatus of tibe indictment that,
being laid as conspiracy, the acts of one are
evidence against the whole, and that, therefore,
this man can come here to hang lugs on de-
Trial of James l/tgs
[1100
daratioDS of Wilson ; but on whom does the
evidence of the conspiracy rest I on AdaiD%
and if he were to be taken away, Hiden baa 119
standing ground. But put it thus: — ^here is
a man to whom a communication of an -intea^
to murder his majesty's ministers is made, an^l
a proposition that he sl^dl join in the attempt
He has, tlien, that which my learned friend, tae
Solicitor-general, has much pointed U>,a direel
interest in the declaration which he makes^
because, without alluding to my lord Harrow-
by's personal character, for which I have at
much respect and veneration as I ought t^
have, can any Britisli nobleman be supposed
to have received information firom an obacust
and bumble individual, and not to have doof
that which becomes him ? But there is tome*
thing remaining to be done : lord Hairowby is
too good and too prudent a man to give moDej
to an individual before he has given his evi^
deuce, but I need not tell ^ou what a man may
expect on suoh an occasion: why does Mr*
Hiden come here to tell you this plan of con*
spiracy and high treason, but for that which is
to raise him from prison, and place hina in
afiluence, because he has made a disclosort
which is to save not only the life of lord Uar-
rowby, but some of the best blood in the kiiig«
dom, and has enabled his majesty's minisien
10 detect this dangerous plot 1
Then it being avowed that he was not ooe of
the persons, itwas unequivocally avowed U>hii%
as he states it, what the destination of the
whole plan was, and that he was to be engaged
to assist in it ; but, more than that, he states
this to you, which, even if it were lakeii as
true (and it shews there are proverbially mea
that ought to have good memories, and provea
the use of examining men separately), be statea
all the houses which were to be set on fire, and
there was not in the midst of it one word about
the barracks or any one place except the houses
of lord Harrowby, the bishop of London, lord
Castlereagh, the duke of Wellington, and some
others which I cannot mention ; and then being
asked again, he says, ** there was no other thai
I can remember.'*
Then, gentlemen, do you believe in all this
of the firing of the barracks, and all the leat
which has been introduced into the canse by
Adams ? If such a thing had ever been stated,
it is quite impos^le that so material a feature
should have escaped the memory of Hidea.
You have no other evidence but that of Adaia^^
with the confirmation of the serjeant who at*
tends at that place, who says that a man who
had been in the light-horse might very w^
know where the stables were, and the evidence
given by the artillery-man that balls made of
tar and pitch and rosin would set fire to boards,
and still more easily to hay and straw t diia is
important evidence, as well as that of the. mas
who made the discovery how the word tmtim
was to be spelt* But I beg you to obserie
this:— this witness is called to sw^ar not to
oonversations held in the presence of maaf
persons, but to one private coaveraatioa anth
11011
far High Tteaton.
A. D. 1820.
[1103
^e indicted individual who therefore ean
neither come forward to confirm or refute him,
but who leaves the field free for this witness to
walk on.
Now, recollect the acconnt which that man
has given of himself— of his purchase of cream,
and his declining the engagement, because he
was to go and purchase it ; and bis assigning
that as the reason of his expecting you to be-
lieve all the rest of his testimony, when he
knows not the name of a family he has sup-
plied for three years, &nd cannot give you any
particulars even of the number or situation of
the house they inhabit. Such frail memories
form very insufficient support to the ibapsodies
or nonsense of such persons as Adams.
Then comes another witness as confirmatory
of this man, Monument, who appears to have
been selected only for the penuiy of his know-
ledge.— Mr. Edwards was present, and could
confirm Adams, if Adams had a word of truth
in him ; but Monument was selected, because
Monument was never present at any of the
meetings — he was to be made use of according
to~ circumstances ; he was— even on the night
of the 22nd— told to go with them, but not
where they were going, and that the whole
would be disclosed quite in time when they
eame there — ^he is brought here to state that
which lieutenant Fitzclarence, and all the wit*
tiesses saw, and not one fkct besides. There
it no disclosure from any of them in a body,
tending at all to confirm this, but private con-
versations with one individual at a time, the
nouth of which individual. Brunt, is shut up ;
and another individual, who has already suf-
fered the verdict of a jury, namely, Thistle-
Irood. Is this the way in which a charge ought
to be made out, when there are in the power
of the Crown the means of elucidating the
case.
' One of the things this gentleman said in his
evidence— on which a little confirmation might
have been well bestowed, for he comes as a
prisoner in custody — was, that all Gree's-court
were to be in it ; and there the question is
asked of him, who do you understand princi-
pally are the inhabitants of GeeVcourt—
** Iritfamen, and they have said they have been
deceived by the Englishmen so often, that they
^Ottld not concur in it unless the English b€^
gan.^«— Is there not a witness in the list of the
Crown, who lives in Gee*s-court, who knew
6ee'»-court, who knew the persons it contained,
and whom they do not bring forward P — it is
abandoned in the very presenting it^ and they
dare not tender the confirmationf — ^he might have
told whetherGee*8 court contains five, ortwenty-
five Irishmen — the Crown knew whether or not
tbey had a witness to prove that — it maybe
known elsewhere, perhaps; but no such witness
iMw been produc€»d ; they dare not call a witness
to confirm that man, and in so doing, they
ltiv«'b$m up as not to be b^eved — ^he swears
fo cbnversations, abont w)(ieh he has no sup^
ert, wliere he might have been supported if
I evidonce were true) but he Is not sup-
ported. It was pressed upon hitt by my
learned friend, *' Why did not you at Cato-
street, if you had no stomach for this fight, dC'^
part, when the tall man was told he was at
liberty to go V* '^ Oh, I did not understand
that that information applied to me ; I thought
it was only the tall man that might depart and
not me a remarkably little man, and therefore
I staid behind. I was too valuable to be part-*
ed with" — such a witness stamps his own evi^
deuce— that shows how embarrassed he is
(though so fluent in the examination in chief);
when he comes to give his evidence on those
questions for which he has not prepared him-
self by antecedent rehearsal ; and this shews
what credit you ought to give to such wit«
nesses.
Now, gentlemen, I must beg your attention
under diose circumstances, and under the di^
rection of my lord, to the charge upon the iiK>
dictment, and to the manner in which it is to
be proved. I shall suppose, for the purpose of
my present argument, that your attention wilt
be principally directed to the third and fourth
counts of the indictment, the first of which is
undisr the statute of 86th Geo.* 3rd. cap. 7, and
which declares it shall be high treason to oon«
spire to levy war against the king, for the par^
pose, observe, of making him change his go-
vernment, or alter his measures, or for the
purpose of subverting the constitution, and so
on. But it is laid to be a conspiracy to levy
war against the king, in order by force and
constraint, to compel him to change his' mea*
sures. I ask you, except in the rash and idle
nonsense which Adams has talked to you, is
there the slightest tittle of evidence of any io«
tention, to force or constrain the king to do
any thing ? Is there the slightest evidence of
intention to depose the king ? Is there any
evidence of intention to subvert the constitu-*
tion of the country, by means of levying war^
or to deprive and depose the king, as charged
in the first count ? The second connt charges,
that they conspired to excite insurrection witb*
in the realm, and subvert and alter the legist
lative rule and government, and to bring and
put the king to death. The third charges a
conspiracy to levy war against the king. All
these are laid as conspiracies, not as acts, id
order by force and constraint, to compel the
king to change his measures and his oounaelsw
The fburth count charges the prisoner wititf
levying war with intent to subvert and destrbjr
the constitution and government of this realin,
as by law established, and to deprive and de-
pose the king of the Crown.
Upon the first three, you will obtierve, the
eharge is a conspiracy entirely and altogether,
and that conspiracy would not be high treason,
unless it were coupled with the intention as*'
signed as the motive of the conspiracy ; and ttf
conspire to commit any one of those acts, b^
the aAcievt laws of the land, as stated by mf
leemM friend, Mr. Curwood, was not high
Irtason. • * '
Now, gentlemen, yoU are tontisfy yourselviei
11031 1 GEORGE IV.
whether there is ativ nan, in the whole bourse
of ttiis eTidence, who deposes to any such in-
lentioB as that of deposing or remorine the
king, except this witness, Adams, whom f con-
tend jfou are to put out of your recollection :
or are there any two men (even giving him as
one) who swear to any overt act or acts com-
bined and accompanied by that intention, for
the overt acts do not prove the intention ; there
must be something else from which to collect
the intention. Now, I am bound to say that
the only overt acts which csn be proved as
forming any point on which those who charge
the prisoner with treason can rely, are those
which took place in the meeting at Cato-street.
The consultations are entirely in the mouth of
Adams, and no other person proves any other
treason. The meeting in Cato-street is proved
by several persons, but no person connects it
with any such intention ; but, on the contrary,
their conduct rebuts sudi an intention. Thev
were to meet to carry their conspiracy into ef-
fect by deposing the king, and seising the go-
Temment into their own hands. What were
the means they had prepared ? a certain num-
ber of arms, barely sufficient for an expedition
on the high way, applicable to another inten-
tion whidi is disclosed, but not to that which
is alleged in the indictment : thej are to carry
tiiat intention into Effect by seizing cannon,
eight in number — ^by conveying them without
horses — ^by acting with them without any am-
munition—«by attacking the Mansion-house;
and, in order to make this formidable attack
on the Mansion>house, they place themselves
at the greatest possible distance ; in order to
seize cannon. in Gray's-inn-lane, they remove
from BrookVmarket, in' the very neighbour-
hood, to the very furthest extremity of London,
and having performed what they call the West-
end job, they are to transport themselves to
the Mansion-house, a distance of nearly four,
or, as they were to proceed, of five miles ;
two miles and a half before they can seize the
first of those cannon, another mile and a half
before they got the rest of these self-moving
cannon, and another mile before they place
them north and south, to attack tiie palace of
die chief magistrate of the city : they are to
make tlie cannon follow them as tamely as
animals wanting their daily repast follow their
keepers ; and to do it with the more fiicilily»
they plaoe themselves at the greatest possible
distance from the scene of action.
There is one part of this case upon which I
shall have to address you by-and-by, in inquir-
ing whether their situation was well selected
fot that, but for all other purposes it is absurd
to imagine they should have chosen to go to
such a place without the means of effecting the
end, without any thing that could contribute
to success. Now, is there the least evidence
or pretence of evidence of this? What says
the witness P There were supposed to be
twenty men, ten to seiie the cannoo, ten to
li^t the town, and then they were to be
Joiaed by other parties : let us see how that
Triid qfJamet Ingi [ 1 H^
was ; the ammunition seized io C&io4tRet
you have all seen ; separate that from sojotiier
real or supposed ammunition^— is there, I ay,
the least evidence that any ammanition fit for
artillery, even supposing thers had been artil-
lery, had ever been earned out, or intended is
be used for such a purpose ?— Have you toy
evidence that that was disclosed to anybody !-
no, not the least ; and if these men (ooe by*
the-by encumbered with two hea?y hods in i
bag) had sallied forth, they would have gone
to places where they had no artilleiyi and
where they had no support ; and this is ^
overt act charged to induce yoo to coaTid
them of high treason. If I were to bear to-
day of a conspiracy from without, to libenie
all the individuals in that gaol by throvinf
cherry stones and carraway seeds, I fbooU
think that more likely to be true than this ^ for
my imagination does not go to the eslest of
believing there can be troth in that which yw
have heard, I will not say solemnlyi but nost
flippantly, sworn to.
Is there any evidence of a levying war sgainst
the kinff? The transaction in Cato-slreet, I
say, did not amount to a levying of war. 1|
they had met in Cato-street and mordertd all
his majesty's ministers, that would hare bees
a most horrible and un-Eoglish assassinatioo,
but it is not high treason ; it is qo more b^
treuon to murder all the ministers than it vai
to murder one of the most amiaUc aad b<»oli^
able men who has existed in our timeS) the
late Mr. Perceval, and for which I saw w
assassin stand at that bar, and heard bis tiWr
not for high treason, but for "b^^' ?"![
with the affecting circumstance, which I *ai»
never forset, that I saw the venerable sir JaneJ
Mansfield summing up the evidence with teas
of regret streaming down his aged diwks, wj
an individual whom he had always lored, «A
vrhom all who knew reverenced. If •■?!*'
gravation could have made such acriinemgs
treason, that assassination presented the af-
gravation ; but the murder of one, or of »«"/,
never did, nor ever can amount to high ttwfJJ
Supposing they had 8[one further, wj^
the cannon in Gray's-inn-lane, and the aw-
lery-ground, that would not have been aWT
ing of war aninst the king, for the csnn* *J
not the king^s; those at GrayVinn-lane htm
to the body of Light Hoise Volunteers, W»
in the Artilleiy-ground to a prirate comp^'^
the seizing of those is a felony, but ^^^^l
nor is the Mansion-house one of •]»* /'jjj
palaces, it is the official residence of the w™
mayor; nor is the Bank the king% »^»J^
house of a chartered company ; so that uw»
you believe the absurdity of iM^{}|"8 \^
visional government of whom nobody »
any thing : tlia narrative Uken «^«^*t'* a,
short of a levying of war to bring it wiiwn w-
description of the 36th of the late long.
I shall not dwell upon this pow^'J^lio
made my observation upon the ^^""'Ir^Jt
doubt it wiU be met with all t^* <»»"fr4
triumph fimn what I see qo the otb^r^w^rr*
IMI1
A. 1>. 1800.
{MOS
toppote it is «ott8id«t«d ^at it ymXi not bear
diseuMion fbr a dingle moment. — ^I imi not l9ie
orade of tbe law^— you will hear whether it is
1«w or not from ray lord; if he declares it to
be within the law, yon will Uien consider
whether you are satisfied by the evidence of
two credible witnesses, that such intentions
were entertained, and that such overt acts
were committed^ or whether two overt acts
have been proved by two competent witnesses;
if vou should be of that opinion of ooxuse you
will find the prisoner guil^; but if you are not
of that opinion, I am sure nothing which you
read in publicajtions, before you knew you
were to sit ki that box — nothing of the feelings
of loyalty which yourselves and I alike enter-
tain— nothing of your feelings of desire for Uie
preservation of those who hold high offices,
which no man ean feel more warmly than the
humble individual who now addresses you— -
nothing of your fears for joyit personal safety-—
none of those considerations and still less any
event that may have t^en place in diis court
within these few days will sway you from a
ri|ht consideration of the evidence ; but you
will proceed upon that according to the fair
impression it shall make upon your minds.
All these acts, and even these acts carried ftir-
ther— -the conflagration of buildings; the
E hinder of individuals ; the levy of money by
resistible applications at the door of every
bouse-keeper-Aio not amount to high treason.
Looking at yoo, gentlemen, I think some of
you are of an age to recollect that, which I re»
collect when young; when blood flowing like
water, the conflagration of houses, and the
blanng of prisons, appalled and astonished all
mankind; when the civil arm was restrained
by terror ; when tiie military arm was not used
fbr other reasons, till the intrepid mind of the
then Solicitor-general set them in motion;
w4ten the persons who had thus acted were
iwcured, they were not indicted for high trea^
«on^ but ibr the simple felonies thev had com«>
mitted, for murder, for arson, or K>r larceny;
bot not one of those who were immediate
actors in that scene was brought to trial for
treason : the instigator and prime mover, in->
deed, was tried for high treason, and it was
decided that he was not guilty of high treason,
for that he had not levied war'against the king.
It may be said, that the statute of the 36Ui
Geo. drd had not then passed, but still I con.
tend that if all the acts these prisoners had
eonspired to db had been flill and perfect, and
completed— except the introduction of a new
government, under the name of a provisional
govemment^f all the bloodshed had taken
plaee, and all the conflagration which Uiey are
taid to have meditated had been efl^ected, still,
wider the authority of those cases, I sav their
oriae would not have amount^ to liigh trea-
son, so as to substantiate the charge in the
fourth count, that of levying war against the
kin*.
. If ow, supposing after all, I have combated
McMssiully the relevaney and the sufilciency
VOL. xxxm.
I of the evidence, still there is oraeh for an l»
account for. Can I say that my clients aiw
men free ftom all guilt ? God forbid that I
should stand before you to say so. Shall I
apologise for their guilt } Certainly I will wA ;
but I am only anxious that it should receive ilt
right character. Are they guilty of having in*
tended to murder his majesty's ministers ? I
cannot shut my eyer against the force of con*
viction that they are. Are they guilty of ha*!«
ing pursued schemes of murder or plunder ia
difierent parts of the town? The fire*balU
which have been brought would oonftiie me
upon that, if I attempted to deny it. Was
^ere a personal vengeance against us majesty'il
ministers ? Did poverty render men despemte^
and impel them to crime ? I cannot deny it»
and for that crime they will have to answer :
but that these eleven men, aided by nine othera^
sought to overturn the state, that they had
their confidences to impart, and their assodatea
to seek at the very moment when l^is plot was
to explode, is so absurd, that I do not hesitate
to pronounce it incredible and impossible.
it cannot be foigotten that this proceeding
hangs mainly, if not almost entirely, on This-*
tlewood . It cannot be forgotten how lately he
had been emancipated from imprisonment fov
sending a diallenge to lord Siamouth^ which
his lordship did not accept, but very property
presented him for punishment. It is natund
that resentment should rankle in his mind ; he
took advantage of the transactions at Manches*
ter, and the Sianks recommended by ministers
to the persons who had taken a part in them ;
he imparted to others the feelings by which he
was impelled, and they, from various causes,
co-operated with him \ but to suppose that an
idea of a provisional government, or of a revo-
lution in the state, entered their minds, would
be to say that all their plans were reduced to
mere folly, folly more gross than that of igno-
rance made drunk..
I am now neariy at the dose of the address
which it is my. duty to make. It has been
stated to< you-— «nd it will I hope be slated*
twice again^I hope the attorney-general, and
my lord, if I may be so presumptuous as to-
anticipate what either of them may say, will
tell you that this is acause of great importance.
Gentlemen, indeed, and indeed, it is not so much
for the life which your verdict may take away,
as for the principle which your verdict may
contribute to establish. It never yet happened
that liberty or justice should receive a wound
throush an attack made on a good man ; for on
behalf of a good man all maiAind arm them-
selves' in their prgudices, and in their hopes;
but the attack nas always been made through
the means of a bad man ; and good men have
afterwards been sacrificed by force of the
precedent. So it is in tlie present day^ If
such a witness as Adams can gain credit fpr
what he has deposed, — the revolution of this
country, I know, will prevent our seeing Jef-
f^es on the bench, — ^but we shall have Titus
Gates in the witness-box^ and audacious wit*
4B
(11073 1 GEORGE IV.
TruU tfJamm hgt
[im
like him deiuMinctng one plot after an-
other. He first swore to the popish plot, and
that was so popular that juries gave a ready
ear to it, i«st a» iionest men would gi?e an ear
to « tale beginning in the mnrder of the most
honourable and respectable men, and ending
in the orerlhrow of the state ; after the stoiy
had been told again and again^ after the
populace had, with shouts and acclamations,
attended the convicts to the scaffold, reason
resumed her empire, doubt intruded itself into
the public mind, and they who at first triumph-
ed* in the o?erthrow of supposed traitors, came
to so sad a feeling of repentance, ttiat when lord
Stafford's blood was to be shed on the same
evidence for the same plot, when he turned
found and protested his innecence, the answer
of the sobbing crowd was, '' God bless you, my
lord, we believe you;" then it was that they
felt that justice was misled by the credit giv^
to the testimony of such a wretch ; but it could
not be got rid of till the revolution had intro-
duced- a better system ; then indeed it was ex^
piated bv the cenviction of the pepured wit*
ness, by his enduring the pains and indignities
of imprisonment, the pillory, and the Toss of
his ears^ and he ended his odious life in pover-
ty and m exile. Alas I gentlemen, one drop
•f the blood he had shed could not be restoreo,
one hour of the life he had destroyed could
not be recalled.; the regrets of his own times
and of posterity for hie victims were alike with-
out avail ; but the sight of his triumph, while
his villanies were sucoesslul, was a perpetual
gall to every man who loved freeoom, and
venerated justice, who loved his neighbour
and feared his God, as you do. I euiort, I
implore you to look with scrupulous exactness
to the witness Adams — to a spy set on by an
informer; return to the verdict which your
oonsciences direct you, but for God's sake do
not allow yourselves to be swayed by the evi-
dence of a man so infamous, so detestable, so
incredible.
Lord Chief Jmttke DoZ^— James Inge do
you wish to rest your defence upon ^e ob-
servations of vour counsel, or do you iviah to
say any thing ror yourself?
Inp. — ^I wish to state the particulan how
I became acquainted with the party in the
first place.
Lord Chief Juttiee DaUas.^Any thing, and
•very thing which yoy wish to state of course
the court and jury will l^ear ; now, therefore, is
tl^e time for you to state them : speak loud and
w& will attend to wha^ you say.— You had
peniaps better consult whk your counsel.
Ingt, — ^I have but a little to say, my lord.
Lord Chief Jiatice Dallas. — Having drawn
your attention to whether you will consult with
your counsel or not, of course you will judge
for yourself, and the Court wAl hear any thing
you have to say.
Ingt, — I would wish to speak to the gentle-
men of the jury.—-
Gentlemen of the juiyi^ 1 am^a man of so
education, I hope you will excuse my humble
abilities ; I will explain the particulan as&r n
is in my power. I left Portsea the begiomnf
of May, 1819 ; I came to London, me and of
wife and fiunily. The reason I left Portsea
was, I had nothing to do, nor any prospect of
setting any employ for the support of my
family; when I came to Londonlthoo^I
should get employment ; I had been in Loo-
don some time — I was disappointed, I coold
get nothing to do — knowing nobody herOi dot
was the reason. I inquired and osed ereiy
means I was master of; I had a few pooads
by me when I came from Portsea ; I foond the
money was going very fast, and I did not
know what to do. I had been in businem,
and had lost my money, not by drioldog or
gambling, nothing of the sort, gentlemen-I
could not get any thing to do, and I told my
wife I thought I had better go into bttsnesS)
with the little money I had. I went up into
BakePs-row, and took a little shop, and carried
on business fiom Midsummer to Michaelmas.
The summer being very hot, wasveiranich
against me ; I lost a considerable deal ^
money in the course of the summer— I could
not get any custom — I found my money w
veiT near gone. I went at Micbaelmu aod
took a house in Old Montaffue-street, and
turned it into a coffee shop and eating-tone;
and having done Uiat my money was all gone.
It did not turn out to my desire; I did not
make money enough to keep iny fi^7\J
persuaded my wife to return to PortsHMudif
because she would then be among her fneodiy
and that she had belter bothers withootiMB^
than in London.
After my wife had left me some consideiabie
time, gentlemen, there was a man used ti
come and take a cup of coffee frequently; ^
used to enter into politics about the goveo-
ment— he used to enter into the Manch^
massacre, and so on. I did not enter iott
conversation with him; I supposed him to ^
an officer. I was after that in Smithfield^ntf-
ket, looking round to see whether I could fi
employ, having no money, and I met this maa.
He asked me how I was, and whether I woaw
have any thing to drink.— No, I (old him, i
did not drink in the morning. He say^
" You ought 10 stand treat, I have been «
your house freauently, and never caught yoj
out of doors before." *' It is not in my po*^.
says I, '•or I would." He «*» ne «*
reason I would not stand treat, I ^*Jt
rt no money, and if I did not get some wcrti
must sell my few things very show*
" What have you to sell ?"— «A sofe-bedst^
and various articles.*'— «< I should like to bi^
the bedstead, if it will suit me: what is «
stuffed with r— «' Horse hair." I took bun»
my lodnngs in Primrose-etreet ; it did notauj
him. This was about the first or second »
January.
In a few days I met the jame person m
Fleetpmarket; he aooceted me there «{*>»'"
1100]
for High Treason.
A. D. 1920.
[1110
the same way, and asked me whether I woald
have any thing to drink — I answered him as
usual ; he said '* respecting that sofa, I believe
I have got a friend who will buy it of you if
you have not sold it.f' I said I had not. He
said, ** My friend vrill give you more than any
one else.'' He took me to his friend, and I
showed him the sofa, and his friend would not
buy it. We came back into Fleet^street, and
I went along with him, and bad some bread
and eheese, and beer. He told me there was
something about to be done, would I make
one. I asked him what; he said, "No good
man wants to know until it is begun ; but Uiere
IS something to be done." We went and had
some bread and cheese, and beer together;
then he introduced me at the White Hart to
two or three of my fellow prisoners. I asked
him wbat bis name was, he said it was Wil-
liams, but his name is Edwards. He toM me
he had made the image of Thomas Paine, at
the Temple of Reason, at Mr. Carlile's, and I
• understand the same man did mzke it; so
that I am not deceived in the man. He in-
troduced me at the White Hart to take some
refreshment with them, but I never knew the
business ; I had been in the room, but nothing
passed about it at the time when I was there,
nor did I know the particulars of any thing,
because they did not wish to trust me as
a stranger. On that very day when we had
the bread and cheese, and beer, I went and
carried a sword to be ground for him. I left
it in my own name ; if I had thousht there ivas
any thing of this kind going on, do you think
I shodd have left the swo^ in my cmn name
at the cutlei^s? Is that reasonable to be sup-
posed? f had no idea when I carried that
sword to be ground, that there was any thing of
this kind going on, you may depend upon it.
I met him afterwards frequently ; I was very
^ort of food, that was the reason i kept them
company. I used to get victuals and ^rink at
thb room whenever I went ; there was a -fire,
and the weather beinjif so cold, I was glad to
go — the man where 1 was, did not charge me
for my lodgings at No. 5K), in Primrose-street.
On the 23rd, I believe it was, gentlemen,
he comes to my lodgings ; he did not find me
at my lodgings, I had been at the coilee shop,
to get a cup of coffee ; I met him in Bishops-
gate-street; he says, ^ I believe there is some-
thing going to be done^ if you will come up to
my hiyase. He did not say where he lived,
but '*eome up to the alley opposite Mrs.
CarHle's ; I shall be there at six o'clock.*^ I
went from there up to the room ; I yras there
up in the room, and got some bread and cheese,
and beer, in the course of the day. At six
o'clock I went to the alley ; he was standing
waiting forme there, but I understand he Uyes
up at a side-door somewhere in tlie alley, by
wnat I have been told in the list of witnesses.
I went with him, and he gave me a couple of
bags, a belt, and that knife-case, and we
came to the room in Fox-court, whidh has been
nentioiied^ gentlemen ; and he and I went
away together from there ; and he to^d me the
bags were wanted to put some gin in — that
the gin was to be got sly. The reason I put
them under my coat was, that the patroles
should not see thenr, for if they happened to
see the bags under my coat, it would be dis-
covered where he got the gin* I went up,
up against St. Giles's church — he went where
he was to get that said gin. He told me it
was not there, but was gone up ; accordingly
we went tip Oxford-street, ana he turned out
at the left hand, and told me to wait. I
believe I waited nearly an hour in Oxford-
street for him that very night ; he came back
to me, and took me to a place I forget the
name of the street, I never was there before in
my life— John-street, where the arms were
tiien ; I had never been there before. He
told me he was going to call upon a friend,
and said ^ Do you stop here, you will see *
some friends of mine directly." I came under
where the archway is, gentlemen, and I saw
Davidson ; Davidson took me into the stable,
and he went up the ladder, and I staid down
in the stable ; I heard great confusion up in
the loft ; I never was in the loft at all, I de*
dare before God that I never was, and I stood
listening at the ladder. I had been in the
stable about five minuter before the officers
came in ; there was only me in the stable
when the officers came in with Mr. Ruthven,
I believe that is the gentleman ; there we're
several came in, and I jumped on one side up
in the stall. There were two went up into
the loft, and the third that came in collaned
me, and said, " You are my prisoner."** -** Veiy
well, says I," and as soon as he collared me^
he began beating me with a staff, till my head
was swelled tremendously on one side. I
heard 4he report of a gun or a pistol* and the
officer left me. I ran out into the street and
they ran after me, and halloed, '* Stop.'^ I ^
met a man in the street with a stick, he nit me
violently over the head; he was coming to*
wards me, and I towards him. I got round
that man, and a watchman came and hit me
yith his stick ; I vras taken prisoner, and taken •
to the watchhouse.
Gentlemen, this man, Edwards, has been at
all the meetings, he has planned and done every
thing whatever that was to be done, and he is
not brought forward ; he is put into ths list as
a witness, and I am sold as a bullock that is
driven into Smithfield-market, depend upon it^
gentlemen, I am sold like a bullock driven
into Smithfield-market. The attorney-general
knows the man, and be knew all the plans and
every thing, for two months before I was ao- >
?uainted with it. I heard a gentleman when
was up before lord Sidmouth say, when they
came out to look at us, lord Sidmouth knew of
this a month or five weeks ago ; that was when
I vras apprehended and taken before the
council. 1 consider myself murdered, gentle*
men, if this man is not brought forward — he it :
put on one side. I am ready and willing te
die directly, if he will di« oa Utt scafibld with *
lllli 1G£0RGE1V.
w. He WM the invealorof thsplat, if it Is a
p)9t» and he has known all about it. I do not
▼alue sty life^ if I cannot get a living for mv
family ; I have got a wife and fovr smaU
children; but I was drawn in this kind of way
wh^ I had no victuals and no drink. My
anxiety about my wife and family I cannot
describe to you, and I hope before you return
your verdia upon me, that if you think me
guilty you will have this roan brought forward,
or else I shall consider myself a murdered
man. Edwards was the man that came to my
house and got acquainted with me. I was
not at any meetincs ; I have been accused of
being at a pablio-nouset but I never was, only
since January, at a public-house in BrookV
maikat — ^I never was at any other meetings —
I never attended meetings in my life, till since
Christmas :-* Gentlemen, I never was at none
of the radical meetings in London, not during
the time I was here; I hope you will weigh it
well ID your minds, gentlemen, before von
return a verdict. The people you have had
before you are people engaged in this plan,
and if they can get out of the halter them-
selves they would hang their God-— I really
believe, gentlemen, that man Adams would ;
but sooner than I would be the instintion of
hanging a man I would die, if I had five
hundred lives, yes, gentlemen, that I would.
Lord Chief Jtutice DaUa$, — Is there any
thing more you wish to say ?
L^-^l have nothine more particolar to
aajTt my lord — ^ves gentlemen, I foreot one
thing ; if you will examine that, that will prove
my character from ray childhood ; — there is
my character down there from my childhood.
— ^[Hondv^ m apaper^
Lord Chief JuUiee DM». — We cannot
recetye that ; witnesses to character must give
their evidence upon oath.
R£PLT.
Mr, Att4)ni^f^eneral. — Gentlemen of the
Jury; The case being now closed in evi-
dence and in observation on the part of the
Srisoner, it becomes my i>ainfal and anxious
uty to address you ; and in doing so, I assure
you that as it is my most earnest desire, so it
shall be my endeavour to lead your minds
fairly and calmly to the conclusion, which not
in my judgment, but in your own, vou ought
to arrive at upon this question ; and although
I cannot but regret that in so doing I shall
have to ask a continuance of the patient at*
tention which you have hitherto paid to this
inquiry — an inquiry of infinite importance,
both as it regards the individual bemre you,
and as it respects the public — ^I feel happy
that the opportunity is now arrived, that will
enable me to remove prejudices which have
been attempted to be excited by the leanoyed
cmnsel who have addressed you on the part of
the prisoner, as to the nature and still room
as 10 the oenduct of this proiecutioD.
Tml of Jama Jbgt
[lilt
It baa been insinuated^— nay, it hat beca
stated in terms — that the result of this trial
is intended to have the efiect of extending the
law of treason, and thxouffh the mediun «f
your verdict against an unfortunste, and,«fr
cording to the epithet of one of mf leaned
friends, a wicked man, of creating a precedent
to enable fiituie governments and peiwu
hereafter holding the high rank and situitioa
which my honourable uid learned fiitnd asd
myself have the honour of filling, to enlvtl
the power of the down, and sacrifice the
liberty of the subject. What there has bees
in the course of this investigation— what th«e
is in the nature of this case— what than ia is
the conduct of ray learned friend or ayidf,
to call for snch observations, I am at a louts
imagine ; but sure I am, if I knew myaetf aid
my honourable and leaned friend, tbat oat
only anxiety on the present occaaion ia, that by
the due administration of the justice of the
country, and hf that alone, the euilt or inso-
cence ot the prisoner at the bar ahall be eitab-
lished.
The law of treason if definite and dear;
but m^ learned friend, who first addresaed je%
will give me leave to state that he miiappn-
hends the law as it now stands, when he telh
you that an attempt has been made by the ^
tute introduced in the late reign, to extend thi
law of treason, or to introduce that lihich he
characterizes as constructive treason. ^^^^
good a lawyer — ^at least I give him credit w
being such-^ot to know that that atatate hai
not extended the law of treason; ^^^I^J^
done no more than make those acta, im
before its existence had been detenaincd wj
the highest authority, and by the aagea of the
law, to be overt acts of treason under tM
statute of Edward the 3rd, substanthre aod
distinct treasons in themselves. Bot nv
learned friend, knowing this, has endesfoond
to prevail upon you to believe (although I jO
satisfied he will have attempted it ioef^ctna^,
because any erroneous impression made bybs
address, vnll be completely removed, when n
the last stage of this proceeding you shall hii|a
heard the law laid dovm toyoabythel^^
introduction of uncertainty and sp*<^*>''^f^
the Uw of treason; but that the object of w
prosecution also is, to endeavour to estaUw*
precedent of constructive treason.
There is no foundation either in Uw or id
fact for such insinuations and such V'^'^*'^
there can be no other motive openting ^
the present occasion than a wish that lAptiw
justice shall be done. If the conduct of tbep^
soner at the bar, and those who are >«r3rj
with him in this charge be, as is adnu^^
both the learned counsel, ofthe"oat«^
description, involving them in crimes •'•J^
our nature sbuddert— crimes by the coPg^
sion of whidi, aecoiding to the cnaoesiww
their own ^Arofum^ f^Um ciwt$^
lll$l
JtrJUgk IVMMk
A.D. Ufa
rui4
liate pvobably beoone fotfeitods let iMtak
you as reasonable men, what induceiDeiit,
what iDlerest, what motire can there beoo
the part of the Crowo, to attempt to bring
home to them a diarge of a higher description,
unlefls it be the firm oooriction which oper«
ates vpon my mind (and whidi I am airaid
iciuty in the conclnsion of this inquiry, operate
upon your minds) that a crime of greater mag->
nitude has been committed.
My learned friends on the iMtft of the pri-
soner, have acted rightly in calling yonr atten-
tion to the specific chaige you are to tiy. God
forbid that any other consideration should
«nt« into your minds, when you come to draw
yonr conclusion upon the evidence, than whe*
ther that chaige, and that charge alone, has
been made ont* Whatever other guilt the
Erisoner has incurred, whatever, delinquencies
e may have committed, dischaige them from
your recollection; keep your minds steadily
intent upon the accusation now made against
him, and fairly, calmly, and dispassionately
weigh the evidence which has bMn adduced
in support of it I beseech you to do this,
and I ask of you to do no more. After an
impartial view of the case, pronounce that ver>
diet which your consciences alone shall dictate
and approve : if it shall lead to a verdict of
acquittal, you vrill gladly relieve the prisoner
at the bar from the weishty chaige made
against him: if, on the odier hand, you are
satisfied that the charge is proved, let no con<»
sideration of the consequences of your decision
operate upon you : look steadily at the only
<;piestion into whidi you have taken a solemn
oath to inquire; and fear not from any thing
which has been advanced by the counsel for
the prisoner, to pronounce a verdict of guilty.
liy learned friend the Solicitor-general,
when he opened the case to you, stated very
shortly the charge made by this indictment,
conceiving (and I think rigntly) that with re-
spect to the law of the case, there was neither
difficulty nor doubt. He said he woidd relieve
your mmds firom aU technicalities; he told
you, that which I take the liberty of repeating
to you now with perfect confidence, that if you
are satisfied that the prisoner harboured an in-
tention of attempting to overset the existing
government (whether that design could or
could not be accomplished — whether the means
used were adequate to the end or not), and
that he acted upon that intention, he is guilty
of the crime imputed to him by this indictment
It is not necessarv by the law of treason, that
the crime should be consummated, by the per«
petration of the act in contemplation ; and hr
tbe plainest of all possible reasons ; if sudi
necessity existed, no man could ever be tried
ibr high treason ; if the acts meditated must
be executed before the crime is completed, it
nust be ascertained whether the government
is 'overturned or not, before a man could be
called upon to answer to the chaige. Witk-
out^ Iherefbre, troubling you either with the
•pdem slatnte of 25th. Edward drd, or (he
snove teceot act of the Mth of his late maiesiy,
I beg you is keep your attention dosdy dli-
rected to the facts ; ask yourselves these ques«
tions : did the plot exist? And was the pri*>
soner at the bar a partidpator in that plotf-
If you find that the evidence oompeb you to
answer in the affirsaative, it then will be your
boundea duty to find him guil^ of the ehaige.
Much hn been said upon the testimony of
the first witness, Adams ; indeed dmoet the
whole of the very able and eloquent addNss
you last heard has been pointed at it, and
some complaint has been made of the manner
in which my learned friend the SolidtoNgea^
eral, in opening thii ciue, stated lo vou that
his testimony should be exasuned. My
learned friend told you that Adams was an
attxiliary in the sdieme; he reeommeaded to
you, in weighing his evidence, to consider
the interest, or supposed interest, he might'
have in the result of this prosecution; you
were requested to see whether he was cesitra-
dieted upon any material points, and hsdy,
the Solicitor-general begged you to give your
best attention to the confirauation which would
be produced te jrou (»f his narrative. I still sav
these are the tests to be applied to that man's >
testimony, and I very much mistake, if, on thn-
review which I shall fed it necessary to lakn
of his evidence, and when I come to point out
to you the parts in which he is confirmed, any
man can doubt the truth of the*, story whim
Adams has told.
The first question my leazned friend on the
other side has asked, is, does he entitle him-
self to credit by the manner in which he gacve
bis testimony ? and here he very naturally in*
trodttced an answer which Adams gave unon
his cross-examination with respect to his ibiw
mer life. Undoubtedly, a veiy melancholy
fact he did admit to you, that during a portion >
of his life he had been misled 1^^ those doo*
trines which of late have been so industriously
propagated, and wfaieh I cannot but fear havn.
Djsen drenlated pritadpally with a view to lead
to these destructive plans and schemes in
which we charge that the prisoner at the bas
has been involved. It is the object of men,
who have sedition and treason in prospect, to
endeavour first to undermine the religious faith
of those whom they may wish to make their
associates in their crimes. He has confessed
to you that, by havinc had in his possession
Fame's works, he did for a time become an
infidel with respect to the christian religion,
but he never gave up his belief in a Ood : he
owns to you that he iMd abandoned his belief
in that sacred volume whidi is our guide and
consolation here, and the sure foundation of
our hope hereafiter; but he tells you though he
had for a time been so dduded, he has re*
turned again to that belief in which he was .
born and educated. He is not a solitary in-
stance of such a return under circumstances of
affliction : another occurs to my mind which
has happened only withm these few days, and
of which Idasc za^y^ vn uXL ippriM* . I
1116] 1 GEORGE IV;
allode to the unfiwtwiiite Magamb , al
time under lenteiice of death for an attempt to
assassinate a constable : after his conyicdon,
and when he came to examine his own mind,
and to reflect on the situation in which he
stood, and the life he had led, that man, in the
moments of sorrow, was satwfied that he had
been deceived by those who had undermined
his futh, and he again embraced the religion
he had abandoned. And in considering the
conduct of Adams, I think it not at all impos-
sible that his proridential escape from Uato-
street may have led to that reformation which,
I trust, is complete.
Yon have been desired to attend to the
manner in which he gave his testimony. I
request you to do the same. It has been said*
that on some former occasion on which Adams
was a witness, but of which you are bound to
take no notice, he did not give precisely the
same account of minute circumstances as he
has on the present trial ; that is to my mind
the strongest proof of the troth of his stoty,—
you are men of the worid and men of expe-
rience; is there any thing more suspicions
than, when a man has given a long narratiTe
oontaining various circumstances, accounts of
various meetings and consultations, that he
should upon a second examination, repeat mi-
nutely the testimony he had previously given
in the same words, and without variation or
alteration? — ^I say such conduct to my mind
would be the strongest proof that the witness
told a febricated and raise story. But ^hen
his attention is on a second occasion called to
other circumstances, and to other persons, that
he should remember other occurrences which
he had not previously detailed, is not only
most natural, out a proof that he comes as the
witness of truth : he gave you the fairest ac-
count possible ; when questioned as to several
facts be has now introduced aflfecting the pris*
oner at the bar, he said, when I was before
here, this man was not on his trial, and I was
not then so fjarticulariy examined as to the
share he had in the transaction ; but now that
my recolleetion is awakened, I am enabled to
state circumstances that did not then occur to
me. But, says my learned friend, he now
omits many (acts which, upon a former occa-
sion, he gave in evidence : in my opinion such
omissions are so fiir from detracting from his
testimony, that they add a weight to it. He
narrated the events as they arose in his me-
mory at the time, not from a story learnt by
rote, and as a child would repeat his lesson.
As men of the world, and as men of experience
in these matters, I am satisfied you will consi-
der that the evidence of Adams is confirmel,
and his credit esUblished by the very circum-
stances upon which n^ learned friend fbunds
his objections to its truth.
I wish, gentlemen, to examine all the ohjeo-
tions which are made to the testimony of this
witness, before I draw your attention to those
strong confirmations which have been very
properly passed over by my learned friends
DM cfjamet lugs
[1116
who ave advoeates for the prisoner, it being
their duty to present the case to you in the
view moat favourable for their client. It is
said there are contradictions Of him by the
other witnesses, and I think those first relied
on are as to the number of persons in Cato-
street; and it is asserted that Adams is at vn-
rianee with Monument. Let me call your re-
collection to what passed there with respect to
the tardy appearance of Tidd, the man whom
Monument accompanied, and who you will re-
coliect was almost the last penon who arrived
on that evening. Considerable agitaiioa had
been exhibited by the party, in consequence
of his not coming at the period at winch be
was expected ; Adams was there long before.
Adams tells you that at one period, when the
matter was talked of, Thistlewood said there
were eighteen in the room above, and two be-
low, m&ing twenty. Now what is the ao-
count given by Monument? — that after his
arrival with Tidd, and just before ihej were
about to leave the stable, and when soom coo-
vemtion took place respecting numbers, it
was stated, I think he says by Thistlewood,
that there were then five and twenty. There
would be no material inconsistency in these
accounts even supposing the fact to which the
witnesses are speaking to have taken place at
the same time. You have often heard — in-
deed it is a trite observation — ^that where wit-
nesses are speaking to the same occurrence, it
is the best test of the tmtli of the story they
relate tliat Uiey do not exactly accord in all
the circumstances attending it, but that there
are some slight variations between them. I
say that even if these men were speaking of
the same transaction, you have this foct coo-
firmed instead of being contradicted, namely,
that at one period of Uie evening there was a
desire to ascertain the number of the men as-
sembled. Monument, therefore, at all events
confirms Adams as to ascertaining their nam-
her, and they difier only as to the number
when ascertained.
But then you are told there is another con-
tradiction ; that Adams diflers from the offi-
cers, as to the number of candles that were ia
the room ; that he says there was one or two
in the first room, the officers on the contrary
that there were three or four, and that it ap-
peared to them there were some in the side
room from the shades thrown by the persons
entering it ; and lastly, you are asked to re-
fuse your belief to the account he has tpven,
because he differs as to the expressions used
by the officers from their recollection of them.
Turn to the minutes you have taken of the
testimony given by the officers, and if my
learned niend is entitled to argue that Adams's
evidence is proved to be untrue by that testi-
mony, I will show you that by the same test it
can be demonstrated that the evidence of the
officers is not correct Ruthven saw but one
man when he entered the stable : Ellis and
another speak to seeing two. It might he
9akdp Buthven does not speak the truth;
fll7J
fur Hif^ Tra^tM..
At &. 1880.
ClllS
and if my Ittrntod fn«iid's mode of reasoning
is to be generally applied, you might altoge*
thef discard the unimpeached testimony of the
officers.
There is another point in which Adams is con*
finned by some of the officers, ^and is uncon-
firmed by others. Adams states that when the
officers were approaching the ladder he heard
a Toioe exclaimmg, '^ Holloa, shew a Ught
above." Ruthven stated that when he went
up the ladder he never heard such an expres-
sion. I am not sure whether Ellis stated that
he did not hear it : but when you come to the
evidence of Westcoatt, he proves there was
eocb an expression. Adams says the officers
exdairoedi ** here is a pre^ n^t of you, give
up your arms," and the officers say that they
cried. oui ''We are officers, give up your
arms ;" if this discrepancy can destroy tne tes*
iimony of Adams, it will destroy that of the
officers, upon whom the counsel for the pri-
soner have not cast the slightest imputation.
These are all the contradictions which hove
been relied upon by my learned ftiend on the
other side, and I hope you will agree with me
thai the observations in answer are satis&ctory .
But then he says there is not sufficient confir-
mation in this case, and that all the confirma^
tion of the witness Adams which ought to be
given, has not been adduced. I will venture
to assert, and I think you will agree with me,
that there hardly ever was a witness confirmed
as he has been in such a variety of points, and
points too so material to the inquiry. It is
said by the counsel for the prisoner (we shall
see wim what truth), it is true that Adams is
confirmed in many particulars, but as to the
intention and die plan of the parties, the cor-
roboration of his evidence altogether foils ; and
yet, gentlemen, this is urged to you by advo-
cates who admit broadly, plainly, and unequi*
Tocally, that the plan upon this occasion was
to assassinate his majesty's ministers. How
do they get at that plan ? on what evidence is ,
it that mv learned friends make tliis admis-
sion ? Tney make it upon the testimony of
Adams, — upon the testimony of Adams confirm-
ed indeed bv the occurrences in Cato-street,
and the evidence of other persons to which I
shall call your attention hereafter.
Let us try the hypothesis submitted on the
part of the prosecution. We say there was a
oeliberate pian formed by the prisoners Ings,
lliistlewood, and their associates, to overturn
the Government, — that' the first blow to be
struck to carry that plan into effect was the
assassination of his majesty's ministers in
Grosvenor-square, on the night of the 2drd of
February, and that that blow was to be fol-
lowed up bymovements in various parts of
the town. The proposition of the otlier side
is, that the plot was certainly to assassinate his
majesty's ministers, but that it was to begin
and end there, and that no proof arises out of
the testimony of Adams, none out of the evi-
dence of Hiden, none out of the account given
by Monunienty none from a variety of fiu:t8
established, and which cannot be controverted,
that there was any design contemplated by
the conspirators beyond the destruction of the
illustrious persons assembled as guests at the
table of lord Harrowby, and the conflagration
and consequent plunder of a part of the town.
To prove the case for the prosecution, one of
the conspirators himself is called : I beg leave
to add mj humble recommendation to that of
the Solicitor-general, as to the caution and at-
tention with which you should examine such
testimony. A man, who admits himself to be
a participator in such a scheme, is to be
watched with the greatest circumspection, and
his evidence is to be most scrupulously
weighed ; but in this as in every other case,
where it is impossible for you to get at the
secret consultations and deliberations of the
persons engaged, if the testimony of an ac-
complice cannot be received ; the crime must
go unpunished ; for, if it is to be laid down
that an accomplice is not a witness to prove
the ofience, complete indemnity is offered to
persons forming such a scheme: they may
proceed as far as they please, knowing that if
eren their friends prove treacherous, they can-
not be received as witnesses in a court of lustice
affainst them. Fortunately, however, for the
administration of justice, that is not the law in
this countnr ; an accomplice is a competent
and a creoible witness, if his testimony re-
ceives confirmation— not confirmation as to
every part of his story, for that would in most
cases be impossible, and in all unnecessary,
for if the law required confirmation of eveiv
part of the account of an accomplice, and such
confirmation could be adduced, his testimony
would not be requisite, the witnesses who could
so confirm him, might themselves be examined.
If, therefore, you find the testimony of Adams
supported in material points, if he relates facts
to which other persons of undoubted veracity
depose, then you will be justified— you will be
bound to conclude tliat the whole of his ac»
count is true.
Now let us see in what points Adams is
confirmed, and I will take you, although it
may occupy a little of your time, through the
different parts of his narrative, and shew you
how he is supported. The first thing whicb'he
states to you m, that upon his coming out of
prison and meeting a^n with Thistlewood
and Brunt, he was earned to a room in Brunt's
house, which had been hired by the prisoner
Ings for the purpose of their consultations, a
circumstance which is proved by Eleanor
Walker and Mary Rogers, who tell you that
the room had been hired for the prisoner Ings,
under the false pretence that he was going to
occupy it as a residence; and it is also con-
firmed by Hale. Was that room used as a
lodging ibr Ings ? Did he ever occupy it as
such, or carry any furniture tliere ? Was not
the only purpose for which that room was
used that which Adams states, namely, for
the consultations and deliberations of those
penoos wjx> had this treasonable plan in view Y
M19>
I GBoaGE ly.
ia this tbcft Adans b coaBnned>^ B«l k it
nkl it U an ttnimporiaiit ^Mrt. What, i»' it
uniniporiaiit to baio it proved that ponooi
have hired a room for the purpote of ooDsultiDg»
deliberating upon, aod matoriag plans of a»>
saaunaiioo and treason ? Have yon not coot*
finnation that it was taken under a frlse pre-
tence? is it even asserted by the prisoner, or
1^ his learned ooonsel, thai that room was not
hired onder the oolonr of being a lodging for
IngSp bat tot the real and my parpose of
nlanning and furthering the oonspiiaqr chaiic^
by the iadictmenty ana of preparing those m*
stnunents of destruction wnich you have seen
produced in the coarse of this trial? Adams
tells you that SMetings were constantly held
in that room, from the instant of bis emerging
fiNm prison up to' the 23rd of Febiuaiy. He
states to you that impatience having been ei-
prmsed br these perM>ns as to the accomplish»
ment of their schemes^ it was determined that
on Wednesday something shoald be done ; he
informs you that Thistlewood had appointed a
committee tOr be held on the Sunday morning,
in the room adjoining Brunt's apartments,
and that such committee met Here then
Adams is confirmed in a most material and
important manner. He says there- was a
larger meeting^ than usual on that morning ;
SIM Halci, the apprentice of Brunt, informs
you that the assembly of Sunday was more
numerous than any he had ever before observed
ia that room. What was done in that room ?
How were these conspirators employed there f
Adams teUs you that he saw some working
upon the pflua-etaves which have been pro-
duced to vou, and others upon the grenades
and fire-bails which have been exhibited*
What does Hale sUte? That he frequently
heard persons working there; that the sound on
sawing was not unfreqnant, and that he ac-
tually noticed in that room the ammunition-
they had prepared.
. What iS tne next important point ? A fiict
which it was impossible Adams could invent
without the certainty of being, contradicted if
it was not true :— he says that, on the mominff
of the 23rd| he .went into Brunt's room^ and-
saw there a man of the name of Strange^ and
another person whom be does not know, flint-
ing (fl think that was bis expression) their
pistols, and preparing their arms ; how stands-
the confirmation upon that point? Tlie ap-
prentice boy (between whom and Adams there
has been no concert, for there could be none,
as Adams has been in custody from within, a
day or two of the time of the meeting in Cidto-
street up to the present period), Hale tells you-
tiiat on that dayihesaw Strange and. another
man^ whose name he does not know, getting
ready their arms» preparatory toiling to Cat<v
street. Who are the pfrsons who attended at:
this room? Adams enumerates the names of-
several of the prisqoerst and of others who are*
not indicted; he tells you that Thistlewood,
Ings, Davidson, Brunt, Harrisop^ Bradhum,
and Hall used to attend there, and that in ad«
dition to IheiA theie wan Filler, PaUn, aad
Cook ; it was proved by the appvenlice bcv
that every one of those men was in the hsiat
of frequenting this apartment. Is this, thca^
ail invention on the part of Adams? No, he
is confirmed by testimony tikat is unimpeaclied,.
and unimpeadiable ; for no endeavour has
been nUde in the course of this trial to tfanw
the slightest imputation on the charaeter of
Hale ; no attempt in cross eTaminatioa to
shake his credit, or to induce you not to be-
lieve in the fullest degree the testimony be has
given to the court.
But there is another most remarkable fact in
which Adams is confirmed bv Hale. Adams
tells you. that, on the 33fd, after they had met
in the room hired by Ingi, and before they set
out for Cato^street, Thutlewood proposed to
vrrite a prodamation, which was to oe ezhibitod
upon the walls of the houses adjacent to those
to which ^T% might be set, in order diat it
might be ^e better read by tiie populace. He
leqi^rsd paper for that purpose, and Adams
says, that Thistlewood talked of getting sndi
as newspapers are printed upon, but thai on
his suggesting cartitdge paper. Brant was
desired to procure six sheets. Would a nnn
invent such a fkct, not knowing who vras seat
for the paper, and being quite unconscious that
he would be capable of confirmatian ? It is in
evidence before you that Brunt went to his
apprentice Hale, derired him to procure the
cartridge-paper, that it was procured aial- taken
into the room. Hale, therefore, confirms him
as to that foot. My learned friend, then ad-
verted to the contents of the proclamation, and
he argued imder a mistake for some time that
Monument might have confirmed Adams,
whereas the evidence was, thAtMonumeat vras
not in Brunt's house at all. Can you, then,
when you have these confirmations before yoa,
say) upon- the assertion of counsel only, yes,
we will believe the paper was procoiod, bat
we do not believe that it was obtained for the
purpose suggested, although the fact is sworn
to by the same witness ? And you.are aUked,
becmise it is said part of this paper was fbaad
in the cupboard, to believe that the rest
had been used- for the mdiing of cartridgei^
though you have not tbrsfigfatest evidence thai
cartridges were at that time preparinfr; they
were ail procured before, and all that the con-
spirators were then- doing; wss aceootring
tnemselves for. the purpeso of going to Cato-
street
What b the next foct? I should have in-
troduced itbefotein point of order, and it is a
most striking ciroumslanoew It is proved that,
on the Tuesday,, some. alarm had been excited
in eonseqnence of Adams's communicatioii
that the landlord had iirformed him they had
been su^meoted: of holding improper meetings
at the White Hart. You will recollect the
agitatioB that prevailed among^ them apoii
that o^caaion ; they vfesa so bent upon their
schemes that they.tasuldaiotffasoplstliaisaspicfoai
that their. plaffrviia8riflBli}&ta' be: hBBVo^.stfll
1311
Jbr High Treaton.
A. D. 1820.
tum
more were they offended by the attempt of an
associate to damp the ardour of their aaherents.
In order to ascertain whether there was the
least suspicion of them entertained by the go*
tremment, it was with great shrewdness pro-
loosed that a watch should be placed on lord
Harrowby's house, to commence at six o'clock,
to continue till twelve, and to be again set at
four in the morning, in order to ascertain whe-
ther any soldiers were introduced into that
house, or any other in Grosvenor*sauare.
.That is proved beyond the possibility of con-
tradiction. Could Adams oe aware of such
confirmation? You have heard it flippantly
(I do not use the word offensively) treated as a
mere confirmation of a game of dominos having
been played. It appears to me a most im->
portant confirmation ; it is shown that David-
son and another were first to watch, and that
Tidd and Brunt were to relieve them. Tidd
came to Brunt*s house in Fox-court after some
delay, and departed from thence in company
with Brunt, for the purpose of taking their
share of the duty in Grosvenor-square, but
stated that there nvas a person whom he wished
to see on that evenine, a very important man,
and that if he should be so fortunate as to
meet with him, he should not be able to attend
the watch. After a short time, Brunt returned,
saying that Tidd had met the man, and that he
could not watch, and Adams was selected to
accompany Brunt. It is established by the
watchman, that a man of colour was seen with
another loitering about the square. It is
proved to you by Gillan, that on that evening
ne actually played with Brunt at Dominos, in
a public house in the neighbourhood. Thus
vou have the fact of the watching confirmed
beyond the possibility of doubt, and my learned
frieod might as well argue that because Gillan
did not hear them say that the^ were watching
lord Harrowbv's house, there is no evidence of
the purpose for which they went into Gros-
Tenor-square on that night. Can you be
brought to draw such a conclusion by such
fallacious reasoning f At the time Adams
gave the account, it was impossible for him to
know that Gillan could be brought forward to
confirm this part of his statement. I say, then,
again, this is a most remarkable confirmation
of the circumstances which passed on the even-
ing before the 23rd, not less remarkable than
the two confirmations of the events of that da;^
to which I have already called your attention ;
namely, of their coming to prepare their arms
at Brunt's room, and the sending for the car-
tridge paper by Thistlewood to prepare the
proclamations.
There is another material circumstance;
Adams tells you, that Tidd's house was used
as a d^p6t for the arms ;— )do you want testi-
mony on the part of the Crown to prove it ?
If confirmation is required, you fina it in the
eridence of the unfortunate young woman who
was called for the prisoner. She states that
ihe box containing the cartridges and combus-
libkt bad been Uiere a -fortnight:, let them
VOL. xxxin.
have be^ carried there by whom they might,
there they were for the purposes of this con««
spiracy ; and a most remarkable fact she has
introduced, with which we were before unac-
quainted, that on the very morning of the 23rd,
some of the articles were removed from Tidd's
premises by these persons ; I leave you to say
whether they were not removed from thence to
Cato-street. Here, then, Adams is confirmed
in a most important point, not only important
as it respects the assassination, but when you
come to consider the nature of the things that
were prepared, you must be satisfied that the
contents of that box were calculated for the
execution of a plan embracing other objects
beyond the destruction of his majesty^s mi-
nbters.
Another fact worthy of your attention is
stated as to the proceedings of Tidd, on the
evening of the 23rd. It is proved by the ap-
prentice Hale, that after some of the conspira*
tors had gone to Cato-street, Tidd called at
Brunt's, and received a pike head and a sword^
which he said he would take care of, and carry
to the place where they were wanted. Monu«*
ment and Adams tell you, that Tidd did not
arrive at Cato-street till after the other con«
spirators; it is clear, from the testimony of
Hale, that he did not set out from Fox-court
till all the others were gone.
There is another circumstance in which he
is most materially supported, and supported
beyond the power of^ contradiction, a fact
which he has not invented, for it is spoken to
by others, and confirmed by the seisure and
production of the deadly instrument to whidi
It relates. Adams has informed you, that the
prisoner at the bar produced a large butcher's
Knife, and you will recolleet the bloody pur«
pose to which Ings stated it was to be applied ;
Adams remarked that it had wax-end round
the handle, which the prisoner said had been
placed there to enable him more firmly to
grasp it, and to prevent its slipping from his
hand. That very knife, be it recollected, is
taken from Ings on the night of the 23rd, and
on his person afterwards was found* the case
to which it belonged, and in which he had
most probably carried it. Are all these con-
firmations nothing ? Do they not mainly cor-»
roborate the whole story told you by Aaams f
Do you not find his testimony supported in
almost every particular in which it is capable
of confirmation ? and are you then to be told,
when his evidence is thus strongly corrobo*
rated, that you are to believe him as to one
part only of the conspiracy charged, namely,
the assassination of bis majesty's ministers, and
that you are to dismiss from your consideration
all he has sworn as to the ulterior objects of
this nefarious scheme ?
In addition to the knifh,.you have also a
sword, particularly pointed out to you amonc
the many found in Cato-street; that sword
was carried by the prisoner, as long ago, I
think, as Christmas last, to a shop in Drury^
laa^, for the purpose x»f being shaipeoed, and
4C
llta] lGEOR6£IV.
particular directions were giveii by him re-
epectifig it. The unfortunate man at the bar
ttatesy in the few sentences he has addressed
to you in his defence, that he took that sword
to the stable bv the desire of another person ;
that it was not his own sword, but that £d wards
gave it him, and that he carried it for him.
Although you haVe heard occasionally of Ed-
wards, there is not the slightest proof that he
was in Cato-street at ail, but, on the contrary,
bis presence there is negatiyed; this sword,
therefore, must have been carried by some one
of the persons who were in Cato-street. In
addition to the sword and the knife, Adams
speaks of two bags or haversacks, which Ings
cuiibited before he went from Fox-court ; that
he accoutred himself with them, and stated
that the horrible purpose to which they were
to be applied was, to cany off the heads of
two of his majesty's ministers, from the massacre
in Grosvenor^square ; the prisoner is actually
found with those two bags suspended from his
shoulders ; but I am tiring you I fear with the
enumeration of these circumstances ; but they
will make good the assertion with which I set
out, that you would find so much of confirma-
tion bef^^re you, that it would be impossible
for you to doubt the general accuracy of the
account of Adams.
I must trouble you with a remark or two on
the interest Adams is said to have upon this
occasion, and oa which so much observation
has been made. What possible interest, I
appeal to ^TtTj one of you, can he have in
Huperadding, if it did not exist, the ulterior
plirpose of overturning the government? Adams
IS apprehended — he states, there is a nefarious
ylot 10 assassinate the whole cabinet, sufficiently
mlamotts, as my k»med ^end admits — suffi«
dently horrible; what credit then is he to
obtain by charging the conspirators with the
fiirth^r intention of destroying the existing
order of things ? His interest was all the other
wey — he had disclosed enough of in&my and
guiH, when he had made known the plan of
Ussassination. If the scheme originated in
motives of private revenge entertained against
the ministers individually, what object could
he have in stating that it was a mere step for
the accomplishment of other projects ? He had
fdready heaped upon his own head, and that
of each of his associates, a load of crime, suffi-
ciently heavy to press them down ; and what
possible motive can be assigned for his increas-
ing their delinquency and his own by stating,
that they intended to overthrow the govem-
inent ? the charge so far from giving a greater
tppearance of truth to his account, was calcu-
lated to diminish its credibility in proportion
to the magnitude afid atrocity of the crime
imputed. 1 submit there is an absence of all
interest in Adam^ to make the offence of these
men more heinous than it was, and that nothing
can have induced him to implicate them to the
extent he has, but a desire of disclosing the
whole of the conspiracy, and making as ample
atonement as is in his power to the offended
laws of his country.
Trial qfJamn Inp
C1134
While we axe talkioji of private reveofq
against his majesty's ministers, permit me to
ask, if the gratification of that feeling was the
only object these conspiratora had in view,
why was not the scheme which th^ originally
purposed and approved, of assassinating the
ministers at their own houses, persisted in ?
If the plan ori^nated in hatred and animosity
against the individuals, tell me, as reasonable
men, what anxiety could they have to take off
the whole of the cabinet at one blow, unless
it was intended to carry into effect the ovei^
throw of the state^ by availing themselves of
the confusion arising out of the destractioa of
all the executive ministers of the Crown?
When you find by the concessions of my
learned friends (and they have made none
which the necessity of the case has not forced
upon them, they have admitted nothing it was
possible for them in duty to the prisoner to
aeny), when the counsel for the accused are,
by the strength of the eridence, forced to allow
that there was a conspiracy to murder his
majesty*s ministers, and that the prisoBers met
in Cato^treet, for Uiat avowed purpose ; I ask
any man to assign even a plausible reason,
why Adams, a participator in the guilt, should
wish to add to the admitted enormity of tbdr
crime, by chai^ng tHem with intentions of a
still more atrocious nature.
If^ then, Adams has no interest to deceive
you, and if you find him confirmed in the ma-
terial parts of his narrative, what just reason
can there be for refusing credit to the testi-
mony he has given to the court ? Bat does
the case rest upon the evidence of Adams ? do
my learned friends imagine, that you, or that
I, have blotted out from our recollection aU that
we have heard from the mouths of the other wit*
nesses? Before I dismiss Adams, let me call your
attention to Chambers, who is put into the bos
to contradict him. My learned friends, to
whom the prisoner has confided his defenc^
examined Adams^ as to whether he had oiled
on this Chambers, and used certain expres-
sions; Adams denies using the expressions
imputed to him, and the gentleman who last
addressed you says, he must admit that Cham-
bers has been mixed up with bad company hv
my friend Mr. Gumey who cross-examined
him^that undoubtedly he is a radical — that
he has been carrying flags at different meetinss
— but that nothing beyond this can be brongSt
against his character. I remember (perhaps
they have not escaped vour memory) the very
forcible observations which were made by the
learned counsel who first addressed you on die
part of the prisoner (adopting language sup-
posed to have been used by the Solicitor-gene^
ral, in examining the testimony of a man, who
had been stated to have had' proposed to him
by another, to make an abonunable acimsaticm
against a third person, with the view of ex^
tprting money) ; my leaimed friend said, that
the Solicitor-general had remarked, that the
man who could receive such an applicatioi^
^parently assent to it, and not oomiaaiiicaAf
Ui5l
* g- - - •
Jar High Treastm.
A. D. 18da
1112$
It to a magistrate, was unworthy of credit ;
and the learned gentleman applied that observ«
atioQ of the Solicitor-generai to some of the
witnesses on the present occasion. The cotin-
ael for the prisoner, not fuUj anticipating the
tTtdence which Chambers would gire, has by
these observations cut up root and branch the
testimony of that man. Chambers tells you
unblushingly, that a proposition was made to
him by Adams, to jom in a conspiracy to as-
sassinate his majesty's ministers, accompanied
by expressions which must have disgusted
every man, who heard them, "that he would
sup that night on blood and wine.'* Cbanw
bers lives within five minutes walk of Bow-
street ; but until he is produced before you as
a witness, he buries the diabolical proposal in
his own bosom; he associates still with his
friends the radicals, and he never communi-
cates the nefarious scheme to a msgistrate, in
order to put a stop to it, and bring to punish-
ment its ffuilty projectors. Then what credit
wiU you give to tnis man ? If it be argued that
a man who has been solicited to join with
another to extort money fVom a third, by mak*
ing a diarge against him affeoting his character
is unworthy of belief if he conceals the fiict;
with what force does the observation appiv
to this most extraordinary witness ? How it
at ODce destroys his evidence 1 According to
his own confession, when the proposition
was made to him, he did not shew th^
least disapprobation of it; he exhibited no
signs of horror whatever at receiving it fh>m
men, of whom, according to his own account,
he knew little, and to whom he owed nothing
on the score of friendship that could have in-
duced him to keep the communication secret ;
yet he never divulges it to a magistrate, of
any human being, till he is called here to-day
for the first time to make it public. Upon
^his miserable attempt at contradiction of
Adams, I win not trouble you with another
observation, as I think vou will be of opinion,
that the weight of credit is due to Adams who
denies the conversation, rather than to Cham-
bers who says it passed, and who has till this
hour kept it a secret.
The occurrence of Chambers to my recollec-
tion, carried away mv mind from the witness.
Monument. It has been said you should at-
tend not only to the evidence, but to the man*
ser in which it is given. In my opinion, no
nan ever gave his testimony in a more deli-
)>erate or solemn manner than Monument?
he was not shaken in a single fact. What is
his account? — that he had been introduced to
Tbistlewood, by a man of the name of Ford,
fome few weeks before this tfiUxr, find that af-*
terwards Thistlewood called upon him with
Brunt. It is very material for you to recollect
Hhe conversation that took place between him
and Thistlewood upon that occasion ; the fiict
of TIAstlewooA comiug and desiring a private
interview with him iis conihrm^ by Ihe evi-
dence of his brother, who lavs that he was at
lione at the toe Thistlewooa aad Bnmt call-
ed. It Is broadly asserted that there was no
treason in this conspiracy ; that nothing be-
yond an intention to assassinate his majesty'l
ministers is proved. Be good enough to re«
collect what it was that 'Thistlewood said t6
Monument at that visit — ** Great events are at
hand ; the people are desirous of a change. I
have been oeceived by many persons, but now
I have a number of men tiiat will stand by
me. *' Great events are at hand ! — The people
are desirous of a change 1 What Events f-^
what change ? The change of his majesfy'i
ministers ? On that change, gentlemen, yoii
had observations offered to you that hardly
became the gravity of this momentous inquiry':
it was stated that to oppose his majestv^s go-
vernment, and to endeavour to remove his mi-
nisters, was not treason; that even for two
privy councillors to fight a duel was not treason i
and therefore it was argued seriously, that be^
cause men in a fair opposition to the mea-
sures of bis majesty's government might em
deavoor to displace his ministers, it is ng^
treason tp remove them all by assaaii nation.
«< Gr^ events are at band, and tbe people are
desirous of a change.** Can you doubt tha^
Thistlewood intended to convey to the mio4
of Monu^nent that a grcfat political blow woold
soon be struck, and a change in the form of
government effected ? If not, what did he
mean by saying that he had now people that
would stand by him, although he had been
jeceif^ before ? What had that to do with
the removal of his majesty's ministers, by fair
means? Nothing, gentlemen, nothing. It
proves, most satisfactorily, the guilty purpose
which was at that time lurking in th^ minds
of Thistlewood and his misguided adherents.
What does Monument prove niore.' He
tells you that when he arrived in Cato-street^
apprehensions were expressed as to the numbers
there assembled not being capable of accom-
plishing all the schemes the prisoners had in
view. Thistlewood told them they were not
to be alarmed, that there were men enough to
go to lord Ilarrowby's and that there were other
parties — for what purpose ? — ^not to go to lord
Harro why's, that is not pretended — ^Thistlewood
alluded to parties who were to meet in other
parts of the town. This declaration, coupled
with fiicts to which I shall by and by advert—-
I mean their preparations — shews, beyond
all doubt, to tne mind of eveiy reasonable
man, that their great plan was the overthrow
of government, however ineflScient the means
for that object^ and that the removal of his
majesty's ministers was only the first step in
the march of destruction. Monument is un-
tbuched in his character by any thing that has
appeared before you, except so far as his
going to Cato-street, s^nd his apparent adop-
tion of their schemes affects him ; his private
conduct is unimpeached, his evidence is un-
cpntradicted.
Then there is another witness of still greater'
credit, at least I think you will consider him
so, lanean the witness Hiden; bis testimony.
1127] 1 GEORGB IV.
joined to the meeting in Cato-ctreet, proTes
this treason. Let us examine what Hideo's
conduct and character have been: you have
heard motives imputed, you have bad interests
suggested which might operate upon the minds
of other witnesses, let me ask you fairly, what
motive can you assign to a man's disclosing a
circumstance, as Hiden did, before it took
place ? Why should he impart the mete ex-
pectation of a meeting in Cato^street, if no
meeting had been intended? Is there any
charge against Hiden P Had he any sinister
end to serve by the disclosure ? Gentlemen, I
must confess, I felt some little indignatioa
while the comments were making by my learn-
ed friend on this man's testinmny; he said
lord Harrowby was a very respectable cha-
lacter, a very worthy man, but still he in-
sinuated to you that money had either been
offered*—
Mr. Adolphm, — God forbid, Mr. Attorney-
general. I did not, indeed. I never meant
to insinuate any such thing. I said that
gratitude would naturally impel my lord Har-
rowby to do something for the man who had
done this to save his life, but that of course
nothing would be done till after the trial, and
that the recollection would remain upon his
mind to the close of his days.
Mr. Attorney OeneraL — Gentlemen, I am
extremely glad of the interruption. Then my
learned friend's remark points only to what
may have been passing in the mind of lord
Harrowby. He may treat my observation in
the manner he thinks it deserves, but I must
put vott in mind that there is no question
asked of the witness as to any expectation of
seward in a pecuniary, or any other manner.
Then if he had formed no such hope, why is
the efiiect of it imputed to him ? Is it intended
to detract from the credit of lord Harrowby,
or of the witness ? With respect to lord Har-
rowby, it is completely disavowed ; it is dis-
tinctly admitted that he has not given Hiden
money for that which he has done ; it is said
be must feel gratitude for the preservation of
which the witness has been the means, but
that no pecuniary reward has been bestowed.
What then do you find operating upon the
mind of Hiden, when he makes the communi-
cation ? — at that time there was no charge ex-
isting against him, nothing has appeared in
4he evidence to fix upon him any acquiescence
in the communicated plan ; he stands before
vou, not as an accomplice, not as a person
lending himself to the wicked schemes ot these
conspirators, not as a man acting from pecu-
niary or other improper motives ; he comes
before you as an individual to whom the plot
had been divulged by Wilson, and who feeling
it to be his bounden duty to make it known,
'gives information of it bv means of a letter,
which he delivers to lord Harrowby, requesting
that nobleman to. put it into the hands of lord
Castlereagh, to whom it was directed.
But see how this disclosure affects the tes-
Trial qf James Inp
HISS
timony of Hiden in another view. Hewiit
have been a prophet if it was not tnie: kv
did it happen to be verified by the transaction
on the following night in Caio-street? Had
he been in Fox-court ? Had he ever leen uy
of the preparations T No, gentlemeD, tlie oolj
knowledge he had gained was by ibe cod-
munication of Wilson, and yet he inputs Ik-
fore-hand events which afterwards take place.
Then is there no evidence from Hideo of the
ulterior purpose of this plot?— does he tdl
you that it was confined to the aasassinaiioa
of his majesty's ministen ? <« He asked me to
join their party ; I asked for what ; be said, to
be one of a number who were going to neet
to destroy his migesty*s ministen at a cabiaet
dinner ; that they had got all ready, and ww
waiting for a cabinet dinner; that they had
some l^gs such as I never saw ; that some oi
them were made of turpentine, and some
bound round with cords, and some made «t(h
tin, and their strength was sudi, that if s^
fire to they would heave up the wall in front of
the houses opposite to us ; he said, that it m
intended to set fire to several houses; w
mentioned some, lord Harrowh/s the duke «
Wellington's, lord Sidmouth's, Iwd Calfl^
reagh's, the bishop of London's, and one dor
which I do not remember." For what weri
these houses to be set fire to after hiam^atJ,'
ministers were destroyed? If remp^
the object of the assassins, that wooU bate
been attained by the borrihle murdwrfttf
illustrious persons assembled atlordHanowtni
but it does not rest there, andlfeelUtoM
proper to call your particular attention towitf
Wilson further told Hiden upon thatooaaoj-
— « Things," he said, « were to be ^^^
the room where the ministera were sitlmji «w
all that escaped the explosion were to die nj
the sword, and that by UghUog the m »
would keep the town in a state of confcajji
and in a few days it would become gwo*
There, gentlemen, you have the kfy:«**!V.
the whole of the object they had iDfi«»»
inefficient as their means, vriW as their sdww.
visionary as their purpose may »PP^^
sitting here soberly and calmly to co«>«J J
them, these conspirators viewed wem r^
very different eyes ; they vainly in»P"*" "JJ
such a blow being struck, the i»«0Dtenw
people (as Thistlewood had i«pw«"ri u^
to be) would join them with an overwhcl^ai
force, and enable them to destroy "e.«>^
rivemment, and erect another ap<>".'^j""J
say, therefore, that this commaniatwo "
Wilson to Hiden, coupled widi the other »»
in the case, proves, beyond all qaeit«»i ^
plot they had in contemplation. ^
But see how the conversations Wiis^rJ
with Hiden, confirm Adams also: r9jr
find that after there was a fiirther comjj
cation between them on the afternoon «
meeting in Cato^treet, Wilson »d»^
"you are the very man I ^^J^^A
ed " what is, there gomg to D^^^TTjajiit
there is going to be a cabinet dioiitf «^
1149]
Jbr'Higk TreatOH,
A:.D. 1890.
riido
at lord Hdtnmhy% in Ofosrenor-flqaare, and I
was to be sute to come— I asked where I
should come— he said I was to come up to
John-street, to the. Horse and Groom, or to
stand at the corner of Cato^treet, till I was
shoved into a stable. I asked him how many
there were to be, he said there were foar di«
visions, one in GrayVinn-Ianet one in the
Borough, and one in the city, or Gee's-court,
besides that in Cato-street — ^he said GeeV
court was all in it, but tbev would not move
till the English had begun ; he said after they
had been at Grosvenor-square, they meant to
retreat to somewhere about the Mansion-house,
that was where all the parties were to meet;"
now you will recollect that Adams tells you
their plan was, to get possession of the Man-
sion-house, and make it the seat of the pro-
visional government ; be is confinned in this
by Hiden, not one of the conspirator*—*' he
said also there were places where they could
take the cannon, four pieces in some Artillery-
ground, by killing the sentry, and two pieces
m GrayVinn-lane, which could easily be got
at, by knocking in some door.'^
It is aigued before you with great force, and
with considerable ingenuity and eloquence,
that Adams's testimony cannot be believed,
because this story of taking the cannon in
Gray Vinn-lane, and *9X the Artillery-ground,
is incredible, and therefore the whole must be
the invention of Adams, and Adams alone;
but you will find other persons did not con-
sider it so visionary — ^Wilson not only men-
tioned the plan to Adams, but mentioned it
with apparent confidence in its practicability.
Thus is the existence of the general plot con-
^rmed, and the testimony of Adams himself
in a very material point supported.
An attempt was made on the cross-examina-
tion, to shake the credit of Hiden, by an in-
quiry into his place of residence, and into what
he was going aoout on the evening of the 23rd ;
and my learned friend had gravely insisted, that
because he asked him where he lived, and he
answered Manchester-mews, Manchester-
square, and it turned out that no longer ago
than last Saturday he was taken in execution
for debt, and therefore came up in custody of
an officer* the first answer was false, although
be left his wife and family in Manchester-mews.
If such a misfortune should happen to any of
you as the being taken to prison for debt, and
three days after you were asked wher^ your re-
mdence was, would you think you told a fidse-
hpod, if you had said my residence is in Man-
ehester-mews, or wherever it may be f The man
had just been removed from his house, he vras
brought up in custody, he could not have meant
by that answer to deceive any person, because
he knew that a habeas corpus had been issued
to bring him here, and that he could not ap-
-oen but in the custody of an officer; and yet
for want of other materials you were seriously
addressed upon this topic by one of my learned
friends at great length, and asked to disbelieve
the testimony of Hklen.
But he' was also cross-examined as to a
family in Princes-street, Cavendish-square^
which he had served for three yean, and
I cannot forget that the witness was loudly
told to be accurate in what he said, because
inquiries would be made, to see whether he
told truth or not. Many hours have now
passed over our heads since Hiden was ex-
amined ; ample opportunity has been afforded
to the prisoner at .toe bar, to discover whethec
that fact was true or false ; but no witness has
been produced to you to shew that he was in-
correct in any part of his testimony. Hiden
then stands uncontradicted ; he is a man
against whom there is no imputation of pre-
vious bad conduct of any description ; he an-
swered most willingly every inquiry respect-
ing the persons with whom he has lived as ser-
vant, to whom access therefore might have
been had, if any thing could be found against
him; it was not last night that the prisoner
knew for the first time that Hiden was to be a
witness, for by the lenity of our law, as my.
learned friends know, he has had for nearly a
month in his possession a list of all the wit-
nesses who could be produced against him,
their places of residence, and their business or
occupations, so that he can have no excuse to
make that he is taken by surprise, and is not
therefore prepared to investigate Uie charactex
of the witness.
My learned friend made some observations
on the list of witnesses, that the number is very
great, and therefore, the difficulty they had in
considering who was to be called in this or
that particular case, was great also; this, gentle-
men, is said to induce you to suppose ; that
the prisoner has been subjected to hardship.
Between forty and fifty of those witnesses are
either police officers, wardens of the Tower^
or police magistrates, whose testimony has
not, but might have been wanted, and whose
names, therefore, the legal advisers of the Crown
were obliged to insert, for this reason, that if
the name of a witness is not in the list he can-
not be examined against the prisoner. We
were obliged to insert not only those who were
known to be acouainted with the facts, but
those also who, by the remotest possibility^
could be necessary to be produced before you.
I believe, therefore, every warder of the Tower
is in that list, from the apprehension, that
something might occur after the prisoners were
in custody^ that it might be material to give
in evidence: all the police officers, all the
soldiers who were in Catorstreet, only two of
whom have been called, are included in it ; and
therefore the complaint which has been made,
appears to me to oe one, which, aAer this ex-
manation, you will think without foundation.
They knew as well as we did who the material
witnesses were likely to be, and had an op-
portunity of discovering evexy thing that could
be brought forward against this or that par*
ticular witness.
I have now observed upon the testimony of
Adamsy Moaument and Hiden. I do not
tt^l] 1 GEORGE IV.
trooble you widi goiw ovtr Ibe wiwis pofoti
ofcoBfirmitWii, bat I beg to eill your atleatioD
to wbat took pUco tt Cato^tmtl^ aod lo tbo
■latariak cottectod Iheve, wiih a tmw to Aew
iIm ultimate ol^tcu of this plot. Itie eiiaie.
tod that ooe part of the plan wai to aseaMiaaie
bie mnjei^fl ministen: what were tba netro-
iMnts proTided ? Wero they ooly adequate
|o that purpose, or were they «ot evidently
designed lor a larger and mofo extenoiTo
scheme f I know not how many band^grsnades
were found ; you have seen them, and had one
^ them opened, and tou have heasd the effects
Hkely to be produced by their exploeion. To
the work ofassesstnation many of the inetiw-
ments which lie on the table are weH adapted ;
I mean the guns, the pistols, and the swords.
Bat were p&es requisite^ or were they not
father designed for operations in the streets?
A pike in a room is of little utility, and when
you see the length of their handlei, and the
number of diem (many more than were no>
cessaiy for the party assembled in Cato*
street), I think you wiU agree with me that
they, could be prepared for no other purpose,
but to be used in the open air. But gentle-
men, 1,300 rounds of bell cartridges bare been
shewn to you, 965 in the box, and between
300 and 300 found in a bag at Tidd*s house-
were those designed merely for the assassina^
tton of his majesty's ministers T-^an you en-
tertain a doubt that they were intended for
more extensive destruction T There is another
part of tfie preparations which hardly requires
a remark to satisfy you, it was meant for other
objects ; you hare seen the flannel bags and
their contents, and it is in evidence that they
are cartridges for cannon, and are made to be
used in six-pounders. Were there to be any
eannon at lord Harrowby's? — ^No. How then
were these cartridges to be applied? The
answer is obrioos. Wilson communicated
to Hiden that cannon were to be taken at
the Light-horse Volunteers riding school, in
GraVs-Inn-lane, and at the Artillery-ground :
for those cannon these cartridges were intended ;
no reasonable man can doubt it ; some of them
were found at Tidd's and some at Brunt's,
none in Cato-street; is it not then evident that
they were desianed for the accomplishment of
other deeds of Dlood, after these conspirators
had perpetrated the assassination in OrosvenoN
squared
Were no other persons engaged in thb plan
than those who assembled in Cato-street f
Recollect, gentlemen. Hale says, that after the
party was gone to Cato^treet he was directed
to carrjr any persons that called at Brunt's, to
the White Hart in BrookVmarket ; Potter and
others did call ; for what purpose ? They were
not going to Cato-stieet ; they were not of the
party to attack lord Harrowby's. The ez«
pression of Brunt, when be returned to his
nouse in the evening, confirms the apprentice.
** We will go out — all is not over — something
is yet to be done." What was to be done ?
They had been defeated in the pbm of assassi-
TiM ofJame$ Ing$
(list
nalng his majesty^ toinislen. Tbatsomettii^
was ezpecfed to be effected by those persons
spoken of by Wilson to Hiden, of whom PaKs
and Poller were two. My learned Ineod
iheught he deiivoi) a triumphant argument from
the absence of Palin; but I \h\vk it operates
agaiwt the prisoner at the bar ; he says, it ap-
pears that a reward has been offi»red for Palin's
apprehension, and asks therefore how be can
pioduce him on tim occasion ; he tells you
Palin has absconded — ^absoonded for whatP-^
Is he a partictpater in the plot at Cato-street?
Was he at Cato-etreet? He has absconded,
because he knows there were other purposes in
view, trakorous and treasonable, in which be
Is deeply Implicated ; that is the reason why be
b not forth-coming to-day.
How does this apply to Hall, Cook, Hairis^
Potter, and others, whom Adams has men-
tioned ? Hall might be produced ; my learned
friends do not bring him forward ; and their
argument is this, Adamsls story is a fiction^
these persons were not there, or If they were
there what he states to have passed did not
take ]^ace. If they were not tnere they might
be csbed to prove that foot ; it could not hurt
them ; all of them would be able to conlradict
Adams, arid satisiV you that what he has sworn
Is false ; what is the plain inference fVom this ^
that thev were there; and if they were, as
Adams has stated wluit occurred on several
occasions, they might be made witnesses to
contradict him. I say, the absence of those
men confirms beyond tne possibility of doubt
the testimony of Adams.
Then if this be so, how stands the case
befbre you in point of proof? The feet off
their meeting in Cato-street, the preparatioBS
which are inade, the intention to assassinate
his mijestv's ministers, are not only proved ^
but not denied by the prisoner at ttie bar.
What obiect had uiese men in the assassin*^
tion of his majesty's miniisters, if it was not
to be followed up by other acts ? Tou have it
in evidence from Hiden, you hare it in evi-
dence from Monument, the feet itself, the
efndenda rei shews that ther had in their minds
that ulterior purpose which we charge, and
which is the only question you have to try on
this occasion. Do not be deceived by any
arguments which you have heard, that you are
to consider whether the plan could be efleded
—whether the means were adequate to the
end — whether it was not wild and visionarv.
To you and me considering the case calmly
it may appear to be so ; it was wild, it waa
visionary, my learned friend says, xmequaUed
in folly in the history of this country or any
other; and he diallenged me to produce
before yon Pespardfs case as' a parauel, and
eommented at mat letigth upon the facts of
it; and you wttt recollect that Thistlewood^
one of the psrt^, had that plot in his mind|'
even in Cato-street ; for he said, when ixm*
plaint was made of their want of fotce, "ttiaf
rf iliey did not proceed then, it woiild be a
Despard's job." The plaii of Despard wtt
l»33l
Jbr.HigA Tteas<m*
11194
quite as wild tnd quite as visionary as the
present Part of his scheme was, to assassinate
the kingy pait of this was to assassinate the
ministers. Despard thought he could take
the Tor/er and the Bank, with means less effec-
tual than those exhibited on this occasion;
he had a few ineni but where were his prepa-
rations? Had he hand-grenades— «had be pis-
tols— had he pikes — had he ball-qictridges —
had he all those implements which have been
produced to you? he imagined that with
twenty men he could take possession of the
large cannon in the p&rk, and fire it at his
majesty as be was going to parliament, -and
that they might afterwards make themselves
masters of the l^ower, and establish a provi-
sional government. My learned friend says,
he might have taken possession of the
cannon in the Park, and have nuirdered
his miyesty ; and I sav here with respect to
the assassination of his mi^^atjr's ministers,
it appears to me that was not difficult of
execution, and would probably have been
carried into effect, I will not describe to you
what has been so well pictured by my friend
the Solicitor-geoeral ; I only ask you to con-
ceive what would have been the confusion and
tenor through the metropolis, if they had been
able to accomplish that and some other parts
of their plan — ^if in the dead of the night, the
inhabitants of this great city had been alarmed
by fires in various places by the report that
his nujesi^'s ministers had been destroyed in
GrosvesDorHMiuare, and that there were par*
ties in arms roving over the town. It is not
al all impossible, that for a few houcs the con-
spirators might actually have been in jesses-
sioo of London ; there was nothing visionary
in the primary objects of their plot; the
destruction of the ministers, the firing of
houses, were both practicable ; I admit the
rest of their scheme could not have been car-
ried into effect, nor could Despard's; thev
were, to a certain extent, both equally wild.
If my learned firiends cite instances, I cite
X>espard*s case as one, in which similar
plans had been conceived, and similar inten-
tions manifested ; and for which that unfor-
tunate man suffered on the scaffold.
Then, gentlemen, do not be led away by
the notion, thatbecause the conspiracy appears
^rild or visionary, you are to aismiss it from
your consideration; the question is not,
whether its objects could have been efiected, but
whether they were contemplated by the.prfsoner
at the bar, and his associates.
With respect to the facts as tlue^ affect the
prisoner, I will not go over them particularly;
vou find him at their various meetings ; you find
him using expressions at those meetings, indi*
«atiog-his intentions; but, above aU, you find
Lim nnallyat Cato-street:^he st^she went
tb#pe ipoocently ;. you will recollect the mm*
ner in which he was acooutrod, -be -had twor
stj^fs over his shoulde^, frm which -huMg
two haversacks ; he had a belt loundb^ waist
In which, wew a brace of .pistols ; |^ kai this
A. D. IB9Q.
I^nife, for no doubt can be entertaiaed that b«
was the nwn who had the knife, his owa
defence has admitted it; he was bylhestep^
ladder which ascended to the loft above; he wae
there first seized by the officer, who took fromhifla
the knifp,and I think, the sword ; hethenu8seay#d
from the stable ; he is pursoed ; you renem-
ber the violent resistance he made ; this mea^
who would have you believe he was innocent
of any improper object, or any improper pur-
pose, actnally dtscharges a pistol at the officer,
and on being intenogated oy that <^cer why
he fired at him, he exclaimed, with bratal
ferocity, that he wished he had shot him dead.
Then the cloth case of the knife is aotuali|y
found on his person it has been &tted to the
knife, as you have seen, aa<Lthat case is aotiib-
ally made of the same materials of whi<^ iJho
belt round his waist was composed ; thos yoa
have him from the commencement of the ploA
to the dose, active in the promotion of thia
design. I do not trouble you at present, nor
will I, with the various expressions. be used»
the savage exaltation he displayed when they
found the cabinet dinner was to take plaee, or
his determination to mutilate sooM of the
ministers, and expose theur mangled limbs to
the populace. Butlauut beg yon to sec^
lect that in Cato-street . Davidson was tak^QA
and if anv thing were wanting to shew the
des^p[is of these conspiratom, you have it in
Davidson's expression — ^ Who would not die
in liberty's cause." Then the cause in whtdi
they were embarked was one for psoouring
liberty by the overthrow of the country ia
which we live ; here is a declaration of one af
the party as to the object of their plot.
This being the case, and these the questions
for vour consideration, I leave with peife«[t
confidence to vou the verdict you have to pior
nounce. I do assure you, gentlemen, :un-
feignedly, that my only anxiety has been ihaA
the case should be presented to yon fairiy, and
with such observations on rov part as my duty
as a servant of the public calls on me to make
in answer to those offered to you on the pa^
pf the prisoner. The constitution of the country
has wisely placed in your breasts the ultimate
determination of this question. It has been
represented to you, and truly, by my learned
friend who las^ addressed you, that it is. a case
of very great importance. Undoubtedly, i]t
is so, but there is nothing so important as the
due administration of justice; if the charge
has failed in your estimation, in proof, if
you entertain a reasonable doubt of the guilt
of the unhappy man at the bar {but let it be
recollected, it must be a reatonabU doubQ,—
then the merciful inclination of •our laws will
require that you should acquit the pri(9one|.
But if the facts and the testimony by ^vhioli
they have b^en proved, clearly satisfy, your
minds that the change has b^en substAiUiatfMl
--*that the designs which I have stisM V> 9<m
were barboureain that ' man's boiofi^ %pdtlmt
he acted with otJJMn <in .the furtberMMPO m)4
towP^eti9n'Of ihmp ^^ ^ wtaesses hlive
1135] 1 GEORGE IV.
told you — ^tben^ important as the case is -as it
regards tbe prisoner, it becomes infinitelr
more important as it affects tbe public, ana
it will be your bounden duty to find him
guilty. That you will d^ide uprightly and
honestly, no man who has witnessed your
attention and desire to scrutinize and weigh
tfab case, can doubt.
SUMMINO-VP.
• Lord Chief Justice DaUoi. — Gentlemen of
the Juiy ; this long and painful inquiry being
now (so far as regards tbe proof and the ob-
senrations from the bar)^rminated, it becomes
lay duty to recapitulate the evidence, with
auch comments as the circumstances of the
«ase shall seem to roe to require. In this late
"•tage of the proceeding, it would be more than
aupetilttous — ^it would be idle to remind you,
t£at the charge imputes to the prisoner at the
bar the highest crime which any subject can
commit Other offences aim at the person
•or property of individuals, but high treason',
by seeking the subversion of the established
government, aims at the property, the liberty,
and the lives of all. Still, however, nothing
'will depend upon the comparative magnitude
-of this ^ence ; for be the alleged crime great
^>r small, every man, standing in tlie situation
in which the prisoner is pla^, is entitled' to
have the charge against him deariv and satis-
fMtorily proved ; with this only difl^ence (and
I make the obtermtion in the outset, as being
in favour of the prisoner), that in proportion
to the magnitude of the offence and the con-
•equences whieh result from his conviction,
ought the proof to be clear and satisfactory.
Whether, in the present case, it be so or not,
it will ultimately be your exclusive duty to
determine.
- The indictment contains different counts or
charges which are founded upon two particular
statutes ; the first being an ancient statute, to
which you have already been frequently re-
ferred, and which passed in the reign of
Edward the 3rd ; the second a more recent
act, which passed in the reign of his late ma-
jesty. Ana, in the outset, and before I draw
your attention to any part of the evidence, I
shall describe the nature and substance of these
different charges disentangled from technical
and artificial statement. Tbe first count is a
charge of compassing and imagining to depose
the king — which is made treason by the statute
which passed m the reign of his late majesty,
the 3dtli of Geo. the Srd — and the overt or
open acts stated in the indictment, are mani-
festations of a secret intent ; for it is in the in-
tention that the crime of high treason consists^
The treason alleged, is compassing and ima-
gining to depose the king, and tbe overt acts
are in themselves such, all or some of them,'
as are sufficient in point of law to bring the
icaae 'within the treason charged, supposing tlie
overt acts themselves to be as matter of fact
made out by sufficient and satisfactory proof.
- Ptsling ove^ the second, the third count
Trial &f James Ingt
nisd
is a charge of conspiracy to levy war against
the king, in order to compel his mayesty
to change his measures and with respect
to Uiis also, I have to inform you, that the
overt acts which are stated in support
of this count, are dearly sufficient to sustain
the charge in point of law, if the acts
themselves be established by the testimony
before yon.
With respect to the two remaining counts
upon the face of this indictment, it is not
necessary to go particularly into them ; the
one is a charge of levying war, which need not
be particularly adverted to in this ^case ; but
this I will say only, if the evidence which
you have heard be true, and the insurrectioit
which is sworn to have been intended bad
taken place, and if it were an insurrection not
for a private purpose, but for a public and
genersi purpose, such insurrection would have
been a levying war ^;ainst the king ; but in
this case, the charge is not the acitud Uvyimf
war against the king, but the oompkin^ to levy
war. With respect to the remaining count,
that of conspiring to put the king to death, I
would state to you, if it were necessary,
that it is not requisite in order to support a
charge of such a description, that any blow
should be actually aimed or intended to be
aimed at the roytd person, or that the natural
life of the king should be the direct object of
those who enter into a conspiracy of such de-
scription ; it is enough that measures are me-
ditated calculated to bring about a change in
the government, the effect and tendency of
which would be as a natural and probable
consequence, the death of the king. But, how«
ever, with respect to these counts, to render
the investigation as simple as possible, yos
may dismiss them from your consideration, and
confine youselves to the two counts, one of whidi
states the compassing and imagining the deadi
of the king, and the other a conspiracy to levy
vrar in order to compel the king to change
his measures. Having thus explained the
nature of the charge, to which it will be ne-
cessary for you to apply your minds, I pro-
ceed immediately to recapitulate the evidence.
The first witness called is Robert Adams,
a prisoner in custody upon the same charge as
that against the prisoner at the bar. The
account which he oegan by giving of himsdf
is, that before he was taken he lived in Hole-
in-the-wall-passage, near BrookVraarket ; he
was acouainted with Brunt; the commence-
ment or his acouaintance with him was at
Cambray, who tlien, in 1816, passed by the
name of Morton. He savs, ^'i was mvsdf
originally a soldier in the Oxford Blues, abont
eighteen years ago, and from those I was dis-
charged, owing to illneas, and since then 1
have been a shoemaker. I pursued that trade
vrhile I vras in France with the English amy.
When I returned to England, I renewed my
acquaintance 'w&h 'Brunt ; he lived in Fox*
court, Ora/i^inn-lane.'' He is then asked as
toThistl«wobd ; and he mfn, ^ ItoovTWacle^
11373
Jht High Treason.
A. D. 1820.
11138
ivoody with whom I first became acqtiainted
on the 12th of January, that was on a Wednes-
day, in this year ; Brant and Ings introduced
me to him ; I had known Ings/ that is, the
prisoDer at the bar, ** five or six days before/'
So that with respect to Thistlewood, the evi-
dence of Adams opens with the fact, that he
was introduced to ThistTewood not merely by
Brant, but by Ings, the prisoner at the bar.
He was introduced to Thistlewood at his,
Thistlewood'is, lodgings in Stanhope-street,
Clare-market. ^^I had some conversation
with Thistlewood in the nresence of Brunt
and Ings. ^On Brunt introaucing me into the
room to Thistlewood, he said, ' Here, Mr.
Thistlewood, is the man I was speaking to
you of.' ^Is this the man?* he said; and
then, turning to me, he said, ^You lately
belonged to the Life-guards?' I said, 'No,
to the Blues.* He said, ' I presume you can
use the sword well, and are a good soldier?'
I answered, thai once I was a good soldier,
smd could use the sword well ; and that, even
now, I could use it to defend myself, if ever it
ihould become necessary. He then said of
the different shopkeepers in London, that they
were all a set ot aristocrats, and all working
under one system ; that he should glory to
see the day that their shops were all shut up
and well plundered. He next talked of Hunt,
that he Was a eoward, and no friend of the
people; and he had no doubt, if he could
get into Whitehall, and overlook the govem-
lent books there, he should find his name as
a spy employed by them. He next spoke of
Coobett, and said he was equally bad; for
ipvith all bis writings, they were not calculated
to do good to the public at all. Nothing fur-
ther passed at this time. Brunt said, he had
two men to call upon in Camaby-market, and
iisked Thistlewood whether he would call upon
them for the purpose of seeing these men ?
Thistlewood declined it, and upon that we
left the room with Brunt and Ings. On the
17th of January, I went to prison for debt ;
on Sunday, the IGth," that is, the day before,
** I had another interview with Brunt, at the
White Hart, in Brook's-market, in a room at
the back. At this meeting, Thistlewood, Ings,**
(the prisoner at the bar) ** Hall, Brunt, Tidd,
smd tio other persons that I recollect, were
presept. It was the following day that I went
to prison for debt, and in prison I remained
until the day after the death of the king. I
saw Ings on the 31st of January, at the White
Hart ; and I saw him also at Brunt's room in
the course of this day ; I mean on the second
floor front room.*' He. says there was also
smother, aback room, upon the same floor,
imd that room was the place at which the
meeting took place ; this was between six and
seven itf the evening, '' I had never met them
before^ and I then went to this place for the
first time. Thistlewood, Brunt, Ings, Hall,
and Edwavds were there, and nothing particu«
}ar passed in the course of this evening. The
V^edoesday nii^ht following was the next time
VOL. XXXIIL
I was there, about seven o*clock in the even*
ing, on the 2nd of February, and I found
Ings, Hall, Harrison, and Davidson there, and
Thistlewood, Brunt, and Edwards. There
was a conversation between them respecting
the indisposition of the new king ; they said 9,
few words on this subject. At Uiis time I saw
in the room some pike-staves ; Thistlewood
said, he wished they were feruled, and holes
bored at the end or them in order to admit
the pike, that they might be taken to a place
of safety, which be called the d^pdt, not con-^
sidering them to be safe in the place in which
they were. I did not know at tnis time whero
the d^pot was ; but I learned, afterwards, it
was at Tidd 's, who lived in Hole-in-the-wall-i
passage, adjoining the house in which I lived ;
the staves were green sticks of the substance
of my wrist ; they were brought from the other
side of the water ; they were fresh cut, quite
green, and thicker than my wrist ; *the same
evening I saw Ings pull a pistol from his
pocket ; they said in the course of conversation
that they thought the king would die ; Thistle-
wood said, he had rather the new king would Um
for a little while longer^* — and you virill.attend
to this, gentlemen — ** a» it was not their intent
tion thai he ihoM ever wear the crown ;^ he
alluded to the people of the country in general,^
saying that they were all a parcel of cowards ;
and Ings said, on the day the* prince regent
went to open the parliament I myself went
into the Park, took a pistol in my pocket; with
the sole intention to shoot the pnnce regent |f
he then pulled a pistol out of his pocket, and
said, this is the pistol which I took, regretting
within himself tliat he had not an opportunity,
to do what he had intended ; saying, had he
done it, he did not care a damn for his owa
life. I cannot recollect any thing that passed
more upon the subject; the appointed place
of meeting was the room in question, and the
times of meeting twice in the day, at eleven
in the morning, and seven in the {evening ; in
the room there was no furniture, a stove only i
and I learned that the room was taken for
Ings, the prisoner at the bar, but for what
purpose I cannot say, tiot having been present
when it was originally taken. I attended
several meetings between that and Saturday
the 19th; I saw the prisoner Ings at every
meeting I was at ; I recollect a meeting before
the time of the king's funeral ; I found Thistle*
wood there, Brunt, Ings, Hall, Harrison^
Davidson, and Bradbum ; they came in some
of them afterwards, ^arrison had been in
the life-guards. Thistlewood began to tell
me what Harrison had proposed ; he said he
had seen one of the Life-cuards, who had told
him that on the night of the funeral every man
of the Life-guards was to attend it that could
be mounted, and that the Foot-guards would
be required to attend as well ; and in addition
to this, all the police officers that could be
spared, from London; that after 'he left the
life-guardsman, it struck him that would be a
favourable opportunity to collect their men
4D
11S9J 1 OEOROS IV.
together, have a ric»t in London that night, and
take possession of the two pieces of cannon
in GrayVinn-lane, and the pieces of cannon
also in the Artillery-gronnd ; it was thought
they should he able to proceed onwards by the
means of the people, who would turn over to
them, and he toonght it would be best to send a
party to Hyde-park-comer, in order to stop any
orderly in his majesty's service proceeding from
London to Windsor, to give information of what
was going on in London ; the telegraph should
also be seised, to cut off all communication
with Woolwich ; it was thought necessaiy to
dig entrenchments across thf end$ of the roads
that led to different parts of London, to stop
the artilterv frmn entering London ; Thistle-
wood and Harrison agreed that if the sofdiers
got any intelligence that there was a disturb-
ance lu London, thev would be so orertired
on their arriTal in London, that they would
not be fit for duty ; Brunt and Ings were not
present at this part of the conversation ; at the
conclusion of the observation they came in ;
and on their coming in, Thistlewood went to
them, and communicated to them what I have
been stating shortly ; Brunt and Ings, the pri-
soner, at the bar, disapproved, saying that there
was nothing short of the assassination or mur-
der, I am not certain which word they made
nse of^ would satisfy them ; I had heard be-
fore from Brunt and Ings that there was
an intention to assassinate the king's minis-
ters ; I do not recollect any thing more par-
ticular passing this night fietween this night
and the 19th of the month, fngs was often in
the room ; he said, we most have the ministers
if possible, before the parliament shall be met.
On Saturday the 19th I was at Brunt's, be-
tween eleven and twelve in the forenoon;
Thistlewood, Davidson, Harrison, logs the
prisoner, and Hall, were there ; on my enter-
ing the room they rose, saying, that it was
agreed on, that if nothing occurred between
this and Wednesday, that Wedn^ay night
should be agreed on to go to work, for
they were all so poor they could not wait any
longer ; Thistlewood proposed there should be
a meeting to-morrow morning to form a com-
mittee, to draw out the plan upon which we
were to act ; and on this Thistlewood said,
Brunt if you go round to vour men give them
orders to come armed ; Brant turned round,
and said, damn your eyes, are you afraid of
dflSeers entering the room ? should any attempt
to do it, I will take damnedgood care that none
6f them should go out alive* lliey met again onthe
Sunday morning ; it was just turned of eleven ;
Thistlewood, Brunt, Ings, Harrison, Davidson,
Hall, firadburn, Wilson, Cook, Tidd Edwaids,
and myself. I had not been long in the room
before Thistlewood proposed to enter on bus-
iness, and that Tidd should take the chair,
which he did with a pike in his hand ; and
After the chair had been so taken, Thistlewood
j^roposed, as they bad been waiting so long,
and as tfatia was oo probability of ministen
AMetbg to|[ether| that if nothiiig occwitd be*
Triul ofjm$0i Ingt
U14Q
fore Wednesday night, the ministen akoold te
taken off separately at their own honses; thu
they should not be able to destroy so many, bat
they must put up with what thejr coald get;
that they thought three the mosthkelyDombec
they would be able to kill; and he proposed
Wedneeday-night, but what precise hour «(
that nig^t I cannot name ; it was also propo-
sed, at the same time, that the twopiecoof
cannon io Gray's-inn-lane, aod the six in the
Artilleiy-ground should be taken; snd tbs
latter were to be taken. Cook heading the
party that were to take them ; and sAcr thei
were taken they were to be loaded on the
ground before they went out, and if soy bod;
interrupted them, those cannon were to be it
readiness to enable them to make t susd.
He was then to make a moveoeot to the
Mansion-house, and the Man8ion4ioase «»
to be beset on both sides, three cannon to be
brought up against each ; he wu to wk» i
demand of,uie Mansion-house, and if the
demand was refused he was to fire on both
sides ; on doing this it was thougjit they wosld
soon give up the bouse to theo, aod it vss ti
be made the seat of the provisioiMd g«ven<
ment. After this had been thus seciued^
thought that with the two pieces of cannon rraii
Gray Vinn-lane they might attack the Binh «
England/ and proceed to plunder it ; hut Ths-
tlewood thought, that it wottld.benece«7
not to destroy but to keep the hooks, as n
would be the means of bringing to hgbt^iM
of the proceedings of government, with which
they were not acquainted. Palin was wt
present at this time ; but it was propos^ that
he should be the roan to set fire to the diiternt
buildings that had been mentioned ; ss to ^
time, Thistlewood said it could not be fixed,
but that there would be time between that tad
the Wednesday-night; he thought it hettoio
leave it to a fitter opportunity, and thenTw-
tlewood said he had nothing more to i^
Then Brunt came forward and said, that M
being made for Brunt, he came fc"*?"^^
propose hisplan, and when he was hegin^
to speak, lliistlewood said, Stop, jo^^
better let the proposals I have made wp
from the chair, to see whether eve^ one » ia«
room is ag^eable, and he put it to the ©eow
speak if they wished ; the proposal was a«3«o-
ingly put from the chair, and Ms«n\^ Ythil
Brunt now came forward and said, w» J"
proposal, respecting the assassination of ow'
isters, was this; he said it would be done »
this way, that as many men as they co^ fr
together for that fob should be dirided into"
many parties as they could kill ministen^ tv|
after the men were singled out for ^^^"^
ministers, one man should be drawn ootn^
each by lot, and that man that H WI "PJ
should be the man that should o^^'Vl.
genUemas or the ford, that they had iom
andifbe&iUd, aad shrfid tbtJciitMp"
11411
J^r High Treoion.
A. D. 181K).
[ii4t
eowardice» 1>e was to be run through the body
wpoQ the spot ; this proposal was agreed to.
After that ralin, P^ter, and Strange came iui
and Thistlewood commnnicated to them what
M passed, and they agreed to -it. Palin got
up, and said he wished to speak a few words
upon wliat had dropped from Thistlewood and
Brunt; be said, I have paid great attention to
what has been said^ and have agreed to it ; and
if it can be done, it will be a great acquisition
to what we have in view ; but this I want
to know — ^yon talk ef from forty to fifry for
the west-end job ; you talk of taking the two
pieces of eaonen from Gray's-imi-lane> and six
pieces of cannon from the Artillery-ground,
and how is aH this to be done at the same
time } In addition to which, I am also with
my men to set fire to the different buildings ;
and he wanted to be satisfied how it was to be
done. He said yon ought to know better than
I do what men you have to depend upon ; with
respecttto myself I can give you no satisfac-
tion as to the men I can bring forward, unless
I can be trusted to commnnicate to them part
of the plan, if not the whole of what they are
foing to do ; and when they will be wanted.
IpoQ this, Thistlewood, Brunt, and Tidd said
it shoukl be communicated to them ; and Palin
was aatisfied. Af^r the chair was left, This-
tlewood turned round and said. Brunt, now
Palin is here, you can take him to the place
near here, and let him see if it be possible to do
what we think ; and Palin ana Brunt went
i^way together. They were not absent above
ten minutes; when th^ returned, thev had
been, they said, to a building behind Fur-
nival's-inn, which Palin was to inspect ; upon
their return, Palin said he thought it a very
easy job, and it would make a good fire.
Upon this Brunt renewed the subject of the
assassination ; and he said, he had an idea that
there would be no difficulty in drawing the
■wn who were to assassinate the king's min-
isten. lags said, whoever has the lot to mnr-
der lord Castlereagh, I am the man to turn
out to murder that thief; this was on the
Sunday. lie met them again on the Monday
jttoming at Brunt's, about ten ; and he says,
when 1 got there, there were Brunt, Harrison,
Thistlewood, and Ings the prisoner at the bar ;
io the course of the morning others came ; and
on entering the room on the Monday, they
were gathered round the fire and seemed cast
down. I communicated the report I had
board, that there had been two officers of the
police, one from Hatton-garden, and another
nooB Bow*street, to know what was going on ;
and that they had intelligence from Bow-street,
£rom which it appearw, ihat there was an
information at Bow«street and at lord Sid-
mooth** office of what was going on. Bar-
jnsoo tamed round and said, you have acted
dcunned wrong. I asked why? Brunt turned
sound and said, jou have ; if you liave any
iiuiig to communicate, it is your duty to speak
to oao or to Mr. Thistlewood. I said I thought
it was my duty to communicate it to ally as it
' f *
concerned all ; they then began to separate, to
caH on their men and on the Marylebone Union.
On the following morning I went again to
Brunt's ; on the Tuesday morning, about ten
o'clock, I found in the room Brunt, Tidd, Ings,
and Hadl, and I had not been long there before
Ings polled three daggers out ofhis pocket ;betng
askea the intention of them, he made a son
of flourish" which the witness described, ^* and
he said it was vrith a view to run these daggers
into their bodies : they were put into his
pocket. Just after this Edwards came in, and
went up to Thistlewood, and he said he had
seen in the paper of the day that the ministers
were to dine the following Wednesday at lord
Hanrowby*s. Thistlewood doubted this, not
having seen ii in the paper which he had seen ;
and it was therefore proposed that the paper
should be sent for. It was sent for, and
brouc^t, and read by Thistlewood himself;
when it appeared to be so. Brunt jumped
about the room for joy, saying I believe now
there is a God, for I prayed that he would call
these fellows together, and now he has heard
my prayer ; Ings said, we shall have an op«
portoni^ of cutting off lord Castlereagh's
nead . Inistlewood proposed, that a commi ttee
should be formed to consider a plan to assas«
sinate the ministers altogether ; it was formed;
I was to take the chair, which I did, and I
called them all to order, and Thistlewood was
going to proceed, but I said first that I had
something to say, and stopped him; I begged
to know, before they proceeded, whether every
man who heard me yesterday morning had
given what I had said a dud consideration;
but upon this,*^ he says, ** they were like a set
of mad devik; and Harrison said, the first
man who said a word to throw cold water upon
what they had then in view, he would run that
man through directly with a sword ; I was re*
moved from the chair, and Tidd was put in.
Thistlewood was about to propose a plan, but
Palin stepped him, and said, Mr. Adams said
something yesterday, and has alluded to it this
morning, and he wanted to know what it was
before we proceeded further. Brunt said,
damn you I will tell you what it is, and then he
proposed that there should be a watch set on
lord Harrowby's house; that it was to begin at
six in the evening, and consist of two men at
a time, who were to take notice who went out
and who went in, and if they were police of«
ficers or soldiers it was to be communicated to
the committee ; and Brant further said, that if
nobody was found likely to obstruct the busi«
ness. It should be proceeded on. Then This-
tlewood himself came forward ; he said it was
a much more favourable opportunity to take
them all together and at this one house than it
would be to take them separately. In taking
them separately, at their own houses, they
should perhaps have but three or four; but
take them all togeUier, and there may be four*
teen or sixteen, and that will be a rare haul.
I ahould, propose, he.said,- forty men to go
with me ; I will go with a note to the door,
1143] I GEORGE IV.
lo^be presented to lord Harrowby, knockiog
at the door, and telling the senrant thai I must
have an answer, and then on his going in, he
proposed that he should be followed by dif-
ferent me'oy with pistols, swords, cutlasses,
and pikes, and if the servants made any
resistance, they were to be shot, and the men
were to rush in after they took pvoesession
of the stairs ; two men at those leading to the
upper part, and two at those leading to the
lower ; each was to have a hand-grenade, to
prevent any retreat, and if any one attempted
to escape, they were to put nre to the h^d-
erenade, and fling it among jthem to destroy
them ; two men were also to Uke the command
of the area ; one with a blnnderi>uss, the other
with a hand-ffrenade ; and if anv attempt were
made from the lower part of the house, they
were to be served in the same manner ; and
the servants being so secured, then the men
were to enter the house, led by Ings at his ovm
Sroposal ; he said he would go to his lordship's
oor, with a brace of pistols and a knife, for
the sole purpose of cutting off their beads,
meaning tne beads of lord Sid mouth and lord
Castlereagh, and that in addition to this, he
would briog away the hand of lord Castle-
reagh; and having done this, it would be
thou^t in future a great deal of. On entering
the room, he added, that he should say, well,
ny lords, I have got as good men as Uie Man-
cbester yeomanry; enter citizens, and do your
duty; he was to be followed by the two swords-
men, and they were to be Harrison wad my-
self; and after this was done,*' that is, after
the assassination had taken place, ^ they were
to retreat, and Harrison was to take an illu-
mination ball, to go to the horse-barracks in
King-street, and £ng it into a straw shed, to
set nre to them ; others of the party were to
fo to Gray's«inn4ane, to take the cannon there ;
and on the road there if they met vrith any in«
terruption, they agreed the persons interrupt-
ing should be shot or run tlirough ^ith the
pikes they might have. Cook was to go to
the Artillerv-ground; Ings rejoiced again that
he should have an opportunity of cutting off
their heads. Harrison was there ; he proposed
a couutersiflrn to be communicated to the men
who came forward, and Button was the name ;
it was to be pronounced separately; the man
that came up to the person stationed at the
top of Ozfora>road, vras, on his approach,. to
•ay B, II, t, and the man vrho was to receive
him, was to pronounce t, o, n, and on this
being done, he was to be conveyed to the
place, to be appointed afterwards ; this was
proposed by Harrison ; I went again to Brunt's
on th^it day in the afternoon, at three o'dodc ;
in going up, I perceived a strange smell, and.
I soon discovered the cause ; Ings, Hall, and
Edwards were} in the room, and I saw that
Ings, the prisoner, was making fire-baUs for
the purpose of setting fire to the different
buildings. Edwards was there preparing fuses
for hand-grenades.. Hall was laying sheeU
of paper on the flgor to lay the fii«4»Us on
Tria^qfJama Inp
CI 144
after they bad been dipped in the iron pot, to»
prevent - their sticking to the hand; I went
away almost immediately, and returned be-.
tween six and seven, when I found Thislle*
wood there; there were two strange nieB,
whom X had not seen before; Harris was tKe
name of one, he was then unknown to aae ;•
the other was then unknown to me, and iseo
still. I remained there: Tidd came a| half
past seven. On his coming in, having beea
applied to, to go wjth Brunt at nine, to watcb
lora Harrpwb^'s house, he agreed : Davidaoa
was to go at SIX ; and, on Tidd's entering^ he
expressed himself not satisfied at not meeting
the man he expected. Brunt then said, it is
time for us to go on the watch, to relieve thoee
who had been stationed there, and Brant and
Tidd went out to go to lord Uarrowby's^ In
about five minutes Brunt returned, saying,.
that they had called at the house where tl&
man was appointed to be, and that he was
oome ; that he was a man lUcely to be of great
consequence, and that, as such, he himself
could not go with Brunt on the watch, fugs
said, somebody else should go vrith him.
Brunt asked me to go, and I consented: jost
ay we were going out, Edwards 4ame in. I
asked him, whether any thing had been seen \,
He said, what he had seen or heard he shovld
commnnicate to Ihistlewood. When wecaar
to Grosvenor-sqnare, I saw Davidson and eno*
ther man. After we relieved Davidemi, -we
stopped but a little while ; we went to lefresk
ourselves at a house at the comer of the mews,;
directly at the bade of lord Hannowby's hcraae.
Brunt got playing at dominos with a person
who was ther^ and stopped there till eleven.
I went out twice, by his oesire, to vratch, end-
I stayed in the neighbonihood till twrive
o'clock, which was the time to which we were
appointed to watdi. When I left the aqoav^
I came directly home ; the watch was to com-
mence, again the next morning. Ings and
Hall were to be upon the watch at four o'dock
in the morning; that is, on Wednesday the
23rd. . I went to Brunt's early in the moniio^
but did not stop ; I went again at two o'dock ;
I found Brunt in his own room ; there was.
nobody else in the room at first, but Stmige
came m shortly after myself, and two or thrae
other men came in who were not known to
me ; and a drawer being opened, I saw several
E'istols; I cannot tell the exact nnoiber.
runt, at this time, proposed to me to go natO'
tlie regular room, which vras the back room ;
they were putting on leather under the pistol
flints ; and in the back room I saw anus of
different descriptions, cutlasses, pbtols, and
a blunderbuss with a brass barreL Jnst after,
Thistlewoed came ; then the prisoner and HaH ;
then another stranger or two ; and as th^
came in th^ prepared themsdves with m^
ferent aims ; . they then fixed the flints in the>
fire-arms, and put slings to the cntlasses. This-
tlewood looked round, and said, well, ay
lads, it looks now.as if you ate going to dec
sometl|ing; aadhft came «p tone, pndsaad^
lUA]
JtiT^ Mxigh TVmiMi
A,D. isack
til4d
weU^ Mr. AdaoM, bow do yoo dtf ?.' I aufwe?^
od| Iqw in spiritSy I have bad notbiog to drink
to«day. Then aome gin was brought; and
alter this, Ibistlewood proposed to £etcb aooie
paper in order to write some bills : he pro-
duced money fpr the purpose to Brunt, and
said, that he shonld like the same sort of paper
as newspapers were printed on. I said to him,
as you do not know the nfune of this paper,
you had better, get cartridge paper, which will
ansWer as well, and Brant accordingly sent
for it by his apprentice boy« The cartridge
paper being brought, lliistlewood sat down to
wnte three bills ; but in writing the last, he
expressed .himself tired; he appeared to be
confused, and said, be conld not write any
longer. Three • bills were lead by himself
aloTO, and they were put on the floos to di^,
and then doubled up ; I saw one of these m
logs, the prisoner*s hands, and one in Thistle-*
wood's hands, and the words he read were
these : * Your tyrants are destroyed I the
friends of liberty are called together, as the
provisional sovemment is now sitting/ And
tk|en he read, as subscribed to this, Uie name
of Jantes Ings, Secretary, February 33, 1820.
He then appeajred tired. Hall then was called
upon to write a fourth, but he refused) a
atranger was then proposed.. Ings was in the
room, being busy at this time preparing for
aetion; and he put a black belt round his
waist, which was to hold two pistols; be had
dang round his shoulder a belt for a eotlaas,
and on each shoulder there was a large bag, in
the form of a soldier's haversack; and this
being done, viewing and examining, or looking
al himself, he said, I have not got my steel, I
am not complete ; but never mind. He then
drew a great knife, brandished it about, and
said, it was a knife to cut off the head of lord
Casdereagh and the rest, as he came at them.
Being asked, what he had the bags for ^ he
aaid, he intended to bring away the beads of
lord Castlereagh and lord SidmQUth in them :
it was a. large broad knife that he said he had
pnpared for the purpose, and bound round
the handle with wax-end, to prevent his hand
from slipping when at work. After this, This-
tlewood and Brunt, who had been out of the
room, returned.. While they were absent,
Palin came in; and when he perceived that
Thistlewood and Brunt were not present, he
took on himself to address those who were in
the room, .and said, he hoped all in the room
knew what they were met for ; he hoped, he
aaid, they would consider it properly ; whether
the assassination would be approved of by the
oountry, and they would or would not turn on
OUT siae. - A tall man then made some remaiks,
saying, you seem to speak as if all in the room
knew what is goina to be done; I am not
alraid myself, nor do I consider a man who
turns out in a cause like this ought to value
his lifie. At this moment Brunt entered the
room, apd seeing a change or alteration In the
oountenanees of those who ware in the room,
hr4mkiad the came. Ilia tali man told him
again, that there were some in thr room who
wished to know what they were met there for,
upon which having told him this. Brunt an-
swered, this is not the place where yon are to
be informed, but go np witti me to the Edg^
ware-road, and then we shall know, and idl
who go with ' me shall have drink to put them-
in spirits. A blunderhusir, with a brass-barrel,
was slung over me under my great coat, a
broomstick which had been prepared for the
reception of a bayonet at one end was given
me as a walking stick. Nothing else partieu-^
lar was then done, except that Brunt said it
was time for us to prepare to go from the
room where we were, as it would be wanted
by Palin's men in the evening. I saw die.
foniles put on the pike staves in Brant's room
by Bradbura; there was a cupboard in the
room, in which were some swords> some tal-
low, some pitch, and some of the smaller hand-
grenades. I had seen in that cupboard, gun->
powder, a musket-belt, and the hand-grenades ;
and I saw powder put in some of the band-
grenades there to complete them. Abcnit six'
o'clock we went away from Brant's for Cato-.
street ; Brant and the strange' man were with
me at first ; afterwards I met Thistlewood be-'
fore I got there, ih the £dgware-road, and I'
arrived at Cato-street, at the corner of th^ street
under the archway ; the building was a stable
on the right side; I found there Davidion
sitting and a person standing, they appeared
to me to be doing something to pikes ; i went
through the stable up into the loft. Ings,'
Hall, and Bradbura were there, they were tM«
ing different arms from a bench in the room ;
Tidd was not there, and in consequence of
his not beinff there, Thistlewood appeared ra«
ther agitated, for fear he would not come;
Brant seeing the men rather confused, for it
was pretty general, said there vras no occasion
for any uneasiness respectincr the arrival of
Tidd, for that he. Brant, vrould forfeit his ovra=
existence that tidd would be forthcoming.
In Gbnsequence of what had appeared in the*
faces of the men, Ings now began to be terri*
fied, and" as the witness described it, <* as if
he vras mad ; he beffan to stamp and swear,
to put both his hands up to hb hair as if he
would tear it off; and said ' Damn my eyes,
if you drop the concern now, I will cut my
throat or snoot myself.' Thistlewood said, for
God's sake do not talk of dropping the bttsi«
ness now, if you do it will tura out a second
Despard's job ; and looking round, Thistle-
wood said,' that there were men sufficient,
eighteen here, that is in the loft, counting
them, and two below, being twenty men in all,
which number he said was sufficient; suppose,
he said, sixteen servants should be found in
lord Harrowby's house, they would not ^e'
armed, th^ would not be prepared ; we are
armed, ana it vrill not take us, from our en-,
tering the house to our coming out again,
above ten minutes ; Tidd came in in iS>o,ut
twenty minutes before the 'officers entered
tha room, andhe propoeedthatioiirteendiould''
il47} 1 6B0BGB IT.
be the nmaber to eotor tlit lioDM,'aBd it
was pat aod agreed to» and they were se-
lectea; aft this time BniDt prodaoed a gin
bpttte fixxn his pocket; Ia|^ was one of
the fourteen selected, I also was one, and
Harrison was another; this beinff done
and the people ready to go, I heard some-
body in the stable i there was a bostling^
and a sound, a sort of holloa ! shew lights
from above ! on this Tbistlewood took a can-
dle, went to the stain, and looked to see who
it was, and then he pnt down the candle seem-
ing in quite a confused stato; I never heard
bim speak : at this time two officers entered
the room, Tbistlewood sidled from where he
was into the inner room ; In|;s and Brant and
Harrison were also in the inner room; the
officers stood in the room et the top of the
bidder, with a pistol presented, and one of
them said, here is a pretty nest of you, adding,
gentlemen, we have a warrant to apprehend
yon all, and I hope you will go quietly ; at
ibis time another of the officers of the name
of Smithers said to his brother officers make
room let me come up ; and on his coming up
between the two officers, going on between
4kem and looking forward, the group in the
room rushed forward, and I saw a man rush
lorward, another hand presented itself with a
gistol, which was Ared, and the motnent it was
red the candle went out, and I could see no-
thing afterwards; I did not see Smithers fall ;
there ^as now great confusion; the officers
seeing Smithers murdered, ran down stairs
and gave the alarm of murder ; I came out
from the stable as I went in, and made my
way through ; a pistol was fired at me, I think
at me, from the window; I succeeded in
Setting home ; while I was under the archway
le soldiers were coming through. I was my-
self apprehended afterwards on the Friday
morning, and I have been in custody ever
since.''
On the cross-examination, he says, ** I was
examined here on Monday, on the former trial ;
I was bom in Suffolk, and educated as a Chris-
tian ; I was once a Deist, but I believe in God,
I have been a Christian again ever since I was
concerned in this affiur; I was taken after the
23rd ef February, and I have ^lled myself a
Christian sbce; I had, since last August, re-
nounced faith in the Christian religion, and
have taken it up again since the time I have
mentioned, that is, on the day that this business
happened, on the 23rd of Febraarv. I never
was an Atheist, nor ever denied a God, though
I was brought by that accursed book of Paine^
to deny the trath of the Scriptures. When I
was in the army, I served in England, in the
Blues; I now have no allowance, nor had I
any pension on retiring. On looking atja
paper, which is not afterwards .produced, he
says, this is my writing; since Monday I
luive been in the House, of Correction, as I
had been before, not in solitary confinement,
but I have had no conversation with any body.
I have been in the habit of seeing men in tlji
IHol tfJwmu Ingi
[1148
eoort, but I have seen no one who has told
me what pamed ; nobody has told me ; I sun
kept in a room by myself, guarded by two
men, and heard nothing about the trial, eze^
what I have stoted. I have known £dwaide
since the early part of January ; Brunt was on
the continent some years ago." Then lie
says, ** I never intended to give inlbnnatioii
against the otbers, nor to commit murder;
after I had got into the knowledge of wbnt
vras in hand, I waited an opportunity to get
out of it, but I was preventea by threats that
had been held out; I was not disposed to
plunder the London shops, nor to do any thii^
of the kind ; there were no particular threats
made use of at the time that 1 am speaking of:
there were Areata the day before I went into
prison; I was asking Bnint for the nian that
was first drawn up in the presence or Tbistle*
wood; firunt ssid, there wonM be nothing
eommunicated till the day of acting. Tbistle-
wood said, nothing shall be communicated;
they said, the day that we think of going to
work, we will have die men all together, and
give them a treat, and then we shall tell them
what is to be done, and after that vre will never
lose sight of them ; Brunt said, there shoold
be no writings kept that should put them into
danger,* but said, that if any man he IhmI
spoken to of this, by his behaviour afaonld in-
duce him to think that he wonld inform against
the o'thers, he would instantly himself run htm
through the body. I was in prison for n debt
of twentv-three shillings and eight-pence. It
was on Uie 16th of Januaiy that I heard those
threats throvm out by Brunt ; it vras a Sunday;
we were in a room at the IVhite Hart ; on the
30th, when I had been in prison fifteen days,
I joined those parties again ; and irhen I was
discharged from prison, I found that the White
Hart, as a place of meeting, was given iq>
during the time I had been in prison ; I never
knew, till then, nf the room taken at Brant's ;
on Wednesdvr, in Februaiy, Edwards was
there. The oUier day, when I was examined,
I did not tell about Ings pulling a pistol from
his pocket, saying, he hoped £e king would
not die then, and that the duke of York would
not come to the crown; I did not tell the
other day about Ings saying, they were all n
damned set of cowards, tlmt he took a pistol-
in his pocket when the prince regent went to
Etrliament, with the sole intention to shoot
m ; that on his making use of that expression,
he took the pistol from his pocket to convince
them, and exclaimed, there is the pistol that I
took, and that he regretted he had not done it,
saying had he done it, he had not cared
a damn for his own life; and the. reason*
why I did not then tell it was, that it did
not come to my recollection till to-day.'*
He says, in order to shew he did not bmre
tell all he knows, the transaction is so molt>>
farious and so extensive, he did not recollect iL
He says«to-da^, ^I have not said any thing
^boiit their being to go to Brighton and M$^
gate and Dover, and teke posoessien of te
1149)
Jhrr HigA TVMMit.
A. D. 18Sa.
[1156
out-ports; if any ^ing now comes to mj
ininay wUle I stay here, I will state it ; but it
did not occur to me to mention before what
I did when I was examined before, that at
the meetinff on the 19th of February, Brunt
said, he bad work to finish, and could not go
about the assassination next day; and I say
now, Brunt being asked by Thistlewood, on the
19lh^ to call on his men, said he had work to
do, and did not know that he should be able to
attend. I was at a meeting on Sunday the
20Ui ; at that meeting, before ther all left, there
were fifteen present, that was when Tidd took
the chair; they did not know then of the cabinet
dinner at lord Harrowby's, their plan then was
to go to he houses of the ministers to assas-
sinate them, and then they were to take the
cannon. I think I stated on Monday last,
^eir plan to take the cannon, and go to the
Mansion-house, if I did not I forgot it. At
the meeting on the 32nd, Ings, took three
daggers out of his pocket. There were thirteen
different persons present, but I cannot re-
collect the different individuals who were at
each meeting, and what was said by each ; I
cannot recollect what happened as to each in this
way. If I had thought of any thing that was
material when I was examined before, I should
have mentioned it. The regular time for meet-
ing was that which I before mentioned ; and I
pever remembered our continuing assembled
till twelye at ni^t. Brunt said he had left
Tldd to meet a man whom Tidd could trust,
tad therefore that he did not go to the watch.
Things transpired on the 23nd which I have
oot stated either on last Monday or now ;
what I have mentioned now I cannot say that
I mentioned here on Monday last ; I cannot
say whether I told of Brunt having a man to
ineet, and in consequence proposing to me to
take the watoh. I stated the number in Cato-
street was twenty ; I took that from the state-
ment of Thistlewood (I did not count them
myself), that there were eighteen above and
two below. I do not know Monument at all.
The room might be fifteen feet by ten ; we were
not close together when the acciaent happened,
and I cannot say whether I was nearest the
door, I mean the door leading into tlie little
room, which was in the middle of the room on
the side of the room ; I was at the end of the
t>ench next the window, where I could see
about the room. There was one candle; I
cannot say but there might be another, but I
never saw but one, and if there were more
than one, it was at the time when I was out of
the room ; and if any man swore there were
eight candles in the room he would not speak
ihe truth, and I would tell him that he was a
fidse man. I cannot tell whether the officers
made a speech, but to the best of my recollec-
tion, one of the officers said, Here is a pretty
iiest of you ! One said, gentlemen, I have a
warrant to take you all, and this was Uie sense
and eff'ect of what he said ; adding, as such
X hope Tou will go peaceably. I cannot re-
cpUtct that it was said, We are officeiSi yield
^# » «
yoar arms. Edwards was always very deep«
and much in conversation with Brunt an4
Thistlewood to outward appearance. I went
away after this affair quietly. I did not be-
fore teU of a pistol being fired at me, I did not
know it at the time ; but in the coat I had on
there is a hole where the ball went ; the greaU
coat I bad on is in the room where I sleep. I
never called on Chambers, in Heath-cock-
court, with Edwards ; I do not know where it
is. Three or four days before this affiur took
place in Cato-street, Edwards went with me
to buy a pair of boots of a woman ; that was
the only time of my being alone with Edwards.
We called in at the wine vaults near New-
port-muket; I never called on any person along
with Edwards to solicit him to join a part^ to
kill his majesty's ministers, and I never said, I
would have blood and wine for my supper.
I never knew Stephen Whatman. I never had
a conversation with a man in Kingsland-road
about the tower, and using Cashman as a
watch-word. I did not take any ammunition
back after I left Cato-street. Hall,, in the
room, gave me a pistol and five rounds of
cartridges ; when the officers came, the pistol
lay at the end of the bedch next me. I have
never handled a pistol since ; the cartridges I
threw away as I came out. I never carried
the large grenade anywhere ; I carried some
pikes from Brunt's up to Tidd's. I saw Ed-
wards making the fuses and the touch-pa{>er
for them. I cannot remember a score of words
which Edwards used ; what he had to say was
in a side-way with Thistlewood or Brunt. I
did not tell the story about the one pound
note this day which 1 told on Monday. Th^
largest sum I ever saw was six shillings, given
by Thistlewood to Brunt; one shilling at
another time, and seven*pence at^ another.
The newspapler Edwards mentioned was the
New Times. There was but one candle, which
was put out instantly on the report of the
fistol, but whether by the report of the pistol
cannot tell.''
Now, gentlemen, postponing till hereafter
all observation on the testimony of accomplices,
I will only desire your attention to the &et,
that we are now passing to a different head of
testimony, that is, the evidence of persons not
accomplices, nor in any way involved in the
imputed guilt of these transactions, but wit-
nesses as to ydiom it is not pretonded (and
properly not pretended) by those who conduct
the deduce, ^at the^ are not entitled for
what they say to the fullest credit from you :
and therefore it will be very material for yon,
as affecting the conspiracy in general, and
more particularly the prisoner at the bar indi«
vidually, to attend to the facts which are now
about to be proved by unimpeached and un-
impeachable witnesses.
The next witness is Eleanor Walker. She
says, ** I know Brunt ; he lodged at my mas-
ter's house; he had lodged there about a
twelvemonth last January : he occupiied two
firont looms on the seoond floor; in Jantiary
Ii5ll 1 G£0RG£IV.
tost he introduced another perwm lb take tiM
back room two-pair of staixBy vhon I did not
then know by sight, or by namey bnt I aftetw
wards found out that th^ name of this |>erson
was Ings the prisoner at the bar. The prisoner
took the room; I did not know him flien;
Brant did not tell me at this time what he
was ; the room was to be taken at 39. a-week,
unfurnished ; he said perhaps he might bring
in his goods in a week or better."
On her cross-examination, she says, ''I
Kved in the lower part of the house; I have
heard people occasionally going up and down,
backwards and forwards, bnt I did not see
them,'' On her re-examination, she says,
^ there is a door belonging to my mistress's
house, by which lodgers go up from without,
without ffoing through the shop, and there is a
grifiate door which leads to the staircase, and
le back door comes out 6f the passage towards
the stairs ; and coming through this, they can
|o up without going through the shop at all."
The next witness is Mary Rows, who told
you that the former witness is net niece, and
was her terrant at the time of whidi she has
rken. She says, ^I remember her letting
two»pair of stairs back room in January
last ; it was occdpied for five weeks, and the
person who took it paid for four ; one week
remained due." She says, ^ the lodging wai
kept till Brunt was taken up ; I asked Brunt
who the lodger was ; he told me that he was a
butcher out of employ; he said, he knew
Kothing of him, except that he had seen him
at a puotic house, aba had heard him inquire
for a lodging ; and on one evening, when I
was putting my children to bed, I saw three
men going up stairs, and the middle man of
the three was the black man ;^ which I need
not remind you is the description of Davidson
(who has been one of the prisoners at the bar
included in this indictment, and who is to be
tried on a separate indictment) in company
with Ings and Brunt.
Joseph Hale b the next witness called ; and
his evidence also is extremely material. Hale is
an apprentice to Brunt, and he sayS) ** I lived
with him in Fox-court ; he bad two rooms in
the front of the house, one to live in, and the
other to work in ; and there I knew Ings, the
prisoner at the. bar. I remember his taking
the two-pair of stairs back room as a lodging;
I had seen him in Brunt*s workshop abont a
fortnight before he took the lodging, and more
than once. Brant looked at the room with
him ; and when they came out, I heard Brunt
lay to the prisoner, it will do, go and
S've them a shilling; this was on Monday,
igs came there that evening, and Hall was
with him. Ings came and asked Mrs. Brant
for the key'' the*key being usually kept hang-
ing up in MrVb Brant's room ; that is, the key
of this'back room, in which there was up ftir-
niture when taken by the prisoner at the bar,
and into which it does not appear by the
evidence that any furniture was brought.
The jkej bei^ asked for it wu broogbt^ And I
TVisf 2fJawm Inp
ri>5S
(bey went into the loon. ^I beard oCbertf
come that evening; and from this time till juf
master was taken up, persons nsed to oomc to
the room in tne evening, and they were or saam
of them were, Thistlewood, Ings the prisoner at
the bar, Davidson, Bradborn, Tidd, Edwnidb,
Adams, Hall, Potter, Strange ; tbm was ao
forniture in the room; they used to bonofw
Brant's chairs to sit on; Brant himself used
to attend. I saw these persons also occ8sio»-'
ally in Brant's room ; th^ called each other
by their names sometimes, and thej called
Thistlewood sometimes T, and eometnaes
Arthur/* whidi yon know is his christiaB
name. ^One day I saw the door open, and
then observed some long poles, like brandies
of trees. I have heard faAmmering and sawing
going on in the room. My master was taikea
up on Thursday, the 24th of Febroaiy ; on die
Sunday before, in the morning, there was a
meeting in the room, the persons I have named
being then present ; there were others besides ;
it was a larger meeting than nsnal; they went
avray one or two at a time ; my master was in
die room with them; and after the meeting, I
saw Strange with my master, in my nmslei^e
room. On Monday-evening there was a meet-
ing; on Tuesday-evening there was aaolhef
meeting ; on Wednesday several persons came
up at different times, I cannot say precisely
how many, but several of these came in die
morning, and some came in the afternoon. I
remember Strange, and a man I did not know,
coming into our workshop about two o^dock,
and Strange and the otner man were then
fiinting five or six pistols, which they did not
finish; for one of the men said, there were
persons overlooking them from the houses oppo-
site, and Brant told them to go into the hmdk
room, for they could be seen out of the
window of the houses opposite, and .diey
went then into the other room, Brant and the
other men. I saw Thistlewood there, aboot
four o'clock, he asked for a piece of writing
Eper ; I gave him some, he took it into the
ck room ; after that. Brant came out ^od
told me to go and get six sheets of cartridge-
paper; he gave me sixpence to bny it. I
went and bought the sheets, and gave them to
Brant ; he todL them into the back room, and
after this some of the men went away ; some
others went into my master's room ; my master
went away about six o'clock. After he was
gone, my mistress wanted her table for tea»
which was id the back room. I knocked at
the door, and asked for the uUe; Potter
answered, and gave me out the table, and ott
opening the door I saw four or five men, be*
sides Potter, I saw Tidd in the conisfi ^ the
evening, wlio came to Brant's room. Ifrs.
||rant took him to the cupboard, and diewed
him a pikehead and a sword, and asked Mm,
what she could do with them ? upon which he
told her to give them to him, and he woold
take them away, which he did; he took dieat
iiito the baek room ; after diat I heaiid some
peiiODS go down Itaiii; apoiMAi asaHhtm
11681
j^ High Tr&ann.
A, D. 1820.
U154
ny mavtraii's f«ea| wbd scidy if any pento
aame and iaqatred, they^werd to be sent to
tiie White Hart; shortly iCfter three persons
cute ; lihey did not know the way to the White
Hart; I went and shewed them; after that
Fetter came ; I told him the same thing, know-
ing the way he went hindself ; my master came
home about nnv, his boots were Tery muddy,
and the tail of his coat ; be deemed rather con-
fiised. He told his w^'' (this was after the
Cato-street business), ** it wtis all up, or words
to that effect, that where he had been, there
had been a lot of officers come in, that he had
saved bis Itfie, and that was all; as he said
this, a mati came in^ Brant shook hands with
him, and asked bin, if he knew who had in-
-formed? he said, no^ he had himself received
« terrible blow on his side, and was knocked
down; and from their manner of speaking
•together, I ^Udge they had been together. As
he was going away, 6run€ said, there was
something to be done yet, and they went away
together. When they were gone, my mistress
and I went into the bade room', and I saw a
long pole in the comer of the room ; and in
the cupboard I saw several rolls of brown
paper and tar ; some round balls I saw also,
-made with string, and tar all over them. I
have heard since, that they are hand-grenades ;
they are tied with rope yam : they were the
'Mine that were fbusd by the officers the
next morning. There was adso an iron pot in
the room whsoh belonged to Brunt,- arid there
were two flannel bags, which were full. My
^master came home about eleven, and directed
-me to rise in the morning as soon as I could,
said clean his boots, which I did; he then
aalced me if I knew the Borough ? I said, Yes.
'*^Ji I knew Snow's^fields ? No.— He told me
bow I was to And them, and that I was to go
to Potter, Kirby-street, Snow's^-fields. He !
desired me to> faring a rash basket into tbe
back nxmtf, and he took another, and desired
sue to pat those things into the basket which I
bare dBseribed as having seen the night before ;
^me was tied up with a blue apron of Mrs.
Bunt's, ^Mdueh nad been used as a curtain to
tbe window of the back room ; the other was
-not tied: up; he then went into his own room,
«:td looked for something to tie it up with ; at
ibis moment two officers caase in and seised
<tiMBm« On the Sunday to whieh I have spoken,
I think at tbe meeting there were abo«t
tweatj present/'
Ob croas-examination, he says, ** I waa net
watpnseA particularly at the- meetings ; I did
not suapCNst what they w^re about, nor bad I
my 'knowiedipe of what the pistols wew for;
I never was ma; court of justice before; nor
ewer before a magistrate, except when I was
ejaunined about this business.^
Tbie eiidsy for the present, tbe testimony of
kiiese three witnesses —coming forward, under
tbe eiroenistances I have stated to you-^^^rant-
[Dg no oonftrmation as to any^ part of their
aeetimonyt and who prove against* the
vtbeBs, and the ppsooer at the bar, the
vdi« xxxiu.
fecfla t?hidi I have stated to yon — the taking
of the room for the prisoneD— the employment
of that room — the approach to it by tbe stain
•*«the backway — the frequent meetings — their
contibuing for five weeks, down to the di».
covery which took place in Cato*street -r- the
arms seen from time to time — the putting all
the bags in the room taken for Ings, and the
other circumstances I have stated. — How fi&r
this evidence is material, if there were no
other evidence to confirm the account given
by the witness Adams, or whether it be at all
material,andif so, how far material, in combina-
tion with all the other evidence to which your
attention will be drawn, it will be for you to
consider when you compare the different parts
of the case.
The next witness called is Thomas Smart,
vi^o is a watchman in the parish of St.
George's, near lord Harrowby^s house. He
says, *^ I was on the watch, on the night of
Tuesday the 82nd of February, in Grosvenor-
square ; I saw four very suspicious looking
characters, about half-past eight or a quarter
before nine, on the 22na of Febraary, and one
of these was a man of colour ; there was a tall
man with him : they were peeping down
the airea, and I left my watch at seven in .the
morning. Bissix was a watchman at the same
time with me ; he and I met everv half hour,
at the end of our round ; and I told him there
were some suspicious characters, and to keep
a look out after them.''
Charles Bissix is next called, who says, hb
is a watchman in Grosvenor-souare, and was
there on watcA on the 22nd of February ; ** at
about a quarter before nine I was at the end
of my beat, on the same side on which lord
Harrowby lives ; there were two men passed
me, one was a dark man, a man of colour I
believe; he said, watchman, is it almost
nine ? to which I answered, within a few
mitiutes."
Henry Gillan is next called ; he says, that
he used tbe Rising Sun public-house, the
comer of Charies^reet and Adams-mews ; and
he says, **• on Tuteday, the 22nd of February,
I was there when there came in two persons,
and I aftenArards played at dominos with
Brant, between nine and ten in the evening ;
I was there before he came in; another
taian came with him ; they bad bread and
cheese, and some porter, and we played about
half an hour. I left the house first and I left
it about ten ; I know that it was the 22nd of
Febraaiy by tbe list b^ which I carry out my
medicines ; I have libt the list with me now ;
that is the only recollcetion I have of it."
Hien John ciectjlir Morrison is called, who
says he is a jour^yman- to Mri Underwood
the cutler, in Druryi-lane, and worked with
him at Christmas last, remembers on Christ-
asas eve last, a berson bringing him a sword
to sharpen ; he was dressed like a butdier. —
To this part of the evidence you will of course
attend, ia eonneedon with the testimony that .
vrill afterwards appear ;^the time when ^lia
4£
11551 1 GEORGE IV.
happened — the circumstances under which it
took place — the circumstances of who brought
this sword — all are highly material. He says,
that the person in question brought a sword
to his master's shop, on the day before
Christmas-day ; he says, he was dressed like
a butcher ; <'Ings, the prisoner at the bar,
was the person who brought the sword; he
called three days after, wad paid me nine
pence for grinding it; he told me to grind
Uy and to make the point particularly sharp,
and to make it cut both back and edge ; it was
a short sabre. After this he called again, and
brought ir veiy long one, which might be a
fortnight after, and then he gare me the same
directions which he had given before as to the
other. It is customary with us to ask the name,
that we may know to whom we are to return
the things when they are called for ; and he
said, Ings or Eames was bis name, to the best
of my knowledge f* and, looking to the prisoner,
he says, Ings is the man who, at the time in
question, brought Uiese two swords, with a
direction to have the point, the edge, and the
back, the one long, and the other short, sharp-
ened. This is the evidence of a person not
connected with the conduct of any of these
parties, in any of these transactions, but a
witness on whose testimony no observations
of an adverse nature can be made, or have
been attempted.
Then Eaward Simpson is called ; he is
corporal-major in the second Life-guards. '' I
know Harrison ; he was formerly in our regi-
ment; he has been on duty at King-street
barracks ; I cannot say how long, but he had
been there long enough to know the different
state of the barracks in the course of his duty ;
he would be perfectly acquainted with them ;
the barracks join Gloucester-mews ; there
were formerly" (that is before the transactions
that were discovered on the night in question)
" windows lookinc into the Mews ; those had
been stopped up mree or four days after the
affair in Cato-street ; there was straw in the
room always, and hay likewise, and if any-
thing inflammable had been thrown in, and the
straw had caught, it would have been the de-
struction of the whole barracks."
The next witness is James Aldous, a pawn-
broker in Berwick-street, Soho. He Knows
Davidson : " he pledged a brass-barrelled
blunderbuss with me, which he redeemed on
the 23rd of February, in the morning; he said
nothing at the time ; I have seen it since ; it
was shown to me at Port man-street-barracks
by the officer ;** this blunderbuss being one of
those proved to have been taken on the night
in question proved by this witness to have
been pawned with him by Davidson.
Now, gentlemen, we return, after these six
witnesses -« impartial and unconnected with
the case— to a person who stands in some
respect in a particular and peculiar situation ;
and I now call yeur attention to the evidence
given by Thomas Hiden. He says, that he is
A cow-keeper and dairyman^ living in Man-
Trial qfJmmei Ii^s
itise
chester-mews ; that he knows (he priacmer
Wilson; he had known him shortly beCoie
last February. Wilson I need scaredy 19-
mind vou is one of the persons who has iwem
proved to have been liom time to tinae prewt
at these meetings, hxving conducted himself
in the way in wUdi he appears to have done
on the testimony of former witnesses, some of
whose evidence 1 have read, and the remain-
der you will piesently hear. He wa» also
taken on the night in question, as will stppear
from the subseqnent part of the'eTidcnce, ia
Cato-street. ''He asked me if I would he
one of a party who were going to meet to de-
stroy his majesty's ministers, and he told me
they had got such things as I never saw,, and
they were waiting for a cibiaet dimier ; he
said the things were made of tarpawlin, tin
and powder, and that it would heave up one
of the walls of the very house by vHiioi we
were walking; he told me that they weie
to destroy his majesty's ministers; they were
to have a cabinetZdinner, and at what time he
would let me know ; thev were going, he said, to
light up some fires.'' Now with this yoo w2l
connect the evidence which stands also on
•nsuspicious testimonv — the testimony of oA-
cecs, nv whom in tne various places these
fire-balls were afterwards found — ^with the
account given of the nature of them and ikm
effects, by the seijeant of the artillery who was
afterwards called as a witness. He tells too^
that Wilson, one of the persons who had a*>
tended these meetings, and who is diaiged
with being one of these conspirators, told him
that they were going to light up some fires;
** he named lord Harrowby's house, the duke
of Wellington's, lord Sidmouth's, lord Caatle-
reagh*s, the bishop of London's, and one mors
which I do not know. He said I had no oc-
casion to be aftaid, that a gentlemaa's servant
had furnished them with a certain som of
money, and if they would act upon the occasioe
or on the subject he would give them a con-
siderable sum more ; he told me'' — and yea
will have the goodness, gendemen, to attend te
this — ** that by lighting the fires and keeping
the town in a state of conftuion, in a few days
it would become general ; that the hand-gre-
nades were to be lighted for the purpose of
being throvrn into the room, and all that es-
caped the fire were to die by the edge of the
sword, or some other means; but, he added, if
I did make one of them, Mr. Thistlewood
would be glad to see me, and I tohl him I
would make one ; after thu " — and this is
terial for you, gentlemen, to consider ;
person was not at the meeting on the nigihl in
question in Cato-street, nor at any of the fi»-
mer meetings, nor was ever himself apprdiead*
ed on any charge of conspiracy or crime — ^" X
wrote to lord Castlereagh, it might be two or
three days after; I went to lord Castlercaigli^
but could not see him ; I delivered it to loid
HaiTowby in Hyde-park; it was on the day of
the discovery that I saw Wilsonagain in Man-
chester-street, who said, you are ttie wtry msa
1157]
fir High Triaton,
A. D. 1820.
[1158
I. want to 9e% ; h% said, there would be a
cabioet-dinDerat lord Harrowby's in GrosTenor-
square, and I was to be sure to come ; I wished
to know where, he said to John-street, to the
Horse and groom ; he told me I was to go into
the public-house, or stay by the comer till I was
shoved into a stable close by ; that I was to
meet him at a quarter before six or by six ; I
asked him how many there were going to be ?
he said about twenty or thirty there, but those
were not all, for, he added, there was a party
in the Borough, and another in Gray's-inn-lane,
and another in the city or Gee's-court, I am
not certain which he said; he said that ail
those living in Gee's-court were in it ; but they
would not act unless the Englisdi began first.
You have heard from other evidence, that the
court in question is chiefly inhabited by Irish,
and therefore Wilson told him that they would
not act unless the English began first ; indeed
it is followed up by saying ^ Gee's-court had
all eokbarked in it ; he told me they were all
Irishmen that inhabited Gee*s-court ; he said
after they had done in Grosvenor-square, they
-were to meet somewhere about the Mansion-
lionse ; he told me, also, tliere were pieces of
45annon which could be easily flrot in Gray's-inn-
lane, by knocking in a small door ; that there
were four pieces at another place, which they
could get by only killing the sentry in the
Artillery-ground, where exactly I cannot re-
collect ; I promised him to come, and he pro-
mised me to be there a quavter before six ; I
went to Johii««treet,bui I was behind my time
in consequence of business ; it was nearlyseven
4>'clock ; I saw Wilson and Davidson ; David-
son is the man of colour ; they stood at the
comer of the gateway ; I had known Davidson
a long time before ; they said, you are behind
jKHirtime; I said, yes, I could not keep it;
l>a¥idson asked me if I was going in, saying.
Hi r. Thistlewood was there ; 1 told him I could
not go in, for I had been employed to go and
^et some cream, and I asked when do you go
A'way ; he said, he thought about eight, and if
gnone away, I was to follow them into Gros-
w^enor-square, and he told me that I was to be
at the bottom of the square, the fourth house
from the comer at the bottom of the square ;
X>aTidson said, come you dog, this is the best
-tiling you ever had to do with in your life.''
XJpoa a paper being produced to him, he says,
^* this is the letter which, before this meeting
ixm Cato-street, in Hyde-park, I myself per-
tfonally delivered to lord Iiarrowby.''
On his cross-examination, he says, '^ the let-
ter is my writing. I was a cowkeeper about
CcptJkT years ; I never was a shoemaker before I
9^SkS a cowkeeper ; I was a gentleman's servant,
a.o^ I was brought up to farming ; I lived in
TMMy 1^^ place, at colonel Bridges's in South
ff^ixdley-street, that is six or it may be seven
^«3.TS ago, I cannot precisely say ; he had the
i^lBole house, but whether it was a hired house
^cnished b^ him or taken furnished, I do not
arm ; I did not live long with hi|n, it might
<.wo or three months, it might b^ two or it
might be 'One, at this distance of time I cannot
exactly say which ; I lived with major Dive .;
a year and three months, in Tavistock-street,
Bedford-square, I lived there as a footman, he
keeping only one ; I then went to Mr. Brice,
in Stratton-street ; for the last five years I have
been a milkman or a cow-keeper, I have lived
in Manchester-mews three years, my family
has been ther^; I have been two or tliree or
four months from home at a time, and I have
been lately for debt in the prison of the
Marshalsea ; I was in piison for about eighteen
pounds due to Mr. Powell, who is. a milkman
and a cow-keeper, I wentinlast Saturday, being
taken then in execution. In the beginning of last
summer, I was out of the way between two and
three months, it might be June or July or August,
or the beginning of September, but not so late I
believe as October ; I was at home at different
times in July and August, my wife and my
family carry on the business, she and my family
remained there and carried on my business for
me ; my family still live in Manchester-mews,
nt least they did last Saturday morning, and
they have been there all the time I have men-
tioned, and are there now for all I know;
they are living there now, my sister told me so
to-day ; I have known Davidson for three or
or four months; I do. not know Edwards;
I know a Mr. Edwards ; the person you are
inqniring for may be the person whom I know ;
the Mr. Edwards !• know lives two hundred
miles in the country." therefore he thinks that
cannot l^e the person about whom the counsel
for the prisoner was inquiring ; he says, '^ I *
carried on the business of milkman in Durwes-
ton-street, by the Edgware-road ; I have been
twice to the Scotch. Arms in a small court by
the Strand, I went to the shoemakers' club, I
went with a friend of the name ,of Clark, a
tailor; I cannot state what was the sul^ect of
conversation, it was seven or eight months ago.
I only know the prisoners Davidson and Wilson,
and had conversation with them, I had seen
Davidson it might be a week or fortnight be-
fore ; I had never been at Fox-court ; I knew
nothing of this particular afiair till Wilson told
me ; the cream is a great profit to me, I might
gain two or three shillings by that order, it was
for a family 1 was to get the cream ; they lived
at No. 6, Princes-street, Cavendish-square,
I have served them for three or four years, I
do not know their names, I have had orders
for cream. repeatedly from them, our people
brought home the order, I did not go to
the house, my wife or sister went ,to tell
them it could not be got ; I do not serve them
myself nor ever did ; my wife serves them I
believe ; I have been at the house many times,
I have seen maid servants there, I cannot, say
when I was last there ; I serve them daily ; I
do not know what quantity of cream was or-
dered for that night ; we get a shilling profit
upon apint, and more than a quart was ordered ;
I do not know the name of any servant in
the house; it was the first time I met Wilson,
th^t be said I had no occasion to b$ afraid, for
1150] 1 GEORGE iV*
there wu a gentleiMui's lervaiit «ko rappUed
motieT;" he then says, ^he told me so at
two different timet, I had known him long
before, and have often met with him ; I never
went into Cato-street, only to the comer."
On the re-examination he sajt, ** I carried
on my business till last Satuiday, in Maft-
chester-mews ; I was taken last Satnxday in
execution. I think the number fras <^ of the
gentleman's house who was to have had the
cream, and I think it was the first door on the
left-hand-side from the square, going down to
Oxford*street." Now this is, you see, a wit-
ness who, more or less, but not idtogether,
has on this day^ at least been described to you
as an accompbce ; whether he is so or not, or
in what particular situation he stands, I shall
consider more fully hereafter. But at present,
yon will remember that he is a person who,
though he tells yon he in words consented (and
whether in heart or not it is for you to judge)
to go with these persons on this purpose being
communicated to him by Wilson originally,
yet, before the hour arrived in which this fstal
project was to be carried into execution, he
appears to have gone with a letter to the noble
loiti to whose evidence I shall afterwards call
your attention — a letter ftist intended for lord
Castlereagh; but such was his anxiety, not
having been able to see that noble loid, that
he went to lord Harrowby's house ; finding he
was ridinff, he went to Uie Park ; and in the
Park, berore the meeting took place, he de-
livered the letter in question. Now, I can
only say that it is not merely most extraordi-
nary, but unaccountable, that he should have
been able, unless gifted with the spirit of pro-
phecy, to deliver a letter to lord Harrowby,
oefore the meeting in Cato-street, giving him
notice of a conspiracy there going on, if it
were merely a thing as yet in the womb of
timet
The next witness who is called is lord Har-
rowby himself. He tells you, that he is pre-
sident of the oouncil ; that it is usual to have
cabinet dinners; and that in February last
these dinners had been interrupted by the
death of his late majesty. In Uie latter end of
the week preceding the 23rd of February, he
caused cards to be issued inviting the members
of the cabinet council to dine with him on
Wednesday the 28rd of February; he then
mentions, with their respective offices, the
several persons who were to have been present
at that dinner ; and von will see how far this
agrees with the number stated to the persons
assembled in Cato-street, by Thistlewood as
likely to be present at the cabinet dinner, and
who were there stated to be fourteen or six-
teen. His lordship mentions the lord Chan-
cellor, the earl of Liverpool, Mr. Vansittart,
earl Bathnrst, lord Castlereagh, lord Sidmouth,
lord Melville, the earl of Westmorland, the
duke of Wellington, Mr. Canning, Mr. Wel-
lesley Pole, the earl of Mulgrave, Mr. Robin-
eon, and Mr. Bragge Bathurst; and his lord-
ship afterwards adds, fburteen besides himself;
TtM €fJmm iW«t [ll«D
^all these were memben of Um PiWy eoom*
cil; my house is on the south side off Grov-
venoT'^equare, next door to thear^bUopof
York. On Tuesday, the 22nd of FebrMiy, I
was riding in the Park, and I was arcoefd
by a person whom I did not then know; I
now know that person to be Hiden ; he gave
me this letter, addressed to lord Castlereagii ;
he said it was of material importance to lord
Castlereagh, as well as myself and souse olhen^
and wished it to be delivered immediately.
I was myself going to Cariton-hoose, to atftoMi
the council that was held by the king ; and
therefore, not finding lord Castlereagh theic^
I despatched it with a note from myself to
him. I met Hiden in the Park, by appMit-
ment, the next morning. He made a oonums-
nication to me there; the communication
which he made to me is oontaioed in &a
letter, except that wbidi I have spokeift lo
before ; and I should add, that at tnis time,
he personal^ made that communication to me
in more gener^ terms. The plan of the
dinner, upon this, vras given op ibr that d^;
I dined at Fife-house^ the eari of Liverpool^
The preparations at my honse proceeaed t»
all outward appearance,'' that the pla» of
giving up the dinner m^t not be known la
the persons assembled, *'as if the c<MBipa»f
had oeen to dine- there, till they were stopped
by a note I sent fK>m lord liveipool's (which
being despatohed between seven and eight
from Fife-nouse, I ooneeive reached mr own
bouse about eight o'bkick) to say timt tte ca-
binet dinner could not take pboe. I had
concealed from my servants the alteratioii of*
the plan, and every thing went on as usoaL
I had no communication with any person m
to this particular thing; but we had informa-
tion, long previous to this, of some geoesal
design of this nature being intended." Hea^
therefore, you see (if the fact could be dooiitcd
upon the testimony of Hiden, if Hidee coold
be considered at idl an accomplice, which yen
will judge) whether he is oompletel^ oonfirmed
by the noble lord who has given this evideaei^
proving that Hiden gave him a letter in the
Park, which gave him the information oeo-
tained in that letter, and upon which they had
previous general information. Lord Hanow-
Dy having left the court, was called back ; and
Hiden was called up ; and his lordship says,
^'tbat is the person who delivered me me
letter.''
The next witness, is John Baker, botfer lo
lord Harrowby ; and he speaks to same effect
as lord Harrowby as to the dinner.
Now we fall back to the testimony of a pei^
son who undoubtedly is an accomplice, namely,
John Monument; who introduces himself bf
telling you that he is at thia time a prisoner ia
the Tower. He says, ** I met Ihiitlewood at
the house of a person named Ford, about t«e
or three months before the meeting in Cal^
street ; about a fbrtnight after, he caHed en
me ; Brant was with him ; I was in the reomi
I and my moUier and my btodier wen with me;
ll€Il
Jar Hii^ Tn/uon.
h« was in the Toom flve minatet, frfaeft lie
called me to Xh% outside of the door ; Brunt
di4 not go out with us ; he said greei^ events
are at hand" — here again, gentlemen, you
will attend to what follows — ^" great events
are at hand ; the people every where are ami*
ous for a change ; he had been, he said, pro<-
mised support by many men, who had de-
ceived him; but now he had got men that
would stand by him ; he asked me whether I
had any arms; I said no; he said no man
ehould be without arms, eveiy one who be-
longed to him had arms ; some a sabre, some
a pistol, some a pike, and that I might buy a
pistol for four or five shillings. I said that I had
DO money to buy a pistol; he said that he
would see what he could do; there was no
other conversation at this time; I returned
into the room; Brunt and Thistlewood went
away together. Two or three days after this,
Brunt called on me by himself; he said he
was in a hurry, and nothing particular pass-
ed; on the 22nd of February, Brunt called
again, in company with Tidd, about two or
three o'clock ; I said I thought I had lost you ;
he said the king's death had made an altera-
tion in their plans ; I asked what plans ; he
said there would be a meeting on the following
evening at Tybum-tumpike, whefe I should
know all the particulars ; and then he turned
round to Tidd and asked, should he give me
the word? and Tidd said yes, be supposed
there was no danger ; and then he told me
that if I saw any people about, I was to say to
them 6,ti,#, and if they were friends, they
would answer t, o, n, making the word button 0
he said he would call the next morning and
tell me further particulars; they then went
arway. On the following day, Wednesday,
Brunt called on me between four and five
oVlock ; he called me down stairs, and told
me that be wanted me to go with him ; I told
liim that I could not then, for that I had some
work to finish ; he asked me when it would be
done ; I told him not before six ; be told ne
then I must go to Tidd's house, and he toM
me where Tidd lived, in Hole-4n-the-wall
passage, Brook's market ; he went away, and
at half-past six I went to Tidd^s ; I found him
at home; he said he was waiting for some
more men, and they had not come ; and he
said he could not wait later than seven o'clock ;
at seven o'clock Tidd went to a box in the
comer of the room, and took out a pistol,
iphich he put into a belt round his body under
a great coat, and then he took about six or
eight heads of pikes, in a piece of brown paper,
in his hand, and a staff four feet long which
had a hole to receive a pike-head ; he went
down stairs into Holbom, and I along with
him, and we went up Holborii, and going up
Oxford^street, I asked him what we were going
about ? he said I should know when I got there ;
was it, I asked, to the House of Commons we
were going; he said no, there were too many
soldiers about there? he thett told me we were
going 10 GrMveuotwsqptaye; tasked who
A. IX ISM. [laoB
thtPi; to said there waetobaaeabiAetdiaMr
there that evening; nothiig acre pa»ed, and
he then teok me lo Cato^street, through the
gateway on the riirht hand into a stable ; tWo
people were standing under the gateway : be
spoke to them ; I went into the stable, thert
were three or four men there> and a light; h#
asked whether Mr. Thistlewood wis up staim,
they told him he was; we went up staiiai
there were one or two or three ana twenty
people, as near as I can tell, of whoai Thiitie^
wood was one $ and on a heacb there wens a
gmt manv swoi^s and pistols ; Tidd went up
stairs, and when up stairs a man in a great
coat spoke of die impropriety of going with w^
small a |»rty to lord uarrowby's. Thistte*
wood said it was quite sufficient, for if lord
Harrowby had sixteen ieivants, fourteen of
our men would be quite enough to m into the
room. The man then said, what raall we do
when We come out of the room> as there would
be people in the street, who might prevent one
escape ; to which Thistlewood answered, this
is the smallest body, there is another and a
larger body, the largest is alreadv awayi Da-
vidson then told the man not to throw cM
water upon their proceedings, for if he was.
afraid or his life^ Uiey oould do without himy
and he might go. Brunt then said, sooner
than leave the nisiness, he would go into th»
room alone. and blow them all up j he said yoa
know we have got that winoh can do it, or ta
that effect ; the man then said he did not like
going with so small a number, but as they weoe-
aU nnr it^ he would not be afpiinst it ; ha theii
proposed that they should put themsllleee'
under the orders of Thistlewood ; when Thkb.
tlewood said every one engaged in the husi»
ness would have the same heneur with himself;
and he then proposed that the fourteen men to
go into the room shonld velimteer from among
tiie persons that were in- the room ) a fow mi*
nutes afterwards, tsvelve or thirteen out of the
fourteen ranged themselves aoeoi^ngly eat the
other side of the loem; one (Tidd) came ftrit
and spoke to me, on which Thistlewood put
him hack, and said, you all know your places;
I do not recollect any thing particular passing
after that until the officers came into the reem^
which was about five minutes.^ Ihis brings
us to that part of the transaction, whieb intio-
duoes the police officers first into the stable,
and afterwards up into the loft. He says,
** there seemed first to be two or three, they
got up stairs before those in the room knew it ;•
they told them in the room that they were
officers, and called upon them to surrender,
telling them that there was a^ guard of soldiers
below ; I was taken into custody in the room
and I have been in confinement ever since/'
On cross-examination, he says, ^fear led
me there ; Bmnt at my house said, that every
man who^ engaged in it and did not eomie foiw
ward, should he deetrojred $ I was< foolish, but
I eaimot ohai|fe myself with anyerime; I waa
afinaid there was soinethiiig had ; I did net
koow^ <i4yIenspeondf theyww»f oinf-to tStm
11633 1 GEORGE IV.
House of Comnons. When h« told tan 'it wm'|
to -ft cabinet dinner, I asked no fbrther ques-
tions, because I was certain what it was ; I
could not see that they could be going for any
thing but to destroy the persons so assembled
at dinner; I had not been at their private
meetings ; I saw Thistlewood at Ford's about
a week before the Finsbury meeting, and this
was after the Manchester meeting; and I went
to Tidd's because I was afraid to express re-
luctance to go with them. When 1 found
what they were about in the room, my inten-
tion was to get away from themy when Thistle-
wood or somebody told the man in the brown
ooal, that if he was afraid to join them, he
might go away, I wished he had said so to
me ; I joined them from fear, and proceeded
from fear. I did not know what their pro-
ceedings were at first ; I admit that I certamly
acted very fboUshly."
. This last witness, I have already told you,
undottbtedly stands in the situation of an ac-
complice, about him therefore I say no more
at present.
llie witness who is now called is Thomas
Monument He says, '' the last witness, John
Monument, is my brother.'' Crentlemen you
will attend to this ; Thomas Monument is not
one of the persons charged with this conspi-
racy, and therefore upon this part of the case,
taking his brother as an accomplice, the point
for your consideration will be., how far he is
confirmed by this witness, whose testimony
BOt being attacked may be assumed to be true.
He says, ** John Monument, the last witness,
is my brother ; I lived with him ; Thistlewood
called upon him at his lodgings, in company
with Brunt ; they remained in the room some
time, I suppose ten minutes ; and then This-
tlewood asked my brother if he could speak to
him ; they went out-side the door." This wit-
ness therefore, not an accomplice, confirms
the story told by his brother, wno is, in all the
panioulars stated by John as to Thistlewood's
coming there, calling his brother out to speak
to him, of course about something that could
not be disclosed before Thomas. "Brant
called upon my brother on Tuesday the 22Dd
of February, and brought a man of the naro^
of Tidd with him, when they came into the
room, my brother said, Brunt, I thought I had
Ipet you ; then something was said concerning
the king't death; Brunt said, the king's death
had made some alteration in their plans ; my
brother said, what plans ? he said, they had
different objects in view. Then Brunt 'said,
suppose we give them an outline of the plan ;
and then Brunt said, that we w^re to meet up
at Tybum-tumpike on the following evening
at six o'clock : lie then gave the pass word ;''
and he repeats the pass word as other wit-
nesses have done ; ** the next day, about five
o'clock in the evening, Brunt came and asked
my brother if he was ready to go ; he could
not go just then, for be had to finish some
work, and he told him to call onUdd and he
VDuld.takf him ; my brother then went aw^y
Trial ofJama'Ingi
U1164
at near seven o'clock, and I never saw fains
after this till I saw him in custody.*' Yoa
will judge for yourselves on this part of the
case, how frir the testimony of Monument the
accomplice engaged in the conspiracy, is or is
not confirmed in all its particulars by the tes-
timony of his brother who speaks to these
facts, who never went near Cato-street, and
who is in no way connected with these trans-
actions.
George Gaylock is the next witness, who
says, '* I live at No. 2, Cato-street ; on tbe
23rd of February I saw Harrison, one of tbe
prisoners at the bar, in Cato-street; he was
going into the stable; I asked him how he did
and what he was going there for ? He said he
had taken two chambers and was going to
clean them up."
The next witness is the first of the police
officers who went to Cato-street, George Tho-
mas Joseph Ruthven. He went to the spot
about six o'clock, and he entered the stable at
about half-past eight. ^ On going in, I ob-
served a man walking backwards and forwards
with a gun on his shoulder ; I did not observe
him particularly ; there were others with me ;
I said to them, secure that man, and I went
up stairs first myself; next came Ellis, and
then Smithers, and Gibbs as I have been since
told, but I did not see him. On getting into
the loft, I observed several men standing round
a carpenter's bench ; there were about twenty-
four or twenty-five round the bench. I heard
a clattering of arms, and saw some persons
apparently sorting them. I said, We are of.
ficers ; seize their arms. Thistlewood looked
up, caught up a sword, and retired, with three
or four others, into a little room to the right of
the bench ; two or three men went also into
the back apartment I know Thbtlewood well ;
have known him from the time of tbe state trials,
two or -three years ago. Smithers then ap-
peared on my right hand, he approached the
door where "Aiistlewood had retired, on which
Thistlewood stabbed him wiih a sword ; he hi^
been fencing with the sword before, and a
pistol was fired almost instantly, on which the
lights were put out. I tlien heard a voice,
kill the b rs 1 throw them down stairs. On
this there viras a rush towards the staircase ; I
joined in it, and got down stairs; there was no
light in the stable when I got down. I got
into John-street, and there I met the soldiers.
I returned to the stable, and I saw Tidd com-
ing out of the door; I called to somebody fol-
lovring me to lay hold of him ; and immediately
upon that he lined his arm, and I saw a pistol ;
I pulled him on me, and we fell upon a dung-
heap ; the soldiers came up, and seijeant Legg
extricated me, and I took Tidd to the Horse
and Groom. I searched him; I found two
ball-cartridges in his breeches pocket, and a
belt round his waist Bradbum was brought
in while I was there ; T searched him, and I
found six ball-cartridges and three loose balls,
and round his waist was a string, five or so.
times roundi that would have answered the
1166]
ftrt High trediQni
purpose of holding a pistol.' Davidson was-
also brought in, and he began to sing, Scots
wha ha wi Wallace bled ; ai^ he said, damn
any man that would not die in liberty's cause ;
he gloried in it. Wilson was brought in, but
I did not search him. After this I returned to
the loft and found there several soldiers, four
prisoners, and some police officers in the room.
When Smitbers received the thrust with the
sword be fell backward, and cried, Oh my
God ! or. Oh I am done ! I do not know which,
and died directly. I found arms on returning
to the loft */' Jhen he produced the list of all
the things that were found in the loft, together
with another list of arms, ammunition, and
accoutrements; of all of which you have heard
so much and seen them displayed, and which
were found not only in the loft, but a part at
Brant's, and a part at what is called the d^p6t
at Tidd's. ** Tidd fired a pistol when he was
lying upon me. Wilson, when in the Horse
and Groom, said he did not care a damn ; he
knew it was all over ; they might as well kill
him now as at any other time. Before I went
to the stable I went to the Horse and Groom ;
while I was there, Cooper and Gilchrist came
in ; after they went out Gilchrist came back
for a stick, one end was cut round, as if to re«
ceive the socket of any thing. I think there
were about eight lights in the two rooms ; four
or five in the first room of the loft. I could
see them ; I have no doubt th^e were four or
five. I said, we are officers; seize their arms.
Smithers said nothing more than, let me come
forward ; and when he received the blow he
fell back, crying. Oh my God ! "
James Ellis is the next witness called ; he
says, ** I was one of the conductors of the
Bow-street patrole on Wednesday, the 23rd of
February. I went with other officers, and
entered the stable close to Ruthven ; there was
a light in the stable; two men were there.
The first I observed was standing about half-
way between the door and the foot of the
ladder. I believe it was Davidson ; he had a
short gun or carbine in his liand ; he carried it
so ** — [the vritness pointed out how] " and at
his left hand side a long sword and two white
cross belts. I took him by the collar, and
turned him half round ; I looked in his face,
and saw that he was a man of colour, upon
which I desired some of the officers to secure
him, and left him. There was another roan
near the foot of the ladder in the ftirther stall
of the stable; he appeared to be a shorter
man, he had a dark-coloured coat. I took
little notice of him. I followed Ruthven up
the ladder, and heard what I understood to he
a aignal to those above. Smithers followed
me ; I ascended the ladder, and I heard im-
mediately a rattling of swords when we got
up. Ruthven called out, that we were officers,
seize or surrender your arms, I am not positive
which ; there were candles in the loft, uree or
more, and lights in the little room besides.
The lights were placed on a carpenter's bench,
which stood acro00 the loomi On getting into
A. D. 1820. [1166
the loft at the top of the ladder, I saw a num-
ber of men falkng back, placing themselves
against the back of the Ion. I saw Thistle*
wood and two or three more between the cap-
pouter's bench and the door of the little room.
On my gaining the top of the ladder, he shook
his swoni in this manner at me, as if to make
a stab. I desired him to desist, or I would
fire. I had a pistol in my right hand, and a
constable's staff in my left hand, which I held
up so. Tfaistlewood retreated, backing into
the little room ; and at that moment, having
ffained the top of the ladder, Smithers rushed
forward to enter the door of the little room ;
and the moment he was in, Thistlewood
stabbed him in the right breast. * Smithers held
up his hands. I saw him Ml back, and heavd
him exclaim. Oh my God ! and foiling almost
immediately, he staggered past me, and rose
no more. 1 fired at Thistlewood ; the lights
were put out the moment I fired ; the flash of
my own pistol was the last light I saw. Great
confusion immediately took place; there was
a rush by me ; I was thrown down the ladder ;
several shots were fired in the loft while I wai
on the ladder ; two or three shots were fired,
when I found myself in the stable ; two passed
me at the door. I cannot tell exactl^ from
where fired. Another shot was fired in the
stable by a man who stood there. There
were some shots from the window of (h#
little room, which looks into Cato-street.
While at the door, I heard a cry of, Stop him I
and observed a man running away towards
Cato-street ; he had two white cross belts. I
pursued him, and caught him in Cato-street ;
It was Davidson. On laying hold of him, be
made a cut, intended for me, with a sword ;
others came up, he was secured. I left him
with an officer, and returned to the stable,
where. I found lieutenant Fitzclarence and the
soldiers ; four men were in the loft in custody
of the soldiers; of these Monument was one
and Wilson another ; they were all taken t»
Bow-street, and finally committed."
The next witness is William Westcoatt, who
went with Ruthven and the others, but not up
into the loft. He says, " when they had gone
up I heard a noise of firing and conftision''-^
and then this witness tells you, and to which
you will particularly advert — that he, remain«
ing below, observed Ings'in the stable, who
rushed towards him, the witness, as if endea*
vouring to get out of the stable. He says^
*' I seized him by the collar, and shoved him
back against the wall at the foot of the ladder ;
he put his hand to his side as if to get out a
weapon ; I knocked him down ; at this tim«
the officers came tumbling down the ladder.
I heard a firing above; I saw the flash -of a
Sistol from the ladder after they had come
own ; it appeared .to have been fired into the
stable; then a man came down the ladder who
appeared to have fired the pistol ; it was.This«
tlewood ; he turned round and presented a
pistol at my head ; it went off. I had before
lifted up my left hand, it passed through th*
Sier ] 1 OBOiftGJB IV.
llii<' dMi ift VIHDg «p Md fraMnting the
puloly ^ I iet go of Iqi^ whom I was holdiog
iefora at woiuided hw, and there were three
boles ia my hat; I received then a Tiolenl
Mow Oft the light side of my head» ead I fell ;
as I felly Thistlewood made a cut at me with
a^swordy and mshed out ai ^ stable door.^
The nexl witness is Luke Nixon, also a
Bow-stieet patn^e, who went with tfie other
eAcera ; be says, ** I saw Westcoatt in con-
fliel with I<i0i» in the stable ; I saw Inga leave
the stable ; I made a soanch at him to catoh
hm^ but missed him ; I do not think Thistle^
^need had got awajr Uien ; lags got out, and I
tan after him up Johnmtiieet, but he had got
too ihr; on this I beard a pistol fired^ and
going up I found him in the custody of Brooks
•ad Champion.''
Joseph Champion is next called, be also is
one of the Bow-atreet peirole; be says, ''I
ipllowed Rathven to the foot of the ladder ; I
was about the sixth or seTcnth man behind
Urn ; I was at the foot of the ladder when he
was at the top; I saw Ings at the bottom ;"
tfaie is the second witness who speaks of him
byname; as to the foimer offiber^ you will
jiidge whether he identifies him or not by
4esoription ; be says^ ** I saw Ings at the foot
«f the ladder; he looked up^ and cried out,
look out above ; Westcoatt endeavoured to
eeewe him> but he made his escape. I foU
lowid hkat and laid hold of him just after
Jkoeka had laid hold of him ; we took him to
the watcb-hooscy and we seaiched him, and oa
hie panon we found four pistol-balls, the key
of a pistol, a case of blue doth for a large
knifoy which fitted the butcbec^s knife pro-
duced here, and which had was^-end twisted
round die handle ; I took off lus great coat,
and then under this, about his person, there
were two haversacks slung, over bis shoulders ;
I saw in one of them a tin case, with loose
piapewder, neatly fiill ; he bed a doth bek
round his Waist with pistol holsters.''
Mm Wright was also one of the Bow-»street
patrefe ; be was there on the 28rd of Februaiy,
and saw a man in the fortber stall, and says,
'* I took a knife and swoid ^m him ; it was
a boicher's knife^ with a wax->end tied round
the handle of it; the swoid was about three
foel long ; I took these (rem a man at the foot
of the ladder, in sixe like the pnsoner at the
barf" and who is proved by the other two
witnesses lo have been by name Ings the pri-
se«se; he says, <' I was kimcked down, a^d
leeabeda^ub on my sida; when I lecoveied
bewaegone."
. Ifcotihs is thea caHad^ who wasakM) a pat^
iola>; .aad he teHs yoi, .<< when I.was ta Johu.
eteaat, I saw Ings lunniagi^ tha street; I
•iessedtfae.stieet»aiid foud oneof mv pait^
aeiB w&di a cutlass; I went np, and the po-
sooer presented a pistol and said he wouUl
ahool me^ and fieed; the ball struck me, and
went through mj collar and the shoulder of
■7 waialcoal^aad out at the ba^ of my neck;
it staggered me to the light, end ihen(Inp.
pose, meaning to avmd the pmsait of ny
eompanion> whq^ was following bim) be cue
into the Edgeware-road and threw tbe puat
away ; a litUe further on, there was a viub-
man of the name of Moay, vdio laid bold of
him just as I did ; I never lost stgbt of Ua
till he was taken ; I said, when taken, joi
rascal, why did you fire at me, a man yoo M
never seen before; he said to killyoo, audi
wish that I had done it ; and this be repealed
afterwards to the soldiers, and to my paitnen.'
William Lee is also a Bow-street patroh,
and he says« ** I went to the Horse and Grooa
in the evening, before the oflkers went to the
stable; I saw Cooper and Gilchrist go it
there; they were tsJcen that night and cod-
veyed to Bow-street/'
The next witness was lieutenant FitMis-
rence ; he says, that be is a lieatenaot in the
Coldstream-guards ; that he was applied to oa
Ute night in question, to go to Oato-straet;
that he took a picqoet with him, and airirri
there a few mmutes after eight; be entered
the stable three or four minutes after eight:
going under the gateway, leading into Cato-
street, 1 saw a police officer, wbo cried est,
SoldienI soldiers 1 sUble-door! He ujh
that he saw two or three persons in the
stable—^ I was met by two men, one prs-
sented a pistol aft me ; I am not sure that it
was a pistol, but he preaented somelbisg at
me, wiiidi appeared to me te be a pistol ; at
the same time a man with a sword struck it
me, whidi.I parried. Seeing a body of sol-
diers coming op, be ran into the stable ; I fol-
lowed him, uid the moment I got into the stable,
I ran up against a man who surrendered himself^
saying, do not kill me, and I will tell jou ail;
I gave him over to the sddiers. I then na
forward into the stable; I went up into ose
of the stalls, and took a man oat, wbom I al»
delivered to the soldien;'* and tben in tbe
very gallant and proper discharge of his datr
—considering the firing that was soiag on, At
time of night, the obscurity of tbe place, asd
the danger with which it was attended— be
goes up this narrow ladder, on which there
was only nxmi for one at a time. He sajs,
'' I led the soldiers, and when I got into ^
loft,IfdloverthelegpsofpoorSBmbcn. of
tbe light in ascending the steps, I n^ three or
four men in the room ; I serared these abo;
then I went on, and tfaerewas s large qoajtitr
of arms in different places of tbe loft; hiuv-
derbuBses, swords, pbtols, pikes, and th^ains
were packed up and seized by the dtfeicoi
soldieia who took them away." ^.„.
The aeit witness called, is SerjeaatWiHaa
L^^, who is a seijeaat of the second battalios
of the Gsldstream»guakdS| and went with op-
tain Fit»>elanaee, wbo ditected ^ ?^
He says, the moment the poUce op» "■■
spoken lo him, the party were direct^ »
advance in double quick Ume. "^^^^.
be says, « we had hear44he »«P«»jiP^'
thete waaa man 5la»diagin*i»»*»*^*^
11693
fat High Treaxon.
A. D. 1820.
[1176
the door; he had a pistol, and he levelled it
against captain Fitz-clarence; but it was turned
away by my pike. I then seized the pistol
with my left hand, and a scuffle ensued be-
tween the prisoner and me ; that prisoner was
Tidd. After some time, we both having hold
of the pistol, it went off, and tore a hole in my
coat ; I delivered Tidd to one of the police ;
the pistol is here ; on going up into the loft
I saw three others who had surrendered."
The next witness called is Samuel Hercules
Taunton, who says, <' I belong to the police-
office at Bow-street. On Thursday morning,
the 24th of February, I went to Brunt's lodg-
ings, where I saw -Brunt and apprehended
him ; I searched the apartments occupied by
him, but found nothing in the front room ; I
then went into the back room, where I found
two rush baskets, both packed up, one tied up
ID a blue apron ; and having seized Brunt, I
asked him an^out them, and he said he knew
nothing of them. I brought the baskets out,
and I opened them afterwards ; and I found
in them nine papers of rope-yam and tar, and
other ingredients calculated to take irre ; and
also steel-filings. In one of the baskets there
'were four hand-grenades; three papers of
rope-yarn, tar, and other ingredients; two
bags, containing each one pound of gun-pow-
der ; five flannel bags empty ; one leather bag
containing sixty-three bullets. In the room
there was an iron pot, which appeared to have
had tar boiled in it very recently, and a pike
handle finished in rough; this was what I
found at Brunt's. I afterwards went to Tidd's,
about nine in the morning, and searched his
lodgings, where I found 434 balls in a haver-
sack; 171 ball-cartridges, loose ; 69 ball-cart-
ridges, without powder ; three pounds of gun-
powder, in a brown paper; 10 grenades;
11 bags of gunpowder, one pound each," these
are the flannel bags ; ^ ana 10 flannel bags,
empty ; and there was a small linen bag with
powder ; a powder flask with some powder in
It ; 68 bullets, four flints, and 27 pike-handles
^th sockets at the ends for pikes ; and a box
which contained 965 ball-cartridges. This '\s
all I found at Tidd's."
He was asked, upon his cross-examination,
about Palin ; whether there is a reward offered
for him ? he says there is ; that he has observed
that he is advertized for the part he took in
this business.
•'Daniel Bishop is the next witness called,
and says he apprehended Thistlewood between
ten and eleven in the forenoon of the 24th of
Febmaiy, at No. 8, White-street, Little Moor-
lields, in the apartments of a Mrs. Harris ; his
own abode, he says, being in Stanhope-street,
Olare-market. lie says he was in bed with
bis breeches and stockings on. "Upon my
cypening the door, he just held up his head from
under the bed-clothes ; I had a pistol in one
hand and a staff in the other. I told him who
I was, my name, and that I had a warrant
against him ; he said, I shall make no restst-
Hit coat and waistcoat were by the
VOL, XXXIIL
bed-side ; in his waistcoat pocket there were
three leaden balls, a ball-cartridge, a blank-
cartridge, and two flints, and a small silk sash.
I took him into custody.*'
On the cross-examination he says, '^ I do
not know £dwards.''
Ruthven was then called back, and he pro-
duced the arms taken from Cato-street.
Morison was called back, and identified a
sword found there as the one brought to him
,to be sharpened, by Ings. He says, that it
'* was directed to be made particularly sharp
at the point, both back and edge, as sharp as
a needle ; it appears to have been rubbed on a
stone to keep the keenness of the edge.''
Taunton is next called back, and he pro»
duces the arms found at Brunt's. He says>
*' this basket contains nine papers of rope^
yarn, tar, and other ingredients; there are
also some steel filings." Then he produces
the basket which was tied up in a blue apron,
and says, '' these are flannel bags full of gun-
powder; there are also some- empty; there
are four hand-grenades; a pike-handle, filed
at the end so as to receive a pike, and it has
a ferule on ; this is the iron pot, there is the
appearance of tar at the ■ bottom ; these are
the sixty-three bullets in a leathern bag.''
Then he produces the things found atTidd's,and,
looking at t\em, he says, '' These are some of
theball-carti'idges; three pounds of gunpowder^
some hand-grenades, eleven bags of gunpowder,
of a pound each, some empty bags ;" and he
produces the various things found there. .
Then Ruthven is called back, and he proves
that those arms found in Cato-street were most
of them loaded, one or two had been fired
off; the others were drawn last Monday.
Then Serjeant Hanson is called ; he is in the
Royal Artillery, and he looks at the fire-balls ;
he says, they are composed of oakum, tar, and
rosin ; and if they were lighted and thrown into
a house they would set the house on fire;
if into a hay-loft, still more likely. He says,.
looking at the fuse, it would bum about half a
minute; and, looking at the thing itself, he
says, this one would bum three or four minutes;
and then looking at one of the cartridges (and
this part of the evidence is very material) so
seized at this d^pdt, he says, " this is a flannel
cartridge for a six-pounder, powder is so made
up for the purpose of charging cannon; but
ours are not made up in the same way, for
they are serge ; this will answer the purpose.*'
Then he looked at the hand-grenades, he took
one to pieces ; and then he says, that the ex^
terior tight binding, as they appear to you to
be, increases the effect when Uiey burst; if
they were slack they would not have half the
effect ; and then he pointed out to you, before
they were taken to pieces, the great nails in
different situations, which in a thing likely to
explode with this violence, would, like a shower
of shot, be scattered in all directions, and be
productive of infinite mischief; and then ho
says, this is more powder than we use to burst
a nine-inch shell.
4F
1171] 1 GEOtOE IV.
• Thii is the whole «€ the evidence for Ihe
•proeecutioii which I hare felt it ny duty im
4hie case, so inportant to the prisoner at the
bar, to state to you.
Go the part of ihe prisoneri the fiiat witness
called was Thomas Chambers ; who says, tliat
he lires at No. 3, Heath-cookHDo«rt, in the
Strand, nearly opposite the Adelphi. He is
called to impeadi the character and the testi-
monv which was giTen by the witness Adams;
and he says, '' I had seen Adams in company,
with Edwards about a week before the Calo-
street business took place ; I was by myself in
aof room when they came together ; they nwde
a proposal to me about the assassination of
the king's ministers, and asked me to go with
Ihera; I refused; Adams said to me they
were going to kill his majesty's ministers, and
they woold have blood and wine for sapper ;
they came to me again on the Monday*night,
(it was a wet night) before the Cato»street
business ; they brought a large bag and wanted
to leave it. I am a boot-miScer ; I cannot say
how loDg I have known Ings ; I have not been
in his company above two or three times. I
wet him near the court where I bve, at a pam-»
phlet shop, where they sell the Black Dwarf
and the Medusa ; the shop is kept by Wat-
Ung ; I know the Scotch Arms in Round-court,
in the Strand ; it is near my lodgings ; I never
Mw Ingf there ; I had been these three times
before Christmas ; there was no business going
•n, nor any chairman ; the three times I was
there, I was in the tap-ioom ; I have been at
the Black Dog in Gray's-inn-lane ; there was
no chair there, it was in a little parlour, and I
saw seven persons there; I was invited there by
a man of the name of Bryant, who was going
to the Cape of Good Hope ; they were all stran-
gers to me but one, and that one whom I knew
vras Thistlewood; I know Brunt very well,
but he was not there ; I will not swear I do
not know Palin ^ I have not had any conTersa*
tion wiih him, but I may have seen him ; I was
at all the meetings in Smithfield; I cannot
state who earned the Uack flag upon that
occasion, but I hare carried two fla|^ ; there
was inscribed on one, * The Manchester Ma**
sncre ;' never saw a flag, * Let us die like
Free men, not Hve Hke Slares.'' Gn Hunt's
tntry, I carried a flag of ' Trial by Jurv ;' I
know Davidson ; I have not much knowledge
ofTidd, I may have seen him; I have seen
Wilson ; I know Harrison very well ; I have
not much knowledge of Bradbum ; I do not
know Strange, nor GOchrist, nor Cooper; I
have known Thistlewood since Mr. Hunt's
triumphal entry ; the proposal of assassination
shocked me so, that I did not go ; Bow««treet
was near me, but I did not myMdl go to. Bow^
street and give any inlormatioa; I die not
know whether Edwards knew of my «^fyiinr-
tnee with the other people.'^
Hien the next witness wha is cnUed, ie
lu7 Barker, the daughter of Tidd. She
wyiy some powder was fonnd at his houae, and
iome grenades and baUs ; " thi^ wei« bcwghi
TrM qfJ0m€$ Ing$
E117«
in the morning by a man and n b6y ; I know
EdwaKls ; he biooght some of the grenades^
Edwards was the man ; they were takes vtny
and returned ; I saw Edwanls on the monaaf
of the 23rd, he came and took some of the
grenades and powder away ; they might be the
same that were brought back on the 24thy bet
I do not know; ther« was one very large one;
Adams brought it ; that was not brought beck
again.''
Upon croasHnamioation she says, *^ the bos
had been there two or three days ; I do not
know how loiy^ the grenades had bees these
they might have been there a fortnight ; it mm
on the morning of Wednesday that thej wem
taken away ; the box was kept cerded, it had
not been opened to my knowledge.**
This is the evidence on the one side, and tm
the other ; and it is for you to say whether,
upon this evidence, the prisoner at the bar be
or be not guilty of the criminality impeted m
him by this indictment; one of the diasges ben^
a conspiracy to depose the king, and the other
a conspiracy to levy war against the king;
such as I have before stated.
You have been truly told, that the natme
of this ofienoe consists in the intention ; and
the intentions charged are those which I
hare pointed out. The overt acts themsdves
are but manifestations of the inward intent^
and if soch overt acts as are stated are estab-
lished by the evidence, there can be no doohi
that, in point of law, the prisoner is guilty.
Now first, with respect to the purpose — ^It
must be a public purpose : and the purpose
charged is an intention to bring abont a cevi^
tion in the government, to compel the king ta
change his measures, and to put many of those
employed in the administration of the govern^
ment to death, by the means that have beea
stated and prored. But still, if this weis
merely an intention to assassinate the king^s
ministers, and that such assassination should
end with itself, however diabolical such a de«
sign would be, still having no ulterior public
view, it would not be the ofiisnce imputed ; bst
it will be for you to judge on the facts in
proof, what were the motives, and what the
end fljid object of the conspiracy in autstion.
To begin with the evidence of Adans. VL
jon believe him, there can be no possible doubt
m the case ; for he proves the origin and pn^
pess of different meetings, from time to ttms^
at which this scheme was formed and matured,
up to the moment when it was preparing to be
carried into execution. But you have been
told, and truly, that Adams is an accomplioe;
that he is a man, upon his own confession, as
guilty as those against whom he appeats to
give OTidenee ; and so undoubtedly he aaostbe
taken to be. But it is not to be expected in
oases of this sort that an accomplice eao^ ever
be an innooent person : the very nature of his
situation imports, that )ie hims^ls conneetel
in guilt with those whom he stands forward lo
accuse; and if the doctrines which we base
h^nrd thm 4^7 «S^i bei %^<^M| it wouU
lira]
fit Ihf^ 7f«ndii.
A. D. >89D.
U174
BewBr b« pdssiUe to c«ll an aocDnplice, bteaust
liisMitiiliOdy wQHilfilM got rid of faf tU ainiflt
observstabn 4Mt he wai an aoeompfioiiy that is^
a gviity man liimtcAil Ak tke same tiBM yon
have bean Iroiy told, that tiioogk in poina ef
htn an aoeomplioa is a witwesa coaipelent to
\t% raceivady aiid theralora one wbo in point of
law it is eompetent to a^ jury to beUet«> jtk in
the practieai application of the role, janes
Angku not to eottviot upon the testimoi^ of a*
accomplice, unless his testimony raceiveapioper
and reasonsible confirmation. Upon this part
of the case, I have heard the law not inten*
<ionally but grossly mis-stated ; the role is^
abat an aceomptico mast be confirmed-^ Qon*-
linned in some particulars, but not confirmed
in all ; for you bave been traty told, that if
this last were the role, it would be unneceasary
to call an aocompUce ; beeause if the other
frvtBo/M could confirm him in aU, by prnttnc
tlie'same fitcts themselvies, dieir etideoee would
mipersede the necessity of his eiridenee, and
therefore it m not aecessaiy to confinn an ae^
complice in all particulars, the- niU being, that
it is necessary only to confinn him to such an
extent as that upon the iacts stated by otiier
^minesses, the jury nmy see that ho is worthy
^ beliefs Now is thisy or is it not, the case or
6«ntleiiiien, to take ftm the lastimeny of
A]ln*4llrea wit^MSses; to- whom I hate rti^vred-^
tfie MtaM set«raat who let Che lo^^rngt-^Miv.
Rogers,i!0 whomtiie bons&belongedw*«ind Halev
wrbo was the apprentice of Brottt. What is
•romd by all these tfiree witnesses ? You will
Jtidge, whether it be or be not die strongest
pisssible confirroaCion of the evidence of an
eM!<feompbce, which perhaps it is- capable of re-
«ei^i»g. Adams had toM you that a bach i«om
was tabea in Fox-court^ Gmy Vinn4ane ; that
il was taken by Brunt for lags, who was de*
n«rf bed to he a butcher out ofemploy ; and it
is distinctly proved— ^onfivnring in that par-
eleular every pert of Adaim's testimony-*4hat
elie foora was uken for Ings, that the meetings
^rera held in this room, that lie continued there
mp <a the night of the meeting in Cato-streat;
that he never returned there after that night;
and that Brunt, another of the party, wei4 out
art tfte same time, retnmed the same evnning,
and conducted himself in- 1^ nmnaer yon have
Heard. All these essential and leading ieatures
of Adams's evidence, are oenfitaMd by the^testi-
iDony of these accredited witnesses. And not
only this, but on that very evenin|f you fiud
that Brunt came home, and told his wife that
it was all up; that tlie police officers had
found their way into the Ion ; that he himself
bad escaped only with his life; and then, shortly
alter, came in another man, who also had been
present, and who stated, he had received a
fclow. The apprentice. Hale, upon whose
character no imputation is attempted to be cast,
proves the poles, the bags, pikes, and pistols-
all these deadly preparations going on firom
time to time in the apartment of Ings, in the
boose from which Ings and Brunt saUied forth
on Aer Digbt in qiiestion. Ings never did
setum to it ; and fiSrant retnmed and beharved
himself in this way. The next morning the
officers found Brunt packing into iwo baskets,
to he conveyed awav, all the difierent arms
and amnmnition, which have been produced
before yon ; therefore, if the ease rested upon
the testimony of Adams only, is this such oow-
firmation of the troth of the story told to yon
by him, as to make bim a witness worthy of
your belief? So I state the question, leaving
it to you to answet it to yourselVes.
Independent of this, there is the testimony
of Mennment, with re|faid> to whom, if it rested
merely on his testimony, it might be said, that
one accomplice eaonot be oonfirosed by an-
other ; but unfortunately it does not, for hife
brother, who is not implicated,, proves Thistki-
wood and Brunt coming to the house. He
itonfirflM every part of the testimony of Adams
as to this part cS the case; mid in addition 16
this, yon have the evidence of asietber witness,
and: that a person who stitnds in a very difbiS'
ent> sBtuation-^tbeevidence of Hideoi Be, up
to a certain time, had engaged in the transact
ticm in question ; but such was his remone of
oonaoience, so completely did be sicken la
mind as tkas night alpproadied, that yon find
that before Uie parties asseti^led in Cato^
stmal^ he did that which he could not Have
done uniem, as I stated befoie, he hiad possessi-
ed the spirit, of prophecy v-*be actually,' iai
Older to prevent the mischief intended, went to
lord Castlereagh's, and afterwuds to lord Han^
rowby's, and deltvonred the tetter, afonvwaming
to prevent what woidd olheiwlso have taken
place. Whether he be, therefore, an accomplice
np-to a certain stage, or not^ it isimfamt^al to
examine < he was not an accomplice at thf
time he did that, which tended to defeat the
plan proposed.
Nor does it rest on the testsmoay of Adams
so confirmed, or Monument so oonfinsied,- of
the ftot of the deliveky of the leuer, bat you
will judge whether tnis story, is not alao con^
firmed by aU . that took place on the 'night ni
question in Cate»street. Them yon fiad, ae^
sembled'in the-stable and in a room spmd
over with anmn^ hay-loft I might ahoEiDSt say
converted intO'an anenal-'-ft number, and of
riie nnmberwas Inge the prisoner, of peiions
dmwa up^ as it were in military array, on tbe
point of. sniffing %A, he was seiaedr-^be es^
caped ; he was pursued — he turned round and
fired a pistol ; and on being asked by one of
the officers, what he meant by shooting at him
an innocent man, he said, to kill you, and
I wish I had done it — I am sorry to add, but
it is my painfiil duty to draw your attention
to the evidence, that a sword was taken from
a man not known at the moment by the person
who took it to be logs, but proved to be him
by two other witnesses; and when he was seized,
there was found on his person a sheath or case
fitted to the knife of which you have heard,
and under his coat and over his shoulders were
found those two bags of which AOaJUs had
1175] 1 GEORGE IV.
spoken ; the bags id which the arowed mien-
tiOD was to carry away the heads of soBie of
the mardered party.
Now this is truly, in all its circamstaiices, a
case of a most extraordinary nature. It is
admitted, that all these persons were met (not
it is argued for a treasonable purpose) but
with an intention to proceed to a cabinet din-
ner, to assassinate all the ministers assembled
there ; to what motive can this be refened ?
Was it prirate malice ? Was it personal re-
venge merely ? The lots of the prisoners at
the bar were cast too widely asunder from
those of the objects of their vengeance, to per-
mit us to account for their plan on any grounds
of private or personal difference. Is it possible
to suppose, that the object was to commit a
murder merely, and stop there P Of this you
will judge, looking to the nature of the prepara-
tions made; not merely daggers conccsided,
irat long staves for pikes ; not merely cartridges
/or pistols ; but cartridges of a sise to charge
artifiery ; grenades sufficiently strong in their
construction, to be equal to the power of a
nine-inch shell— the number of arms — the
Quantity of ammunition — the military d^p6t —
tne fire balls, and the surveys made.— Connect-
ing this with what relates to the Mansion-house
and the Bank — the provisional government —
and the expectation that the people would
rise and join — ^it is for you, gentlemen, to
judge, whether this was merely to lend to and
end in the assassination of the king's ministers ;
or, whether there was not an ulterior purpose
of insurrection and revolution, to which the
assassination was but preparatory and subser-
vient.
But it has been said, is it probable that
persons comparatively so few in number should
suppose themselves able to accomplish such a
mighty purpose as to bring about a revolution
in the government of the country ? 1 cannot
tell what in their estimation might be proba-
ble ; but this is a most uncertain test by
which (o judge ; for if I had been told there
could be found five-and-twenty men on
the face of the earth, and still more (and 1
grieve to say) five-and-twenty men of the
country to which we have the happiness to
belong, who could have combined to commit
such a dreadful deed of barbarity and blood, I
should have said, till they had been detected
in the way in which these persons have been
TrM ofJamu Ingt [ 1 176
detected, it is utterly impossible 1 It never
did happen— it never'can ! I cannot bdiefve
on any testimony that it is intended. Bnt
how failadons would have been audi rpneowing
is proved too clearly by the hsXl And the
fact established, the next step I fear is of no
difficulty whatever. For that public revolution
could only have been intended by such meansi
is as difficult to disbelieve as it was difficolt to
believe in the means till established. Beaades,
upon the evidence, it will be for you to say,
whether extensive co-operation was not the
support and consequence to what they looked,
as proved expressly not only by the measeras
but by the different declarations given in
evidence.
The prisoner has called witnesses to im-
peach tne testimony of Adams, of whose en-
denoe you will judge. You have heard his
defence, which I n€wd not repeat to yon, and
in which he has desired you, before yoa dis-
pose of his case, fully to examine all the cir-
cumstances, and well to weigh the verdict yos
may pronounce. In that prayer I most rendfly
join. Weigh well the evidence ! Delibeiaie
thoroughly on the result ! And if in concfa"
sion you can have any doubt of the facts which
constitute the overt acts charged, or the
purpose alleged as connected with then ; if
you think that, however horrible, this was an
intended assassination, and nothing mora ;
that the conspirators were to go into the hons^
commit the murder, and then separate, and
that with that separation all operations were
to cease — if this should be your opinion — in
the honest exercise of your judgment apply it
to the case, and acouit the prisoner. Kit, on
the other hand, if it be impossible fairly to Ibna
such a judgment, then you will perform that
duty which in the name of that Being refened
to more than once in the course of these pro-
ceedings, you have been sworn well and tin^
to di^harge, and pronounce the prisoner
guiltv because you believe him to be sa.
Finally, if you have any doubt, give him te
benefit of it, and nobody will rejoice mwe
than I shall, if you can, with satisfaction ts
your consciences, pronounce him not gnilty.
The Jury withdrew at twenty-five miaoias
past eight, and returned in twentj*fiva
minutes, finding the prisoner Gvii.tt on
the first and thiid counts.
1177]
Jw High Treoion,
A. D. 1S20.
L1178
704. The whole Proceedings on the Trial of John Thomas
Brunt, for High Treason, before the Court holden under a
Special Commission, for the Trial of certain Offences therein
mentioned, on the 24th and S5th days of April : 1 Geo. I Y.
A. D. 1820.*
SESSIONS HOUSE, OLD BAILEY,
Monday, April 24th, 1820.
Praent
The Right Hon. Lord Chief Baron [Richards.]
The HoQ. Mr. Baron Garrow.
The Hon. Mr. Justice Bkhardton,
The Common Sergeant,
And others his Majesty's Justices, &c.
[The Prisoner was set to the Bar.]
The Jury Panel was called over, commen-
cing with No. 219.
Bichard Emery, cooper, diallenged by the
Crown.
Stolen Gourd, bricklayer, challenged by the
Crown.
John Apple, drug-grinder, excused on account
of illness.
Thomas Bru^fne, mason, challenged by the
t)risoner
mUiam Butler Baker, challenged by the
Crown.
WilUam Benn, farmer, challenged by the
Crown.
John Boper, gentleman, fined for non-attend-
ance.
William Norton, sawyer, challenged by the
prisoner.
William Blasson, gentleman, challenged by the
Crown.
Alexander Barclay, gentleman, and grocer.
Mr. Barclay.— My lord, I feel so completely
influenced by the facts that came before me
on the former tria],tthat I really do not feel
myself a competent judge.
Lord Chief Baron. — It is no objection unless
the parties object.
Mr. Cunvood. — ^We prefer him, my lord,
because he will be able to see the difference.
Mr. . Barclay, — I trust I may be exempt
under these circumstances.
Mr. Justice Bichardton, — It in no objection
in point of law.
-£ i ^
* See the preceding and following Cases.
t He was one of the Jury on the trial of
Arthui Thistlewood.
Mr. Barcli^ was sworn.
Edward Hughes, gentleman, excused on account
of illness.
Edward Grant, cow-keeper, excused on ac-
count of illness.
Thomas Lester, bookseller, challenged by the'
Crown.
Joseph Sheffield, esq. and ironmonger, challen-
ged by the prisoner.
Thomas Goodchild, esq. sworn.
Josei^ Baynes, bricklayer, challenged by the
Crown.
Robert Stephenson, anchorsmith, challenged by
the Crown.
Mr. Stq)henson, — I am sorry to be under
the necessity of appealing to your lordship,,
but I should think, having been challenged
twice* I may claim a right to withdraw alto-
gether.
Lord Chief Barons — Certainly not.
Mr. Stephenson. — I have always applied mj*
self strictly to do my duty, as I have been
taught from my infancy, but I conceive I am
trifled with.
Mr. SoUdtor-GeneroL — It is no reproach to
any gentleman that be is challenged, either on
the one side or the other, and ought not to be-
so considered.
Lord Chief Baron. — No, certainly not«
BichardBbmt, gentleman, challenged by the
prisoner.
Isaac Gunn, baker, challenged by the Crown. ■
William Churchill, gentleman, and win&4ner-
chant, challenged by the Crown.
Thomas St^ld lUersey, esquire, sworn.
Thomas Tfukinson, fanner, challenged by the
prisoner.
Simmel Fi^, tobacconist, challenged by the-
prisoner.
Eim^ ColUngridge, water-gilder, challenged
by the Crown.
William Shore, farmer, challenged by the Crown.
James Herbert, carpenter, sworn.
John Shuter, gentleman, sworn.
Josiah BartMomew^ watchmaker, challenged
by the prisoner.
* Now, and in the case of Arthur Thntle-
wood^
IVn] 1 GBOKlG£ IT.
Trial ^Mm TUmu Brmrt
UIM
Join JimOf tiarpenter, challenged by the Crown.
Hemy Rtmney^ boaUbuilder, excused on ac-
coant of illness.
Tkoma» BriUaWf ooaGhmaker, challenged by
ihe miaoaer.
Samwu Granger^ lighterman, challenged by the
George Dickemom, builder^ challenged by the
itfisoiier.
jinui F«Mwm^ upholatareri challenged by
the prisoner.
Thomm Jihion^ esq. and ahip-chandler, chal*
lenged by the prisoner.
JsMKS WUmot, market-gardener, sworn.
Gtorge FhUlip^ jeweUer, challenged by the
prisoner,
^AofHos JBird^ distiller, challeogied by the ptir
soner.
WiiUam Johnttm^ bakesi challeDg(Bd by tbt
Crown.
JioAn EAoard Shif^ardi genlleman, sworn.
Samml GoM^ caUoo-printer, challenged by the
Ciown.
Jamti Wadmort^ esq. challenged by the prispner.
TlwrnM BrmoMf oilman, chaUenged by the pri»*
w)ner.
4S«frge AUm^ brass-fbonder, challenged by^the
pmaoneiu
mi
llSam Reedf esq. challenged by the prisoner.
Gepf^e Dqmt^ cooper^, cludlenged by the pri-
soner.
JiMii JRnidi^ brewer, challenged by the pri-
soner.
JoAn PTeHhrodky t)ridi-maker, ilned f6r non-
attendance, but the fine afterwards remitted
on proof of ittfkeAi*
Jimatkan^Famnghami fiumer, challenged by the
Crown.
Joteph DrakCf draper, challenged l^ the pri-
soner.
Jotq^ ClemeniSj market-gardener, excused on
aooamil of iUocss.
JMit FowUtt itan-plaie washer, sMroen.
SfmmlMkaim^ esq. andeowhhaeper, rhallenged
bv the prisoner.
WiUimn GibU Ho6eris,. cooper, «Mom.
Biekard Smkhf esq. diaRenged l^ the Crown.
hupi Ftthndf. ii90i»«|date wexket, ehaBengai
by the Crown.
3!kwtt GoniM^ 4»pwifg^ cMlen^ad by tlK
Goewn*
Matthew JfUoay eoacb-vaslti^ chatteogad by
thepeisHmec
gmlanrf &^dtm, esq, md fawwa, chalieagad
by the prisoner.
JUbi HicfanasB, WIcLbc, smoih.
WUUam Bttihbyf esq. fined for non-atteadance.
Tkamm Amtin^ esq. eacused «» aceoMia oC
illness.
Ji*» IMmn, leaq. chattteged by tha priaoner.
Crown.
y tna pnao
Thomas Dickt, sdraiDudv ebaUei^jad bji iha
ShoMi Wiodf pmtBg,. <hftliengad by th» pii>
soner.
JuKtr Goto: joiner, challeugttd'bytlie Crown.
Mm4 meii^ fiurmer,eliaHeagad^h<»eMWn.
Mt^wd Bracebridge, watdimaker, cballeMe*
by tiie Crown,
Johm Jona, Btock*broker, dallenged bj Ai
Crown.
ThoKuu Fmiriige^ farmer, challenged by the
prisoner.
Ottfgt Ham^ sUpMshaidUr^diaUeived ^^
Crown.
Xloaiv Hflri^, eaq. and BOpeHttifar, diilkoged
by the prisoner.
Wmiam Mrrett^ watdk-engfaTer, challenged \j
the pdsomsr.
Samul Wmdmdif horse-dealer, fined for noo-
attendance.
John Btmtifg, gentleman and tailor, chsHesgcd
by the Crown.
WiUimm JXpses, farmer, chaUenged hf tk
Crown,
WiUkum Cooper^ gentleman, challenged by the
prisoner.
Biheri Gremxs, gentleman, excused on aocoe&t
of illness,
Chnttopher Dmmm, sbip-bailder, Mka§A
by the Grown.
Wiiiiam Jama Farmer^ baker, chaUenged b;
the prisoner.
Daoid Newman, farmer, challenged by the
Crown.
George Skvyr, <liHk««se aMbeiv eluikBgei
by the Crown.
Bemy Seaborn^ cooper, excused oa sMoatt d
illness,
Franeii SherBom, esq, and toner, diaDesfW
by theprisonea.
Edward t&mpton^ shipwright, challenged by the
prisoner. .
Ttnutiam Dovief , shopkeeper, dialTeoged by the
Crown, .
Richard Frardss, esq. and siflL-meicer, cbal'
lenged by the Crown.
>hn SmitL n
John Smith, undertaker^ sworn.
Thpma^Lmigl^ ahip-chandler, cbaUeogediy
the Crown.
Georgfi Frieitf esq^ challenged hy the pcisoiK'r
Samuel JFlbon, gentleman and merchsBtf
Mr. air«Nm{l--4ha«wiwca«wU>fheW|aT
challenges are exhausted.
Mt. Attorney General— The prisoner shift
not suffer inconreoieoce from that cuouf
stance,
CAaHenged by the Cromn.
Mkhad AUdnst taq^ challenged by tbeCmmir
Alfred BaUoHi esq. and porterHicaIer,cb«w«*
ed by the Crown. .
Gaonge TaytoTy bnoklayer, ehsieogsd Of ^
Crown,
John fPoocJuMtrd, giantlemaiH sworn,
Alexander Batelayr ^^ Shephaidi
Thomas Goodchild, Max Fowler
Thos.Suffield Aldjarsey,, Wm. Qibbj Rob^
James Herbert, John DiAanson,
John Shuter, John Siliith>
James Wilmot„ John Woodward,
Ifcei J^ «9ew4baf9i^wiih the Fis>^^
the usual mrm.
ll$ll
JtMT Uigfi 7rMMft«
Mc AUamey C?«iera/.-^Beft>re Mr. BoUaD^
opens Ui9 Gase^ I Ihiok k my duty to bring
oefore y^ur lofdsbips a eireuautanee which
has oocone4 sinoe you last sat in this place.
The Court, from aa asxioufl desire thai nothiog
should occur during the course of these trialsi
which could by any meaus operate to the pro-
jttdice of the prieoaets* at the commenceaieRt
of the proceeoiiigs directed that so pubHcation
of the proceedings on the ftrsi or any other
trials should take place until the whole of
them were brought to a oondusioa. ^Viith that
U^uoction, I belioTe I may state, that the
daily papem have most prbp^ly complied ; but
it appears br the paper which has been put
into my haadsy that a publication was made
yesieidav in the Observer newspaper of the
whole of the trial of Arthur Thistlewood, and
not a very short account was given also of the
yial of James Ings, and my lords, this publica-
tion has been issued with a full knowledge on
the part of the publisher^ of the prohibition
which the Court had nionounced, for I find
that prohibition pubUsoed in this very paper
which contains the account of the trials I have
mentioned.
It is not my intention at thb moment to
interrupt the proceedings which are about to
take place, bj calling upon your lordships to
take any specific step upon this most daring and
flagrant contempt or the authority of the Court ;
but I thii^ I owe it to the dignity of the Court,
and to the situation which I hold, to state thus
fMiblicly, that this conduct cannot pass unno>
ticed ; and that undoubtedly some proceedings
will be taken, when the means are funiish«i
to bring the matter in a proper alwpe before
your lordships.*
JVisMsr.— Wonld your lordship have the
(poodness to give me the indulgence of a seat,
at intervals, when I am tired.
Lifrd Ckkf Bar<m.^-CeTtsdo\y.
J. H£ Indictment was opened by Mr. Bolland*
Mr. Attomtg GeneraL — Gentlemen of the
Jury ;-^ You have heard, from the opening of
tbe indictment by my learned fnend, the
nature of the charge which is preferred against
tbe prisoner at the "bar ; and as the circum..
stances of this case, aboot to be laid before
vou in evidence, have already come to the
knowledge of some of yon from the duty you
have latehr perfonaed, and may probably have
reached the minds of the rest ; let me, in the
oatset, beseech you to dismiss, as for as you
can» all recollection of what you have heard or
read upon the sul^eet of this proceeding, and
ta ooafine your attantioi exclusively lo the
fitf ts which will be adduced in evidence upon
tbe present occasion* I am convinced that
every one of you has anticipated me in this
* See the commencement of the trial of
Arthur Thistlewoody April 17th, a^j and
tbt proceedings at the dose of the pijeauit
laiaf, m/9t^.
A. D. 1820. [1189
request, and that therefore it is unnecessary,
but in justice to the prisoner at the bar you
will forgive me for having made it ; and I am
satisfied, that through the whole course of this
trial, your minds will not be influenced by any
thing but the evidence in the case, and thal^
upon that evidence alone your conclusion wiU
be formed.
The chaige against the prisoner at the bar
is that of high treason ; and without troubling
yon with stating the different counts of this
indictment, I shall content myself by observing
to youy that it is necessary by the law, that
the acts intended to be given in evidence
afiainst the accused, shall be stated in the i»*
dictment. Those acts consist In coasultatiooe
and deliberations by tlie prisoner at the bar^
and othen» to overturn the constitution of the
country, to excite insurrection against the
established govemment-*in having actuallf
prepared means lor that purpose and in
oaving formed and acted upon an intention
to assassinate all his m^es^'s ministers. Those
statements are introduced into the indictment
as indicating and evidencing tbe intention har^
boored in thie mind of the prisoner at the bar
and his associates, to depose the king from hie
royal authority, or to levy war against him, in
order by force to compel him to change hie
measures and counsels ; and I believe I may
state with perfect confidence, that if these overt
acts, as they are called, shall be proved to youv
satisfaction, they vrill establish the charge of
high treason against the prisoner at the bar«
I consider it, therefore, sufficient at present to
request your attention to the nature of the
evidence which will be laid before yon, without
troubling you further upon the law of the
The- prisoner, John Hiomas Brunt, was a
shoemaiier, residing in Fox^court near Gray's-
inn-lane, and it will be proved by the witnesses,
that early in the present year, plans (which
probably had for a period long before existed
in the mind of the prisoner at die bar, and the
other persons who were associated with him)^
were more matured and brought nearer to the
point of execution. One of bis associates was
a man who must frequently be mentioned in
the course of this investigation, of the name
of Thistlewood, a name probably not unknown
to any of you, and it is a duty I owe to the
prisoner to revest that you will lay out of
yourconsideration(any thing which has occvrwed
with respect to Thistlewood, and confine
yourselves strictly to the proofs which will be
laid before you in support of the particular
charge you are now iinpanelled to try. Ano-
ther person, included m tbe pmseot indict*
meat, James Inga, bv trade a butcher, will
also appear to you to have been an intimate of
the prisoner Brunt. At the oommencement
of the present yeax, meetings were called by
tbese three individuals, Thistlewood, Ings,.and
the prisoner, at which several other persons,
who will be inlKoduced to your notice in .the
coHne pf thia trial, were assembled* TImjf
118^1
] GEORGE IV.
Tritd ofJokn Thomat Bruni
[1184
were held at the White Hart in Brook's-imaricet,
not in the public house itself, but in a room
in the yaiti belonging to it. It being thought
however, for some reason or other, that this
was not a secure place for their meetings, ano-
ther room was obtained, in the house in Fox-
court, in which the prisoner at the bar lived; and
it will appear, that though hired for the ostensi-
ble purpose of being occupied by Ings as a lodg-
ing, it never was applied to that purpose, but
was used exclusively for the meetings which
the conspirators daily held, in order to consult
upon their plans, and to prepare the means for
tarrying them into execution. This room was
on the same floor with the apartments of the
Prisoner Brant; his were in the front, that
ired for Ings was at the back of the house ;
tlie key of it was kept at Brunt's, and access
to it obtained by applying to him or some
member of his family.
' It will be in your recollection that at the
6lose of the month of January, his late majesty
died. It had been part of their plan to com-
mence operations oy the destraction of his
majesty's ministers, and it was thought that no
opportunity would be so convenient as that
which the assembling of those distinguished
persons at a cabinet dinner would afford. Incon-
sequence of his majesty's death, those dinners
were suspended, and therefore no such oppor-
tunity was at that time likely to occur, at least
ffae prisoner and his associates so believed ; it
was therefore proposed at one of their delibera-
tions, that altnough the whole of their scheme
could not be accomplished, some individuals
of his majesty's mmistry should be cut off
either at their own houses, or at other places ;
and it was thought that the night of the king's
foneral might be a convenient time for the
commencement of their plan. It was observed
by one of them, that the soldiers, or the greater
Ert of them, would then be withdrawn from
»ndon to attend his majesty's funeral at
Windsor, and that many of the police officers
would be necessarily absent upon the same
duty; and from these considerations it was
proposed to the meeting, that that night should
DC 6xed as the period for beginning the projected
operations. This proposal, however, either was
not adopted, or, if then agreed to, was not
afterwards acted upon, and their operations
were postponed beyond the evening of his ma-
jesty's funeral. Atlength the oon8pirators,heated
and inflamed with the object which they had
in view, became impatient; and you ^ill find
that on the 19th of February (a day to which
your attention will be particularly directed),
at a meeting at Brunt's room, at which Thistle-
wood, Ings,' Brunt, Davidson, Harrison, and
others were assembled, their impatience was
exhibited. Many of them said, that they
were resolved that a blow should be struck
without delay, and that if no convenient op-
portunity occurred in the mean time, at whi^
the whole of his majesty's ministers might at
one blow be cut off, they were determin^ that
Mmething at all events should be attempted on
the evening of the following Wednesday.
Thistlewood, acquiesciog in this opiDion, pro*
posed, that upon the ensoiag moraing (hey
should assemble again, and that a committee
should then be appointed for the purpose of
digesting the operations of Wednesday; and
it will appear to you, that on Sunday the SOtli
of February, the party met more nameioosly
than had been usual ; twenty penoos or more
were, I believe, collected.
The plan of these conspirators embraced
other objects besides the destraction of his
majesty's ministers ; different parties were to
be posted in various parts of tnis metropolis;
some were to set fire to buildings, whidi were
to be pointed out ; others were to seize the
cannon deposited in Gray's-inn-lane at the
Light-horse Volunteer stables, and in the
Artillery-ground near Finsbury-sqoare. Iivas
intended, that after the taking of those caDum
and the firing of different places in the metro-
polis, they should meet at the Mansion-house;
which was to be the seat of what the^ tensed
the provisional government This beio^
settlea and arranged on the Sunday, yon wiU
find that their activity increased to complete
the preparations they had begun. Ammunitioa
was procured in very large quantities ; hand-
grenades, which will be exhibited to yon, were
prepared ; fire-balls, to which they give the
appellation of illumination balls, were made,
to be lighted and thrown into the hooses which
were to be set on fire ; cartridges for the canooa
were obtained in considerable quantities; arov
of every description —guns, blondeAusses,
pistols, and swords— were collected. Othtf
instruments which were found will be exhil>ited
to you ; they are pikes made of staves of ash
and beedi, into one end of each of which were
to be screwed bayonets or sharpened files;
thus connected together, the bayonet ^^
staff formed a very formidable weapon, of the
length of eight or nine feet.
In order to their security, fearing th«t Aeir
motions at Brunt's room might be obseiwo,
they had appointed another place as a dep^
sitory for the arms and ammunition which
they had procured, and you will find that
place was at the house of Tidd, who is another
of the persons charged in this indictment, who
lived in Hole-in-the-wall-passage, in Brooks-
market. They met again on the following
day, Monday, the 21st, when their phtns wtfC
again considered, and they were stiU ^*»7
eager to complete them on the Wednesday;
and you will find their delibferatioiis tuw
again entirely on the mode in which their
scheme was to be carried into effect.
On Tuesday the 2lnd another meeting w
held. At that meeting a man of the name «
Adams, who will be caHed before you ««»
witness, communicated to them somethnf
which had occurred with respect to himwj
and which excited a suspicion in his rsm
that their intentions were not altogether^,
known to the government, and that theirm^
tions were watched. The very suspicton «
H8I>1
Jw High Treason*
A: D. 1620.
L1186
this excited grMt agitfttfen in the minds of
those Whd Were present ; they were so con-
vinced of the fidelity of «ach other, so con-
fident in the means which they had prepared,
that they could not brook the notion that there
was any possibility of fiiilure. Such, at least,
was the general impression «pon the minds of
(he persons assembled there ; but you will find
that one of them, called Palio, who was to
head a detachment for setting fire to the town,
thought that the suggestion made by Adams
ought not to be treated with inattention.
Brunt proposed, in order to ascertain whether
their scheme had been detected or not, that a
watch should be set that night. Gentlemen,
I ought previously to hare stated to you, that
upon the morning when this which I am re-
lating to you, took place, it had been ascer-
tained by the meeting, from a newspaper, that
vpon the following day a cabinet dinner was
to be given by lord Harrowby ; an event long
anxiously wished for; an opportunity long
desired by the prisoners, as by finding all his
majesty's ministers assembled at one place,
they hoped the more easily and the more
effectually to perform their diabolical work of
assassination. Brunt proposed that a watch
should be set, and the spot fixed upon was
lord Harrowby's house. Brunt said, *'Ifour
plan has been detected ; if there be any ground
for this suspicion which Adams entertains, no
doubt there will be some preparation made at
lord Harr6wby*s house, to meet the intended
attack; and if, therefore, upon watching his
house tO'Uight and to-morrow morning, it shall
appear that no soldiers are intinoduced into
that house or any of the adjacent houses, that
no preparations are made for the expected
attempt, we may be quite satisfied that our
plans remain undivulged, and that we are in
p^ect security." I will not repeat to you
the expressions which were used at that meet-
tfig; the exultation which was displayed at
finding that at last this opportunity they had
been so long expecting would occur, and that
at last the day had arrived, on which they
^rbuid be able to perpetrate their nefarious
crimes. It' will b6 sufficient for yon to hear
tlieok once, from the witnesses who will be
called beibre you.
On that evening, in pursuance of the sug-
fg§si\on of Brunt, a watch was set in Orosvenor-
sct^are aC sit o\:10ck. Two persons, one of
•M^fbwas Davidson, were to take the duty
frtkV IRX till nine, when they were to be re^
li^V«d'by ttio others, who were to remain till
twri^ ; it was thought that firOni that time till
Ibor in th« mornrng no observation would be
netfesMiry, but that at the last mentioned hour
tik^.watdi should be resumed. Davidson and
}ni aMtociate Went into GrOSvenor^titee, and
leoti^tiftued tlfei^ ft&ai m till nine. At' that
hodf'thef were relieved by Briint and the
wilrieftf AdAtes,'&nd a remarkable ciiicuihisiitmc^
&Mt^ff6d up^th^t- evening, which puts' it oiit
of 'IdldduM'thiit the prisoner Bru'iit was there.
it- 'Wilf 'be^ proiM ta^ou, by Witnetoei,* ndt
VOL. XXXIII.
only that he was seen in Grosvenor-square,
but that he was engaged in playing at do-
minos in a public-house at the comer of
Charles-iStreet, which is close to theatre,
with a young man of the name of GiHan.
Upon the following morning, the 23rd, the
day on which the plan's of the conspirators
were to be carried into effect, you will find
that they met at Brunt's house ; and that in
the afternoon, between two and three o'clock,
many of the persons again assembled there for
the purpose of proceeding to another place, to
which I shall now call your attention. It was
thought, by these persons, that, in order! to
carry into effect the plan of assassinating his
majesty's ministers at lord Harrowby's house,
those who were - destined for accomplishing
that part of the plot should be brought toge-
ther at some spot not very remote from Gros-
renor-square ; and it will be proved to you
that on the Tuesday it was resolved that they
should meet near Tyburn turnpike ; and tliat
those who were not intrusted with the whole
of their schemes should have a word given
them, by which they might be able to ascerr
tain, at their arrival there, who were the per-
sons with whom they were to act. It however
so happened, that before the Wednesday, iht
prisoner Harrison procured a stable in an
obscure street, called Cato-street, leading into
John-street, in the Edgware-road, which was
considered by them a very convenient place
for assembling and making their preparations
for the attack at lord Harrowby's house. The
access to Cato-street, at each end, is under an
archway ; so that it has the appearance rather
of a mews than of a street ; at one end it is
accessible only by foot passengers, at the other
end there is an entrance for carriages. This
stable was prepared for their meeting on that
evening ; Harrison and others were seen car-
rying things into it in the course of the after-
noon of the 23rd, and some cloth or sacking
was nailed up against the windows of the
building on the side looking into Cato-street,
for the obvious purpose of preventing the
persons opposite from observing what was
passing witnin.
On the afternoon of that day, Thistlewoocf,
Ings, Bradbum, Hall, and others of the party
met at Brunt's room, and you will find that
they were seen putting flints into their pistols,
accoutring themselves, and arming themselves
with blunderi)nsses, j>bto]s and swords, with
which they were to proceed to Cato-street,
and afterwards to lord Harrowby's.
It was thought by Thistlewood that it would
be proper to prepare some sort of address to
the people, which should be exhibited that
night in different parts of the town, for the
pur|i6se of exciting disaffection, and of in«
ducing {>ers6ns to join their party ; and he sat
ddWtf, and wrote a proclamation, in the pre-
paration of which, circumstances occurred
most material for your consideration. It .will
appear to yoii, • that there being in th^ room
no i^p^ updii '^hitbTUiitlewood could write
^ 4G
1187] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial i^JJm ThmoM Bruni
[1188
the proclamatioDy and itbaTing been rnggeited
that cartridge paper would best answer the
purpose, BruDt, the prisoner at the bar, sent
ois apprentice, Hale, to purchase some. Hale
went out, and bought six sheets, which were
afterwards carried into the room. Upon that
paper Tliistlewood wrote the proclamation,
which it was intended should be stuck up near
the places to which they intended to set fire
on that night, so that by the light it might be
made Tisible to the persons collected in the
street. The address was to this effect : '* Your
tyrants are destroyed ; the friends of liberty
are called on to come forward, as the provi-
sional government is now sitting. J. Ings,
secretary. February 23rd, 1820." Three of
these proclamations were prepared by This-
tlewood, for the purpose ot being used in the
manner I have stated to you.
After this was done, and after they had pro-
Tided themselves with arms, they proceeded to
the stable in Cato-street.
It is proper that I should in this part of the
narrative inform you, that upon the preceding
day, intimation was given to lord Harrow by,
of the plan which these persons had in con-
.templation, by a man of the name of Hiden,
a cow-keeper, living in ' Manchester-mews,
Manchester-street, and who was known to one
of the conspirators, the prisoner WiUon. As
the night of the execution of their plan ap-
proached, they became more and more anxious
to procure all the assistance they could ; they
endeavoured to enlist associates iroro amongst
those with whom they were acquainted, and to
whom therefore they had the less difficulty in
divulging generally the schemes they had in
.agitation. Hiden was, as I have observed,
known to Wilson, and it will appear to you,
that two or three days before the Wednesday,
Wilson bad imparted to him the outline of the
conspiracy, the taking the cannon and the
assassination of his majesty's ministers, hoping
and expecting that Hiden would join them.
Hiden, when he came to reflect on the com-
munication made to him, immediately felt the
necessity of making the matter known to thode
more particularly interested in the event, and
lie wrote a letter to lord Castlereagh, and
'communicated to him the intended proceed-
ings, which had been imparted to him by Wil-
son. He was unable to see lord Castlereagh
personally, and he was fearful of being ob-
served to go into lord Castlereagh's house lest
it should be known to these persons that he
was making a communication; he therefore
took an opportunity of watching lord Harrow-
by, when nding in the park on Tuesday, and
be delivered to him a letter addressed to lord
Castlereagh, requesting his immediate attention
to it, stating that it was of the utmost import-
ance ; by these and other means the plot
iDecarae known to lord Harrowby, and to the
f^overnment of the country. On the follow-
^g day, Hiden saw Wilson again in the strict,
and Wilson then told him that they bad fixed
|o meet that tvenuigiiiCaU^tr«#C; be
ed Hiden to join them, detailed to kiii bor
fully the objects they had in view, andisqaoirf
be would not fail to attend between fix ud
seven o'clock.
In consequence of their plan bang dm
known to my lord Harrowby and tbe pnO'
ment, means were taken to preveot its vx»
tion, by the apprehension ot these penou ia
Cato-street, on the evening of the Mii
Between seven and eight o'clock there vet
assembled in Cato-street, Brunt the wMf
at the bar, Tbistlewood, Ingi, auoM,
Davidson, and others to the number of ibirt
four or five and twenty. I should here Hale
to you, that the prisoner (who like tbeiot f
his associates was anxious to iocreise tbtf
numbers, and to procure the assistance of «
many persons as possible) bad, oDthepRnd-
ing day, the Tuesday, applied to tmanofw
name of Monument, a shoemaker, to whoaK
had been introduced two or three weeks bewe,
by Tbistlewood ; he told him he should wirt
his aid on the following day, he imputed tt
him the watch-word by ^*>^ch**»*y^*'*!J?*!
themselves known to each other at Tyw
turnpike, the place of meeting at CatMBj
not having at that tmie been fixed upos. Cn
the 23rd after they had procured *«.*^
Brunt again saw Monument, and told hiaiw
he was to accompany Tidd ; that he wis top
to Tidd's house, in Hole-in-the-wall pawp^
who would take him to the place o^ "^"^
on that evening. You will have it pwiw »
you. that Monument did aocordinglj m*
Tidd's, and that he walked wiihTidd tod^
street, and that be found Brunt tbeie oa w
arrival. , l • «k»i
At Cato-street, the execution of '"[V PTJ
was brought under consideration. Twy ^
there collected a quantity of anas and ijmm
of those destructive instruments, grenw "J
use of which 1 will now state to y<»- ",2
intended that Tbistlewood should ki«» •l^
Hanowby's door, under pretence of haw*
note to convey to his lordship, and »<*^'t
the hall being thus obtained, o^^VvT
party were to follow him, secure the seW
enter into the room in which the cjwj
ministers were sitting, and there ^J**" 1^
murderous plan which they intended to »wj
For that purpose they had P^f"^^
grenades, which are balls of considettW "^
in the centre of which is a quanu^r « JT
powder, about three ounces, inclosed tRt^
case ; round the case are placed FJ^^j^J
some of those grenades which have been (^JJ
contained long nails, of that descnpUWJ ^^
is used to fix the tiresof cart-wheeUlo »«rr
work to which they are attached. -^"^^J
or ten of these nails are iiastened >^°rV'yn
they can be round die tin-case '^'Jpj,
gunpowder, with tow dipped in a ^^^JJ
of pitch tar and resin. From '^ ?JJ*^ ^
a mse communicated with the -- _^ ^
ball, which, bein^ lighted, "^^^^^^ d
almoit instanuneous cxploeioo» H^ ?^
iioa wouU b« dispeoed aiDund » »»
11891
J^ Hi§^ Treat<m.
A. D. 18M.
(1190
tioMy and the oomeqneiicef would be, that
aojr penon who should unhappily be struck by
then would be deprived of existence, or be len
wounded, roaimed» and lacerated. Betweea.
•even and eight o'clock they began to prepare
Ihemselves for the execution of their desiens ;
and doubts being entertained by some of the
party, whether their number was quite adequate
to all the objects they had in view, 1 histle*
wood, in order to allay their apprehensions,
stated that they had men enough there for the
accomplishment of the assassination in Gros-
▼enor*square, and that there were other parties
in difierent parts of the town for the accomplish-
aient of the duties assigned to them. This
Statement of Thistlewood was founded in fact,
fer it will appear that after the party had taken
their departure from Brunt's house, other
persons were expected to call there ; amongst
them was a man named Potter, one who was
deep in their schemes, and was the intended
iMMler of a band upon that night. From Brunt's,
these persons were to be directed to proceed
to the White Hart, from whence they were to
move in divisions to the execution of the
▼arious tasks they had to perform. Palin was
to be at the head of the fire party, and Cook
was to command the detachment that was to
take the cannon in Gray's-inn-lane and the
Artillery-ground.
After tins had been stated by Thistlewood,
he proposed that a selection should be made of
fourteen to enter the room at lord Harrowby's,
to destroy his majesty's ministers. Among
those who were to go into that room,
were Harrison, who had been forroeriy in the
Liie-euards ; Adams, who had some years ago
served in the Oxford-blues ; Ings, the butcher,
who had prepared himself for the bloody scene
in which he was to be an actor, in a most
vemarkable way, the prisoner Brunt, and
Thistlewood. At the moment when they were
separating themselves, the officers entered the
stable below, and discovered Davidson, one of
the persons included in this indictment, a man
of colour ; he was armed with two pistols in a
belt, a blunderbuss in his hand, and a cutlass
«t his side, and wks standing as sentry, at the
f»ot of the step ladder which led from the
stable to the loft above; Ings was also sta^
tioned in the stable ; he had a black belt round
his body, in which were inserted a brace of
pistols, and also a remarkable instrument,
which will be exhibited to you, a large
butcher's knife ; he bad stated upon the pre-
ceding day, and also upon the evening of their
Diecting in Cato-street, that with that knife he
himself intended to enter the room in which
the ministers were sitting, and that he h^d
provided himself with it for the purpose of
PButilattng the bodies of loid Castlereagh and
lord Sid mouth ; he had also fomished himself
with two> bags or haversacks, which he had
Gsstened over each shoulder ; in these he in-
tended to carry off the heads of those two dis-
tiDgiiiahed persons, in order that they midit be
ghibitad on pikes in the street, to ismriste
the people and to excite them to insurrection.
The leading officer directed his followers to lay
hold of those two persons, in order to secure
them; but the officers being anxious to get
into the loft, Davidson and Ings were not
taken into custody at the moment, although
the knife was taken from Ings. The first of
the police who went up was Ruthven ; and it
will appear, that while he was ascending the
ladder, either Ings or Davidson gave an alarm
from below to their associates above. On
Ruthven's gaining the loft, the first object that
struck his notice was Thistlewood, whose per-
son was well known to him, Ruthven having
been acquainted with it for some years. *
Thistlewood, on seeing Ruthven, seized a
sword which was on a carpenter's bench before
him, and on which other arms were ranged,
and retired into a small room adjoining, fenc-
ing with his sword, in order to keep off Ruth*
ven and his supporters, who were advancing,
and who announced to the persons assembled
that they were officers of justice, and that they
were come to apprehend them. Ellis was im»
mediately behind Ruthven, and he was follow-
ed by an unfortunate man named Smithers.— -
Smithers, observing Thistlewood in thisattitude
in the small room, passed his companions, and
advanced to apprehend him. On his approach-
ing, Thistlewood came forward and thrust tlie
sword into his heart; the lights were extin-
guished ; a cry was raised of* Kill the thieves,
throw them down stairs I" a rush was made to
the ladder ; the officers were precipitated into
the stable ; Thistlewood followed close behind
them, discharged a pistol, as he descended, at
another of the officers, then made his way
through the stable and escaped. Several or
the persons succeeded in eluding the visilance
of the officers on that night, others of them
were apprehended ; amongst them Davidson,
after a very desperate resistance on his part ;
and I only call vour attention to him now, in
order to state his conduct and expressions
when he was taken into custody— conduct and
expressions evincing most clearly, if there
could be the least doubt upon the mind of any
man, what was the object of this conspiracy.
On his being apprehended, he immediatelv
exclaimed, ''who would not die in liberty^
cause?" ^at *' he cared not for his life, that '
the cause in which they were embarked was
that of freedom, and who would not perish in
that caused These expressions must con-
vince yon that the object was to overturn the
government, and that the assassination of his
majesty's ministers was only the first step to
the accomplishment of that object.
The prisoner Brunt made his escape; he
retumea home about nine o'clock, or a little
after, and Hale, his apprentice, happened to be
in the house on his arrival ; he came back with
his coat and boots extremely dirty ; he told
his vrife (and this is a part of the case which
it is most material for you to attend to) that it
was all over, that they had been attacked by
the officers^ and he had escaped only with bis
1191] 1 GSOBGE IV.
7na/ e^JMii THdtm Bnmt
[Btt
life. Pfesendy after another Inan bame id,
who, it should seem, had been one of the party
in Cato-st^et, and had «effecled his escape,
but bad received in the contest some consider- khat it will be argued before you, that the pin
able blows and wounds ; he stated, that he had
been knocked down and hurt ; they both ap*
peared to be glad to find themselves again
in the society of each other ; and the prisoner
Brunt stated, that though they had been thus dis-
persed in Cato-street, << all was not yet over,"
alluding, undoubtedly, to the different bodies
colTected in other parts of the town. And he
said to the other man, ** come along ;" and they
to you on his behalf by UscouMiil, vlMiitk
period arrives at which they will have to li-
dress themseWes to this case. I sstiopM*
which this person had conceived vas wild toi
▼isimiary, was impracticable, and that ttoefim
yon are to pay no attention vrbatever to the
evidence which shall be given lo yon to pcoK
iu existence. Let me caution yoo as to the
application of that observation to the pmol
case: whether the plan was pnictieableotMt;
whether they had overrated their force ud
their means of accomplishiDg it or not, ii art
went then out together; he was absent from a matter for 3roar inquiiy. The ODlj<)QBtioi
that time till near eleven o'clock, when he
returned again to his house. Before he retired
to rest, he directed Hale to get up on the fol-
lowing morning to clean his boots; and he
himself at an early hour avrakened him, and
then asked him, whether he knew a place
5;alled Snow's-fields, in the Borough. The lad
replied, " he did not :** the prisoner told him
where it was, and then went into the back
room (that room which had been hired under
is, does the evidence vrhich vriU be addacedis
you, satisfy you, that the scheme I have detuicd
was harboured in the mind of the pmoBcr it
the bar ; if it were, and he acted in Mm-
ance and execution of it in the maaner lime
stated, however wild, however vuBonaiT, hot-
ever impracticable it may have been, the geih
which is imputed by the present indietaoit
will be established and fixed open him.
But even in our own experience, other phM
the false pretence of being a lodging for Ings, of a similar nature, equally wild,havebeencflB-
• ■ . . - c^iJfed and formed; without advertisgtoi^
particular case, you will recollect, that, !■«•»•
mating the practicability of this plan, 700 m
not to reason upon it in the ttSnaer in vfaNS
you or myself would judge of it «***y *^*J
closets, but you are to remember Aat wt
men had long entertained this pn!H<^'_3
they had brooded over it till they owrWf
all the difficulties which intervened betvecaiti
conception and its execution ; that they insi*'
ed a blow once struck by then, voold exa»
the disaffection which they vainly \W9^
prevailed in this laige metropolis aflMOfi
great number of its inhabitants; ^^^
should be joined by an overwhelsisg wc^
and that vrith that force they shonld beaUett
overturn the existing government, le*""f!:
the book of chance what odier institutioB inp
be substituted for it. The evidence wfll s^
you what were their preparations, prepw^**
wholly inconsistent with the idea that the «j
sassination of his migesty's n*''**^*"!^^!!
only crime they meditated. You will nw w^
at Tidd*s house was seised 00 the days^
their meeUng in Cato-street, no lessaqow
than twelve hundred rounds of baD-caitndfti
they bad prtNmred, as I have stated, »g^
number of grenades ; they bad cartndg«J
the purpose of loading cannon; *'*^» ."J.^
tion to these things, thqr were pro^r ^
fire-balls, intended to be used in borpinP'
different buildinffs wbidi had been fixed t^
and amongst o&ers the barrscks n^Jy
man-square, well known to Hsrrisoo, w
been quartered there. These pi«pa»^<*' "J:
this ammunition shew pkinly, that the «o^
they meditated was not to teminate is w;
sassination of his majesty's ainisters, w"*"^
these coQspiratoia bad ulterior o^^J^^^^
temptation, and that they were bent^y""^,
orertlinyw and destructiott of the 99^^^^
But let us for aooaent «Mider i»»r
but in wlucb, as I have stated, the meetings of
the conspirators were held, and their prepar-
ations were made) and from the cupboard in
that room, he took out several hand-grenades
and some fire-balls; these he pack^ up in
two baskets, covering one of the baskets vrith an
apron belonging to his wife, and which had been
used as a window curtain to that room, telling
the apprentice, he was to take them and their
intents, toa manofthenameof Potter,inSnovr's«
fields. Ue had just finished, when Taunton, the
officer, arrived at the house to apprehend him.
Taunton found the prisoner in his own room,
and you will hear the conversation he had with
him. Brunt affected not to know who it was
that had taken the back room ; said, that he had
nothing whatever to do with it ; pretended to
be wholly ignorant of the two baskets which he
had just been preparing, and denied any know-
ledge whatever of any thing in that room.
An iron pot was standing there belonging to
the prisoner, in which they had prepared their
pitch and resin, and other combustibles; of
this also he said he knew nothing, and persist-
ed in his denial of being acquainted vrith the
contents of the baskets, although he had imme-
diately before been engaged in the act of pack-
ing them, for the purpose of being sent off.
Upon this he was apprehended, and he now
stands here for trial before you.
Thistlewood also made his escape on the
night of the 23rd ; he did not return to his
own home, .but fled for concealment to the
house of one Harris, in a street near Moor-
fields; and on the morning of the 34th, at
about ten o'clock, was apprehended there in
bed, with some of his clotnes on.
I believe I have now detailed, as briefly and
as clearly as I have been able, the main facts
which will be adduced in* evidence against the
prisoner at the bar. I oan anticipate, perhaps,
some of the observations which sriU oe made
tisal
Jor Higk Trmm*
A. 0. 18fa
[1194
df the iclwoie to which yom attention will be
my much directed in the coune of thi» in-
quiry, I mean the amassination of his majes-
ty's ministers. With what view could these
conspirators meditate their destruction ? Were
they persons against whom, individually, these
men nad conceiyed revenge P Was it against
lord LiT^rpool, was it against the duke of
Wellington, was it against the lord chancellor,
penoiuUfy, that their hostility was directed?
Who were the parties to make the attack?
Were these twenty or five-and-twenty persons
united by any common bond of interest? I
ask you, as men of sense and understanding,
whether you can doubt that that part of their
plan was more than a prdiminary step 7 that
their swords were not to be raised against his
majesty's n^nisters, as individuals merely, but
as distinguished personages filling the highest
offices in the state, and possessing the confi-
dence of their sovereign. In^that character
alone, had the illustrious guests of lord Har-
rowby become the intended victims of the in-
stigators and supporters of this horrible plot.
This assassination was to have been ^e first act
of the tragedy ; the overthrow of the govern-
ment was to have been last.
It will perhaps be said that in a case like
the present, the testimony ought to be such as
to leave no doubt on your minds of the truth
of the story which is narrated — that it should
come from unpolluted sources, from witnesses
untainted by crime. Undoubtedly, in all cases
anbmitted to the consideration of a jury, it is
their duty to be satisfied that the evidence is
clear and conclusive before they pronounce a
verdict against the prisoner. But the secret
machinations and designs of conspirators,
planning and acting in a scheme like the pre-
sent, can only be developed to their fnll extent
hf the evidence of some of those who have
been participators in their guilt. An accom-
plice in these cases is, generally speaking, the
only witness that can be produced fully to
discover and make known to the court the
plans and machinations of his associates. That
the testimony of such a person ought to be
watched with the utmost anxiety and jealousy
I most readily admit ; and unless it receives
confifmation from uncontaminated sources, a
jury is never advised to come to a conclusion
npmvourable to the accused. ITpon his evi-
dence alone, in this case, however, I think you
^ill agree, when you have heard the story
which the accomplice Adams will tell, and
the confirmation which will be given to you of
thai story— confirmation of the strongest and
most impregnable kind, not as to one or tivo
particular circumstances onlv, but I might say
as to almost ail the leadin|^ facts which he will
idate ; I say, I think you will be satisfied that
lie is the witness of truth. To produce con-
firmation of every part of his testimony would
he impossible, and if it were possible, it would
render the evidence of the accomplice alto-
gethei^ unnecessary, because the account he is
to give might then be proved by wHoesses
liable to no objection* The confirmation which
you ought to require in' this instance should
be such as to convince you that the general
tenor of the narrative of Adamtf is true. Such
confirmation you will receive from witnesses
upon whom there is not the shadow of an im-
putation—witnesses upon whose veracity you
may^ith confidence rely.
But the case will not rest upon the testi*
mony of «n accomplice, though fully confirmed.
A witness will be called before you, who -was
not an aocompliOe, and who, if his account be
not true, was a man endowed with the spirit
of prophecy ; I mean Hiden; because he, be-
fore Uie Iransacdon took place, communicated
it to lord Harrowby, at a time when he had
no interest whatever operating upoii his mind
to induce him to make the disclosure, except
a desire of averting that evil which he saw im-
pending over the person of that nobleman and
his colleagues in office. Against Hiden no
charge could have been or can be preferred,
because, although in words he appeared to as-
sent to the scheme of the conspirators, he never
acted in a single part of the plot. If you re^
ceive from this person not only an account of
the scheme, but one completely confirmatory
of the testimony of die accomplice, it appear^
to me that it is no longer possible for you to
hesitate on the conclusion to which you are to
arrive. I do not advert to the testimony of
Monument, because the observations which
apply to Adams apply equally to him. I
ought, however, to remark, that although
Monument was undoubtedly found in Cato^
street, and had agreed to meet Brunt and Tidd
there that evening, he does not appear to have
been fully informed of the extent of the scheme
till bis actual arrival in the ^apm, and does
not seem therefore to be so deeply implicated
in the transaction as Adams.
Such being the case, it will be your duty,
after you have heard the evidence, calmly an^
deliberately to weigh the effect of it. If, ailer
the observations which I have made to you,
you shall think that the proof adduced does
not fully satisfy your minds of the guilt of th^
prisoner at the bar, and you shall entertain
a reasonable doubt respecting it Tbut it must
be a rational and a well-founded doub\), giv^
the prisoner at the bar the benefit of it ; but
if on the contrary, however wild in your esti-
mation, and however impracticable the scheme
may have been, still, if upon considering the
whole of the evidence, you shall be convinced
that it was formed, and was on the eve of exe-
cution, then, gentlemen, it is a duty you owq
to yourselves and to your country to act upofl
that conviction, and, without hesitation, with-
out regard to the consequences to follow from
your decision, to pronounce a verdict of guilty.
Lord Chkf Baroigk--Bring into court the
other prisoners named in the indictment who
have not been tried.
[William Davidson, Richard Tidd, James
William Wilson/ John Harrison,
l^ieS] I GEORGE IV.
Trial qfJAn Tk9mai Bnad
[1196
Kichud Bradburn, John Shaw Stnttge,
Junes Gilchrist and Charles Cooper
were placed at the bar behind the pri-
soner on trial.]
EVIDEMCB FOR THE PBOSECUTIOir.
IMert Adams sworn •—Examined by
Mr. SoUcitor General.
I believe yoa are a prisoner in costody?— *
Yes,
Where did you live before you were appre-
hended?— No. 4, Uole-in*the wall panage,
firookVniarket.
What are you b^ trade ? — ^A shoe-naker.
Were you ever in the army ? — Yes.
In what regiment ? — The royal regiment of
Hoft^guards.
How long is that ago ?— ^Eighteen years.
Do you know the prisoner John Thomas
Bmnt ? — Yes, I do.
Where did you first become acquainted with
him ? — At Cambray in France.
How long since r— lu 1816.
By what name did he then go f — ^Thomas
Morton.
Was the British army aft that time stationed
at Cambray ? — ^Yes, the head quarters were aft
Cambray.
What were you doins there f — ^Following
the occupation of my trade.
With the army ?— Yes.
Do you remember calling on Brunt eariy in
the present year ? — Yes.
Where? — ^At his lodgings in Fox-court,
leadin|[ into GrayVion-lane.
H€ is a shoe-maker, I beliere ? — ^A boot-
doser.
Did the prisoner at the bar introduce you
to Tbistlewood T-Ile did.
Do you recollect about what time T^On the
13th of January, a Wednesday.
Where was that P— By Clare-market ; Stan-
hope-street I think it was,
At Thistlewood's lodgings ?— Yes.
Did Brunt go alone with you, or was there
any other person ? — Inss was with us.
fell us what passed upon that occasion ?
—On entering the room of Mr. Thistlewood,
Brunt said to Thistlewood, '' here is the man
I was speaking to you about.** Tbistlewood
said, ** You belonged to the life-guards for-
merly, did not you ^' I told him I did not, I
belonged to the Oxford blues, that was the
name I expressed. '^No doubt you are a
good soldier," he said ; I told him " once I
was ;" ^ and can use a sword well Y* I told
him I could use a sword sufficiently to defend
myself, but I was out of practice ; I conld not
•ay I could use a sword so well as I formerly
could, for I had not used a sword or any arms
for a considerable time. On this Mr. Tbis-
tlewood turned his discourse on the different
•hopkeepers in London, saying they were a
•et of aristocrats altogether, and were working
under one system of government, and he
should glory to see the day when the shop-
keepers should have their shops skat op isd
well plundered ; he next turned his diieoiine
upon Mr. Hoot, saying that Mr. Hunt im t
man that was no friend to the people, ud U
had no doubt could he enter Whitehall, iid
overiook the government books, he shosld find
his name there as a spy to the gOTemment;
he next alluded to Mr. Cobbett, stying tint
he, with all his writings, was a nsn that mi
no firiend to the people, and he had no dosbt
he was the same as Mr. Hunt, a spy. Bnat
here told him he had a couple of other nco to
call upon towards Camaby-maiket, sod ukid
Mr. Thistlewood whether he would walk vilk
him to see the men.
Did he go ? — No ; there was a word ortvo
dropped - from Mr. Brunt to Thiitlewood
respecting the attending of a raffle.
Has that any thing to do with this?— Thii
raffle was to raffle for a blunderbuss with i
brass barrel ; I do not recollect that Mr. Thii*
tie wood said he should go, but we left the roon.
You, and Brunt, and Ings ?~Yes.
And left Tbistlewood there ?— -Yes.
I believe sometime after this, yoa were id
prison for debt in the Whitecroas-strcetpriMo?
— I was.
When did you come out of prison?— Tbe
day after the death of our late king.
The 30th of January ?— Yes.
After you came out of prison, did yoa sn
the prisoner at the bar .^•— I saw him os liie
Monday.
What day of the we^ was the 90lh <)f
January, when yon came out of prison ?— Hm
Sunday.
Where did you see him ?— The first of ny
seeing him was at Hobbs*s, the White Hart
Did you afterwards see him at anyroou?
-—I saw him in the evening at a room takes
on the same floor, the hade room, where be
lived.
Did you collect from the prisoner who hid
taken that room f — ^I heard him say hiaisel^
that be had taken the room for logs.
Did you attend any meetings al that room.
— Several.
Up to what time did you attend these
meetings ? — Up to the 23rd of Febraarjf
From the time you came oat of pnsont—
Yes.
How often were the meetings held ?— lo^
were held twice a-day . .
Who were the persons that usually stteoded I
—The persons that usually attended were
Tbistlewood, Brunt, Ings, Hall, Hairisoo.
Harrison had been in the Iife-gosrdS| i
believe? — Yes: Davidson.
Davidson is a man of colour, I beheve .^
Yes : Wilson.
James Wilson P— I did not know his dir*
tian name, I only knew his perMo sndbii
name : Edwards, Tidd.
Where did Tidd live?-In the next hosn
adjoining that in which I hved. „
Where is that place r—Hole^o-tbe-mU
Passage. '
1197]
fir Hi^ TrmuoH.
A. D. 1820.
CllOS
He is a shoe-makerf — ^Yes.
Do yoQ know a man of the name of Palin ?
—Yes ; Palin was not so regular ; be attended
from the Sunday.
From what Sunday ? — Sunday the 20th of
February ; that was the first time I saw him
there.
Had you seen Potter there?— Yes, I had
seen him before that ; but I cannot charge my
memory with the time.
What was Hall ? — A tailor by trade.
' After you came out of prison, which was on
the 30th of January, will you tell us what
passed at those meetings ? — ^1 called up on the
evening of the Monday, and there I found
aeveral of them ; I cannot charge my memory
that any thing particular passed that night.
• Direct your attention to some meeting where
you remember what passed? — On the Wed-
nesday-night following I attended there.
Was Thistlewood there then f — ^Yes.
• Brunt?— Yes.
Daridson ? — ^Yes.
• Harrison ? — ^Yes.
Edwaids?— Yes.
What did you see in the room at that time ?
— I saw a number of pike-stares.
Was there any furniture in the room ? — ^At
the time we were there, there were some chairs
brought in.
Was there any furoiture belonging to the
room ?-*No, only the store that was fixed.
When you used the room, where did you
get chairs ?— They were brought from Brunt*s
room, the adjoining room.
• What sort of things were those pike>8taves
you hare mentioned ? — ^They were rough, just
as if they had just come from the country,
quite green.
What passed as to these pike-staves ? — I saw
Bradbom cut the ends of the stares ofi^, and
knock the ferrules on.
lord Chief Baron, — You did not mention
Bradbum as being there ? — He was there.
Mr. Btuwi Garraw, — Do you mean the end
of one, or the ends of more of them f — One
end of each pike staff; after they were all
knocked on this first dozen, it was considered,
in consequence of the ferrule being too small,
that in boring the hole and cutting the stick
down to it, the end of the pike staff would not
be strong enough to support it : that is all I
can speak to respecting that time.
Mr. Solkitor Genera/.— >Was any thing done
afterwards to alter them ?— Yes ; they were
cut off tigain, and some ferrules put in.
By Bradburn ? — Bradburn baiid instructions
to get the ferrules, but he did not get them^
and afterwards Brunt bought the ferrules
larger and deeper.
Do you know whether Bradbom is a car-
f^ttter ?— -I suspected he was a carpenter, but
was not certain.
Were ^hose new ferrules pat on in the room
At that place ?— They were.
Ltfrd Chief Baron. — ^Were the new ferrules
brought in that evening ?— No ; Brunt brought
those ferrules in the course of the day, and put
them on.
Mr. Solicitor OenenU, — Do you mean the
same day ?— No ; I saw them afterwards.
Do you remember being there a short time
before the funeral of the king ? — ^Yes.
Whom did you find there at that time ?— I
found Thistlewood, Harrison, Davidson, and
Wilson.
Tell us what passed at that meeting? — At
this meeting Harrison told Thistlewood that
he had seen one of the Life-guards, and he
had learnt from him that erery Life-guards*
man that could be mounted, was to attend the
funeral of the late king, as well as all the foot*
guards that could be spared from London
would be thero, and the police oflBcers that
could be spared from London, were to be there
at the same time.
Harrison, who made this communication,
I think yon say had been in the Life-guards f
—Yes.
Do you know how long he had left the Life«
guards T — I cannot say ; I have heard him say
he had been in the Life-guards.
Having made this communication, as coming
from the Life-guardsman, what did he say
further ? — He said that after he had left the
Life 'guardsman, it occurred to his mind, that
this might be a farourable opportunity u>
collect what men they had amongst themselres
together on that night, with an intention to
kick up a riot in London, as be thought all
the officers, soldiers and what not, would be
out of London, that there would be nobody
left in London that could protect it scarcely ;
on his coming into the room, seeing Thistle-
wood, he communicated his thoughts to Mr.
Thistlewood.
He said that had passed in his mind, in
consequence of the communication of the
Life-guardsman ? — Yes.
And on Thistlewood coming into the room,
he communicated those ideas to Thistlewood ?
—Yes, he did, it meeting with Thistiewood's
ideas: Tbistlewood inmoediately improves
upon the plan how it should be done ; he pro-
posed that the two pieces of cannon in Gray's-
inn-lane should be taken, and the six pieces
of cannon at the Artillery-ground were to be
taken on the same night ; after this was done,
they thought it highly necessary to send a
party up to Hyde-park comer, in order to pre-
veut any orderly being sent from London to
Windsor, to communicate what was going on
in London ; at the same time he proposed
that the telegraph orer the water should
be taken, in order to prevent this telegraph
communicating any intelligence to WooLwiob.
of what was goin^ oe in London ; he thought
at the same time it would be necessary to cut
trenches across Uie road, in order to pre-
rent any caimen from Woolwidi entering
London.
IfMJ 1 OBORGB IV.
TrioL^
u Tk^ktatBmni
tt9M
Who said thatf ^Thistlewood.
TiM wMe of wfaat y<m have now been
fltetiDg, WIS said b j Thiattewood ?— Yes ; on
doing thiSy he thought the soldiers, being so
faf distant from London, in coming up from
Whidsor, they would not be able to oome up
to London time enough to fender the country
MBistance, that they woidd be so knocked op
and fatigued that they would not be able to
do any Uiiag. Here Mr. Thistlewoody for the
flat time that I can Tooch for, said that there
must be an offer made to the soldiers, in order
CV bring the soldiers over to them, and if they
ftmnd that the soldiers were determined
to act against them (Harrison was the man
that proposed the hand-grenades, that were
made for the destructioB of human creatures),
they were to enter the houses in the streets,
and fling those hand-grenades in among the
Midiers in the streets to destroy them as haft
as possible.
Was any thing said about the ports?— It
was proposed 1^ ndstlewood, that there
should be men sent to the different sea-ports,
such as Dover, Brighton, Margate, and those
diflhrent places, wi3i an express order, that,
if awy persons were suffcrod to leave the
country without an order from the provisional
govemmenr, their towns were to be blown
down over their heads; he mentioned par-
ticularly that they ought as soon as they could
gollect force enough, which he had no doubt
they should, to send a rery strong force down
to Brighton, in case the new king should be
tivere after tho riot was kicked up, which he
did not suppose he would in' consequence of
hit indisposition; they were to plunder
Brighton, and as for his being crowned as king,
Thistlevrood said that was all nonsense, for
that we did not intend tbtt should ever be;
this finishes the subject, I believe.
After that conversation had taken place, did
the prisoner at the bar, and any c4her person,
come into the room T>— Yes.
Who ? — Ings and Bnint came into the
room.
Was the subject of the prenoos couvertation
oommunicated to then?— It was communica-
ted to them both by Thistlewood.
Can yon tell us what Brtnit said? — Brunt
and Ings expressed thenseives both together,
that there would be noUiing short of the
assassination of the ministers should satisfy
them.
• Had Bnmt at any lime before that, told you
any thing about any phm to assaninaier hisr
mtjesty's ministers?— <hi the Snd of' JsMutry;
W«s tet before he had intredocM you t<^
Thistlewood ?-^It was:
At the meeting to wliioh you spoke when
I first uked yon* the question ?'^Drhivo%m
rooin«i
Whete yoo celled upon hhtt^^Yet.'-
Wa9 it at thtt meeting f—>^Thef6' was ho
neetifl^ Ibto.-
UQi«iii< yowand^h^ met ipoa that oocftsikm,
did he communicate that plan to yowK^-liv
communicated this plan to me on the 2b8 of
Jaduaity in the street, as we wen wattdng
afong.
Then upon this occasion to vthich yds bsrt
now been speaking, he said that sotioBg
would satisfy him except the attssiinatioerf
his majesty's ministers? — ^Yes.
Mr. Baron Garraw. — You do not ask bin
as to the particulars of that conversation.
Mr. Solicitor GeiKre/. r— No, my lord, sst
the details of it. Did any thing foitkerpM
at that meeting after he and logs had said tial
nothing would satisfy them but the a9saHiBa>
tion of his majesty's ministers ?--This was titt
night when Ings expressed himaelf is the
room, that he had been to the Park, with the
sole intention to shoot the Prince Re^t^ »
he was at the time.
Did he produce any thing ? — He pndoccd
a pistol from his pocket, and said that vis the
£istol that he had taken; he puUedthe pistol fran
is left pocket, held it out in that my, vA
said ** Damn my mortal eyes, but that ii the
pistol that I took ;" that was the veiy eqif»-
sion.
Upon what occasion was it he said he vest
into the Park to shoot the Prince Regeot?-
It was the time that the Prince Rei^t «<X
to open the Parliament.
When Bmnt had originiaiy conniittBicit«>
to yon this intention to assassinate his oa*
^'s ministers, did he say when that was t»
one ?— It was to be done the ii»| one
the ministers assembled together for adioMr-
What diunerP—What they caU a cabaet
dinner. ^
Do you remember a meeting dot took
flace on Saturday the 19th of Febisaiy!-
'erfectly welL
Who was present at that meeting W«J
Thistlewood, Brun^ Harrison and VlTihon; ai*
Ings was there.
What pashed at that meeting? irss that m
the forenoon or erening?— It was hetwte"
eleven and twelve o'docl^
Was Davidson there at that time?— !»•:
not positively say. ^
Tell us what passed at that meeting ?--0»
my going into the room, they sat with th«f
heads together, as if they were in a cowu^
ation about somethipg ; I P^tty soon wm
out what. »
What was it?— They got up all on the «»•
den, Thistlewood said, « Well, it is agreed ,; tf
nothing- tianspire between this and WedoeH
day«4iight, we intend to go to woric, "[TJJJ
all so poor we caimot wait any longer*'' ^fjl
aewood proposed direcdy, that tbait diW
be acomnrittee sit at ainfe o'dook toJOit^
motBiftg, ift Older to dmsr up a ptatf ^ ^
upon.
oideis
Was ihat'ag^M to?--Yer; he V^^
to Brmtt atthe sasoc titoi'tcteli «h* "^^1
were to come by his instructioias, to ««*^7;
ed; H^ Bmdt exph»Rd bimsrif; ^l>
« it is a parcel ofwaosensir'' ^^ ^^ *^
jaOll Jor Bigh TreoiOfu
«< to think of m otken coming here f if they
were, he woald execute them in the room, or
muvder them : he expressed himself in a dif-
ferent way, language that it is not proper to
use here.
That if they came to the room, they were to
be murdered ? — ^That he would take care they
should be murdered ; and he would take good
care that it should not be found out
Pritoner, — My lord, can the witness look
me in the face, and the jury, and state that?
Wiineu^ — I can, with a good conscience.
Prisoner.— Then you are a bigger villain
than I took you for before.
Lord Chief JBoron.-- You will.be at liberty
to say any thing you choose by and by, but
you should not interrupt the examination.
Mr. Solieitor General, — Look at the jury,
and state whether that is a fact ?
WUneu* — It is the fact, and you know it
yoofself Brunt.
Lord Cfuef Banm, — ^Do not get into any
conversations with the prisoner. ^
Mr. Solicitor General, — If the prisoner de-
tire it, look more towards the jury, so that the
prisoner may see you. After this did they
separate ? — ^Then they separated.
You spoke of some pike-staves, had vou
seen any other arms of any description before
the Saturday?— I had seen a sword $ I had
seen those hand-grenades ; some of them were
then in the room.
One sword, or two ?^)ne sword, and some
hand-grenades which were made in the room ;
and I have seen pistols pulled from their dif-
ferent pockets.
Were those things that you saw from time
to time in the room kept there, or were they
<«arried on to some otner plsuce ?— They were
removed from there to Tidd's lodgings in
Hole-in-the-wall-passage.
What was that place called ?— The d^p6t.
Was .any reason given why they were not
kept there? — The reason given by Mr. Tliis-
4lewood that he wished them to be removed
from that room to the d^p6t was, that they
might be there safe, in case any body should
«ome into the room who did not know any
thing of their intentions, that he should not
Jttve any suspicion what their intentions were.
Did this meeting take place in pursuance
iof the arrangement on the Sunday-morning ?—
Allow me one moment, as Mr. Brunt has de-
nied what I have said. Brunt was the man
who carried the. principal part of those hand-
grenades to Mr. Tidd^s, «>r I followed him
. there myself; I followed him into the room
of Tidd, and saw them lie on the floor; and I
saw Tidd's daughter put them into the box
, voder the window with my own eyes.
Did this meeting take place on the foUow-
. ing morning ? — ^Yes, the Sunday.
^ Who was there ?*-*There was Thistlewood,
VOL. xxjcni.
A. D. 1890.
CISOS
Ings, Hall, Brunt, Harrison, Davidson, Brad-
bum, Edwards, Cook, and there were three
others, that came ailerwards; there were
twelve in all.
Tell us what passed at that meeting?—
Between eleven and twelve o'clock, on the
20th January, Thistlewood looking round the
room, seeing twelve men— •—
Do you mean January or February? — Fe-
bruary ; Thistlewood seeing twelve men, said,
" Well, gentlemen, we may as well proceed to
business ; here is enough to form a committee;^'
Tidd was proposed to take the chair.
Mr. Baron Garrcw, — ^He had not mentioned
Tidd as being present at this meeting P
WUneu.^Ou Tidd taking the chair, with a
pike in his hand— —
Lord Chief Baron, — Was he there when you
went in, or did he come in afterwards ? — He
was there among the first I might, gentle-
men of the jury, possibly, not charge my
memory as to all that might be in the room,
at the different times I was there. Though I
have not mentioned Mr. Tidd being in the
room, he certainly was there, for he was the
first that spoke to me in the room. On order
beinc^ called, Mr. Thistlewood, standing on the
left hand side of Tidd, said, '< Well, gentle-
men, as we are all met here, we have no occa-
sion," turning his head to the door, ** to make
mention of any names '; I suppose you all
know what you are met for, and as we have all
waited so long, with an expectation of the minis-
ters dining together, finding there is no likeli-
hood of their coming together, we have come
to the resolution, that in case nothing occurs
between this and next Wednesday-night, we
intend to take them separately;" be then
begins to state his plan. He proposed then
the west-end job; he called the job that was
intended to assassinate, ** the west-end job."
He proposed after this was done, or at least
at the same time, that the two pieces of can-
non in Gray's-inn-lane should be taken
and the six pieces of cannon at the Artillery*
ground should he taken, and that Mr. Palm
should take the command of another party, in
order to set fire to the different buildings;
Cook was the man that was appointed to take
the lead of taking the six cannon in the ArtiU
lery-ground.
Mr. Solicitor General, — ^To take the com«
mand of the party that was to take them?—
Yes.
Was Cook at that meeting? — He was, I
mentioned him. As to the time, he said we
could not come to the exact time, {or the pre^
sent, but we should have an opportunity he•^
tween that time and the time of its being ta
be executed, to fix the time, but he thought
forty men would be enough for the west-end
job, and more if he could get them, of which
he said he had no doubt, and as to further
proceedings on the plauj^ that would be too a^t
another, time.
4H
laoeJ 1 (3B0iR«E IV.
Trid ^JokK fimmn Brunl
[
That fttfther partievlany u to the extMUaa
of tbe plan shoold be tettM at another time ?
— ^Yes; as Mr, Bnint was eomiog Ibrwavd
vith a motion respecting the assassinatioBy
bow it was to be done. Brunt came forward to
address what were in the room, but was put a
■top to by Thistlewood saying that the motion
be had made ought to be put from the chair ;
that if any person had any thing to say upon it
they should state it ; the motion being put and
agreed to by all in the room, Brunt came for-
ward and stated what he had to say. Brunt
proposed, that as there was no signs of getting
ihem all together, they should \^ taken sepa-
rately, and that it shodd be done in this way,
as many men as could be raised, or rather as
many as they thought they could assassinate,
they were to divide what men they had got
into as many parties as they thought they
eould get men to assassinate; if they had
forty men, they were to divide them into so
many parts.
How many was each party to consist of? —
That was not said ; when these men were so
lotted out, he proposed that a man from each
lot should be drawn out for the purpose to
assassinate whoever they might be appointed
to do; that it should be done regularly by
drawing loU; if that man that was drawn did
not execute hisduty from any signs of cowardice,
he was to be run through on the spot ; upon
this I geU up myself, and told him I wished
to ask him a few words on what he had dropped,
whether it was not possible for a man to make
an attempt in a thing like that and fail, says I,
\* do yon mean to say, that a man so failing,
IS to be run through upon the spot whether or
not?" ^Certainly not, unless there is proof
that the man is a coward." I sat down; this
motion directly after was put from the chair,
and it was agreed to in the same way as the
other ; direcuy after this in came three other
men.
What were their names?— Palin, Potter
and Strange.
Upon these persons coming in, were the
matters that had previously passed commu-
nicated to them ?-— They were communicated
as before to them.
They were commnnicated as they had pan
sed ?— They were.
Did either of those persons make any ob-
servation ?— Palin.
Was that the man that was to head, as you
say, the fire par^ ?— Yes.
What observation did he make ? — ^After Mr.
Pftlin had consented to the plans, he got up
and addressed himself to the chairman on the
•ttbject of what had been dropped, saying,
*'' agieeing as I do with what has been said,
and I ha^ one amongst the rest agreed to it, I
wish to know how these things are to be done,
as there are so many objects you talk of at one
time provided ;*" lie said, they could all be
cvned ; he thought Chat it would be a great
wqoisition to what they had in view ; " this
is what I wish to know^^iie Mys^ ^'-jon talk
of tAiQg forty IMS lev te wtit4Bd job ; jn
talk of taking the two pieees of cunfls ■
GrayWnfrJane, and six atthe AitiUsty-gMoi
and then propose me with my laea ssttjogfia
to the different buildings, but yoa w^ ti
know better than myself what mes yoicu
command. I for my own part cu gin »
satisfoction what men I can bring htmd,
unless I may be intrustsd from this cauiaK
to state to them what has paiued in thisiNa
thi9 morning. If I can have tbat power (p
tell tbe men I may have to call upon what it
is they are going about, ainl when tu^ viij
be wanted^ I should better know how to act"
Upon his sUting this, vbai was said toliial
—Upon his stating this, it was stated bj Mr.
ThuUewood, Brunt, and Tidd, that if It.
Palis had men that he covld ]daoetbatcsi-
Bdenee ia^ Ihey did not sea when tbtboi
would be in making the commanicatioa tt
them ; upon this Mr. Palin sat down nsM,
and nothmg particular occurred to tbe dnv
aftevwmrds to tlia heal of my vecoUectim.
After the chair was left, what thm pMj
—After the chair was lefji, TWsUewood tonrf
himself round on a sudden, and said, ^ Oh.
Bruift, now as Palin is here, you can take li»
to this pUce which is oloM by, sad ietftbi
see whether the plaee is practicabU to dec
not.**
Upon that, did Brant aad PsIib 9»«^^
the room tof«th«r?-«Bnmt and Palio «c||
out of the room together to ejaoae m
place, and see whether it was pnctieable »
Mr. Pidin «o do. .
How long did they remaia aliseatf-Te»
best of my recotleetion, about ten b"^!-
When they oame back what ww*"**
Mr. Palin gave in woid, t«iat the ptece^*
very easy job, and would make a good vt
Was &e plaoemntiooedr-ThisFbctftf
FomivalVinn^teildings. ^^^
Was it mentaoned ?-4t was net «e^
at that tiaae ; I heard Bnmt tcU Hr. Th*^
wood of it before thattwa; it was »«">*
Tidd found out ^e place. ^^^f
That was mentionad at a pMviooio*"'*'
The bnildiaff was going oa at die<MJ|
not finished f — The baA p«t of ihc >^
ing is not finished now, I bslieft*
I believe this i^aee, foMr^wn, is ^ ■*
the back of Funiivai'iHino M^WT ;"Lu{
What tother passed at thattioe?--^
tiiem began to separau, saying, ^7\^
to call upon, and to acqaaiat **«■ '•r^
woQld be wanted; after this, ^»*^
dropped a word to tiiai Aot ^ ^%
think we had better, betwesuthisaDdifte^
of going to wofk, eoBect ^*«* »»f-J
together, in oHIer to give Ihcna a W ;
Uewood said, he did^oot kmm k<^ "'L-
to be done, for Ihey ivere tH to P^^*^,
this, Bnmt was tbe man that toni«*^^
walked from the fire and ^<^ "g^ jhsii
my eyes, I have a pound note, *^v,-. i
d<^o UUleomo wo* lately, Ml^"^
130^1
Jar Hi^ Treoitm.
A« D, 1820.
[isoa
pound note that I bavft reserved to treat my
men, and I will do it.''
What furthet passed ?—ktliere was some
other communlcauoii.
Was any thing said about any communica-
tion to Hobbs?— Yes; Thistlewood was the
man that said, he did not know where we
could take them to. after Brunt expressed
himself that he would spend the pound note ;
he said, ^*I suppose we could have the toom
up stairs at HobVs.*'
That was at the White Hart?— Yes.
Was that the place where some meetings
were held, before thev got the room in Fox-
court ?— The very housci but not the room.
It is not a part of the house, but a back
Toom, in which you used to meet ?— A back
loom in the yard. Brunt said, he did not like
to go there, in consequence of what I had
dropped.
As to the communication that had been
made? — ^Yes; Brunt said, ''never mind, as
time gets so near ; I do not see what we have
to fear, for if any officers come into the room,
-we will take care ot them.''
Did you, shortly after this, separate? —
Shortly after.
This you have mentioned was Sunday P — It
Was there any meeting held on the Mon«
day 1 — ^Yes, there was.
Was there any meeting held on the Tuesday
morning 7— rYes, there was.
What time was the meeting held on Tues-
day morning ? — At about ten o'clock.
Was the prisoner Srunt there ?— -Yes.
Thistlewood ?-*Yes.
Tidd t—Yes.
Ings ? — Yes.
Hall ?— Yes.
Yourself? — ^Yes ; Wilson and Harrison and
Edwards; there were Bradbum, Palin, and
Potter there besides.
After they had mei oh fte Tuesday-morning,
was any communicatipu made as to a dinner? —
Tes ; on Mr. £dWards coming into the room.
Mr. Edwards was the man that communicated
to Thistlewood, there was an account in the
paper of the prime ministers being to meet to
dine together on the Wednesday-njgbt.
Mr. Oumey, — Where was that to be ? — At
lord Harrowby's, Grosvenor-square.
Was any observation made by any one, upon
iImU oommunicaUon with Edwards ? — ^Thistle-
wood made an observation.
What did he say ? — ^He said he had seen a
paper that morning, and he did not see any
SMCOUDt of it ; in order to satisfy the men that
were then in the room, Thistlewood proposed
that the paper should be fetched.
Did Edwards say how he came to know it ?
^-Seeing it in the paper.
That was tlie communication he made, that
he had seen it in the paper ?->-Yes.
Was the paper sent for and brought? — It
was ; Hall was the inao that fetched the paper.
What paper was it F— The New Times.
tJpon the paper beintf brought, fiow did it
turn out f — Exactly as Mr. Edwards had said.
Upon that, what passed ?— On this informa-
tion being communicated from this paper, it
was proposed by Thistlewood, that ti.ere should
be another committee sit to alter the plan of
assassination, as it had been proposed on the
Sunday.
Did Thistlewood say any thing more at that
moment? — No; but in the interval of this
time there is one circumstance I wish to state ;
Harrison and Davidson came into the room in
the interval of the paper beiog fetched ; Har-
rison brings a bag of muskel balls, Davison
brings the balls, Harrison brings in the
powder; with this Thistlewood calls me to the
chair, as I was not yetv well.
Before you were called to the chair, do y6u
remember anv observations being made by
Ings ?— Ings, m the interval of the paper being
fetched, pulled out three daggers; those dag-
gers, he said, he had prepared with the sole
intention of assassination oy themselves.
You mean for separate assassination ? — ^Yes ;
taking one in his hand at the same time, he
ezprmed how he intended to do it.
now he had intended or now intended to do
it ? — ^How he had intended to do it making use
of a very coarse expression, wliich I will not
repeat
Do you remember his saying any thing
more ? — Not at that moment.
Any thing about lord Castlereagh ?— In the
course of the day.
Go on and reuite what took place next ? —
The chair was taken by myself, and I called
to order.
Before you took the chair, do you remember
Brunt saying any thing after the paper was
brought in and read, and it was found there
was a meeting ? — Yes ; on the news that was
communicated in the paper. Brunt expressed
himself — '* Damn my eyes, now I believe there
is a God, in calling these thieves together ; it has
often been my praver that they would all meet
together, now Uod has answered my prayer.
Then you say Thistlewood proposed there
should be a committee, and that you should
take the chair ? — Yes. ,
Did you do so?— I did.
What passed next, upon your taking the,
chair? — Upon Mr. Thistlewood coming for«
ward to express the plan he had then to pro*
pose, I called to order, and said, '* gentlemen,
oefore we proceed any further in this business,'
I hope you have given a due coiisideration to
what fell from my mouth vesterday morning.'*
What was it you had mentioned on the
morning of the day before ? — ^The account that
Mr. Hobbs, the landlord at the White Hart,
Bad given me.
Something that Hobbs, the landlord at the
White Hart, had said to you?— Yes.
What was that somethin$;r ? — Hobbs told me
privately, by myself, that there had been two
officers there, saying that there wa!b 8om«thin|(
13071 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial dfjohn Tkmat Bnaii
[1908
ia band more than there ought to be ; that they
had got information at Bow-street, and at lord
Sid mouth's office.
You referred to that which yon had stated
upon that subject? — Yes.
Upon your bringing this up what took
place ? — Upon my bringing this up, Palin was
in the room ; I had seen him before; Thistle-
wood was going to speak again.
I am not asking now all which took place
on the momiuK before ; but, on your saying
** gentlemen, I nope you have considered what
I said yesterday,'' what passed? — ^I wish to
state that transaction, word for word as it oc-
curred.
You have given me enough of the com-
munication you before made ; will you now go
on with what passed at the meeting, when
YOU were in the chair, when you said yon
hoped they had given a due consideration to
what had fallen from you the day before ; who
took that up?— Palin took it up, and said he
wished for some explanation of that before the
business proceeded any further; upon this
Brunt geu up, saying, ''you shall have an ex-
planation ;** he gets up and communicated to
the whole room nearly the same as I had to
them; after he had done this he proposed, in
•order to do away this, that there should be a
vatch set on lord Harrowby*s house.
Did you remain in the chair at this time, or
were you put out? — I was in the chair at this
time ; this watch was to begin at six o'clock
that night, two were to go on at that time;
tlio«e two men were, to go off at nine, and to
be relieved by two others, who were to remain
till twelve, and the watch to commence again
the next morning at four o'clock, and to con-
tinue till the evening, when they intended to
go to work ; those men on watch were to look
to see who entered the house of lord Harrowby,
such men as police officers or soldiers ; if they
entered the house they were to communicate
it to the committee ; if there was nothing of
this kind seen to go in, he was determined
that the work should be done to-morrow night.
Who was he ? — Brunt.
What did Thistlewood say ? — On this being
done, men were picked out for that purpose.
Who picked them f ut ? — Brunt himself.
State in what manner they were picked out ;
what was said? — Tliey were picxed out for
the purpose, but I cannot give you sufficient
satisfaction who all those men were that were
appointed ; Davidson was one of the first of
them that was to go on ; Brunt and Tidd were
the two next that were to relieve them.
Davidson would be from six to nine, apd
Brunt and Tidd Irom nine to twelvp that night ?
—Yes.
Was any arrangement made as to the man-
ner in which this should be done the next
night? — The assassination; yei.
What passed upon that ?— Thistlewood upon
this came forward : '' As to what has fiulen
from Brunt's mouth, respecting what has been
Mid, if there is a proof that there has nobody
entered the house, such as wMieTs or polia
officers, I shall propose a plan in order to take
them altogether r* He proposed himself to p
to lord Uarrowby's door with a note ui lus
hand, to deliver to the servant, saying, be not
have an answer to this note ; on his going iiio
the house he was to be followed.
By how many T — ^The others were to rashii
directly after him, seize upon the serrutt,
present a pistol to them, and threaten then
vrith instant death if they made any lesistaoce;
at the same time others were to go and take
the command of the stairs.
How many to take the command of tb
stairs ?— Two to take the command of tlie itaia
leading to the upper part of the hoose? tm
to take the command of the stain leading to
the lower part of the house ; eadi dib «
these were to have a hand-grenade and ^M
and a cutlass. If any attempt were mideto
retreat from the upper part of the house, tkii
hand-ffrenade was to be thrown among tbeii;
and if any attempt by the serranU ftom the
lower part, a hana-grenade to be thrown among
them.
Was any thing to be done with respedli
the area ?— There were two men to be placel
there; one with a blunderbuss, andthcotw
with a hand-grenade.
What was to be done with w^J®2
dining-room? — ^After these men h*<^*^,
the servants and stairs, Ings P">pw*^ "Tj
to enter the room first ; he was to be folww
by two swordsmen. .
Who were they to be ?— Myself one, oA
Harrison the other. ^^
Did Ings say what he should ^J^lP]
in ?— Ings said, that on going in, he ^^''^^^
«' Now, mv lords, I have as good n.^'^f
the Manchester yeomanry; enter ciuien«»
do your duty.** i
What were the others to do?-OnthHfo»
of command from Ings, thtey were to rush »"
the room, to be followed by ^^P.^^.^
broad knife, swearing that he would cat i«»
heads off as fast as he could get at theo.
Did he mention the heads of any pei*»?
particular ?— The heads of lord Cwtiw
and lord Sidmouth he was determined to iw
away wiih him in his bags, a«J^«i^
CasUereagh's hands. There is «^J^
cumsunce I have not stated before; tw»JJ
he intended to cure, as he said that ^^
thought much of in a future day; l^
state this one cireumstance, fOT^<*'",-J2
slip my memory, as I believe I haw not «^
it, what Ings himself at a sohsequent oeewi
to this had proposed. ^j^ ^
Do you mean by sabsequeot, i»w«
after ?— Before this he had exp^^
after he had got the head of lord C^wje
and SidmouA, that be would exhiW ^
heads upon a pole about the «***?**f.^|,tii
wood improved upon this P>w 5 '^^Tj be-
better to put them on a pi«e, P»^ ^ ^
hind the cannon, and cany them aown
streets, in order to tcnify the people.
112001
for High Treason,
A. D. isdcr.
fiaio
After doing 'ihi3 sit lord Harrowbv's> what
was it proposed you should do?-* I have not
finished yet; on Thistlewood saying this,
Bradbum improved it immediately, saying, he
vrould immeaiately after it had been exhibited
here inclose the head in a box, and send it to
Ireland.
After yon liad done at lord Harrowby's,
what was to be done next P — ^The next thing
that was to be done after leaving the house,
was to be done by Harrison.
What was he to do ? — He was to go to the
Horse-barracks in King-street, and set fire to
4he shed.
WiA what ? — ^A ball prepared for the pur-
^>ose.
Who was to support Harrison ? — ^Wilson.
From thence where was that party to pro-
ceed to? — ^Tney were to proceed from thence
to Gray's-inn-lane.
To what place in Gray Vinn-lane P — The
City Dght-horse barracks.
What to do ? — ^To take the two cannon from
ihei%.
Was it said whether the party were to go
from thence, or whether they were to meet
any body else f — There was to be somebody
in waiting there.
After getting those cannon at the Light-
horse Volunteer barracks, to what place were
you to proceed next? — ^They were to proceed
irom there to the Artillery-ground, unless things
'Occurred afterwards to the contrary.
Whom were they to meet there ?— Cook.
Whom besides ?— That I do not know.
What were they to do at the Artillery-
ground ? — To take the six cannon from there,
and after they had got them, they were to
load them, and bring them into the street
loaded.
What to do?— If Cook found himself suffi-
ciently strong by people, as it was supposed,
coming over to them, if he thought himself ca-
pable of advancing to the Mansion-house, he
was to do it.
If the Mansion-house was taken, what use
was to be made of it ? — It was to be the seat
of the provisional government.
Was any arrangement to be made of the
cannon that were there? — ^Tlie cannon were
to.be arranged in this way; there were to be
three placed on one side of the Mansion-house,
and three on the other.
For what purpose? — For the purpose, if
they refused to give up the house, of firing
into it on each side.
After that, was any place near the Mansion-
bouse to be attadced f — ^The Bank of England
was to be attacked, and taken if possible.
What was to be done there ? — To plunder
the Bank, but Thistlewood said not to destroy
the books.
Did he assign, any reason ?— He assigned
the reason to secure the books, in order that
they might be enabled to see some of the pro-
ceedings of government before that, that they
were not then in possession of. There are
I lome few woids I believe I hav« not stated
yet in court, with respect to the finisKipg of
the concern; Mr. Thistlewood and Cook
agreed between themselves that if he, Cook,
found himself so situate as to go to the Man-
sion house, he was to send an orderly man
ft)rward to stand against the door of saint Se-
pulchre's church, to wait the arrival of an
orderly to be sent by him, Thistlewood ; on
this l)eing done, they were to return to their
separate parties, to give instruction to the dif-
ferent parties how they were situated.
' Do you remember uarrison making any pro*
position about any sign or counter-sign ? — ^Yes.
What was it? — Harrison proposed that there
should be a countersign agreed upon, to give
to those men that had to go round to tell the
men that they would be wanted to-morrow
night.
What did he propose that should be ?— He
proposed that the countersign should be
button, in this way b, u, t — t, o, n. ; there was
to be a man fixed at the end of Oxford-street,
that the party who should go up and say 6, u, ty
was to be considered as one of the party, and
he was to answer t, o, n, to shew that he be-
lonffed to the party too.
This was on the morning of Tuesday ?—
Yes ; on this being done, Harrison would pro«
cure a place between this and the time ; and
the men that were to come up so, were to be
conducted from the end of Oxford-street to
that place.
Did you go to Fox-court again in the after-
noon of that day ? — ^Yes ; I did.
Did you perceive any thing as you entered
the room ?— -On my going up stairs, I perceived
a strange smell ; on my going into the room
I saw Ings, Hall, and Edwards.
What was Edwards doing ?— Ed wards was
making ftises for the hand-grenades.
What was Ings doing ? — Ings was dipping
those thinffs for the fire balls into an iron pot,
into ingredients that were mixed for that pur-
pose.
What was Hall doing? — Hall was laying
the paper on the floor in order to receive those
balls after they were dipped into the pot.
Did you leave the room and call again ?—
I left the room, and called again in the evening.
Whom did you see then? — I found Thistle-
wood Uiere, and two strange men that I had
not seen before.
Any other that you had seen before ? — In
the course of the evening they were pretty
well all there.
Davidson you have said was to go on watch
at six ? — Yes.
And Brunt and Tidd to relieve him ?~Yes.
Did Brunt and Tidd go to watch at nine ? —
Tliey started for that purpose.
After they had started, did any thing occur?
—After they had started, they called at a house
to meet a man that Tidd was to have met be->
fore, and finding this man, he (Brunt) caipe
b«dc again to take another, and he pitched
upon me to go with him.
laii} 1 GEOBG& IV.
Trial qfJohn Thomat Bruni
Did yoa go mth him in Tidd'0 ttObd ?—
Tes,
When you got to CrroaTenor-sciukre, did you
fiod BaTidson on the watch t*-Yei.
And you relieved him? — ^Yes; we did.
You went about nine I suppose ? — Yes«
l^rom nine to tweWe was your time ? — ^Yes.
While you were on the watch, did you and
l^nt go into any publie-bouse to take re-
freshment ?— We did.
Where is that public-bouse situate t — ^Itis
at the corner of a mews, directly at the back
Sart of lord Barrowb/s house^ but the ikame I
0 not know.
How long do you think Brant and you
staid in the house ) — Ull about elevem
o*c1oek.
What time did you go in) — I suppose a
quarter or twenty minutes past dine.
Yoa staid there about an hour and a half t—-
Yes.
Bid either of you play at any gane with
any person there ?-^Brunt played at dominos
with a young man that was there.
At about eleven, did Brunt and you leave
the public-house} and retura to your watch in
the square t — We did.
About what time did you leave your watch ?
—Turned of twelve.
Did you stav in the house the whole of the
hour and a halfy or so out occasionally? — ^I
went out twice myselL
On Wednesday, did you go to Fox-court ?—<
I did.
At about what time? — About two o'clock^
to the best of my reeoUection.
Did you first go into the back room, or into
tbe other room ? — I first went into Brunt's own
room.
Did you find him there ? — I did.
Did any persons come into that room to
you?~*6tiange came in first, and two other
stranger^ whom I did not know.
Did you see any weapon in Brontes room ?
—I saw pistols.
Was any thing done with them ? — ^They be-
gan to try to put the flints into them.
Did they go on with that ? — On those two
other strange men coming in, Brunt proposed
to go into the other room.
Do you remember, whether any observation
was made while they were putting the flints
in» before he desired them to go into the other
room ? — ^I cannot charge my memory.
However, he proposed they should go into
the other room ? — Yes, he did.
And Strange and the two strange men did
go into that room 1 — Yes.
Did you go into the back room too ?--Yes.
Did Brunt?— Yes.
Did you see any weapons there ? — I saw
pistols, cutlasses, and blunderbusses.
Did any persons come?*- Just afterward^,
Th^ttewood came.
Did any others come after him ? — Ves.
Who came in- next after Thistlewood, as
well as you can remember ?«*-To the best of
[131S[
my recollection^ Ings and Hall came alUr-
wards, kod other strangers after that
When Thistlewood oame iii, do yoa leGol.
lect what he said ?— When TbisUewobd caoe
he looked roand and said, '* now ny iids,
in
this looks somethiog like ) it looks as if w(
were going to do something."
Did he address you ? — He clapped his band
upon my shoulder, and said, '^ how do yoa do
Mr. Adams V I told him I wa^ not veiy vcQ,
abd I was very low in spirits. He said, ** what
is the matter? you are not low spirited in coo-
sequence of wluLt we are going to do,*^ I taU
him I wanted soine refreshment.
Did Brunt send out for any thing ?--By tk
ordets of Thistlewood he did.
What did he send for ?'— Some gin and Mae
beer.
What passed next ?— Mr. Thist&wood sud,
he wanted some paper.
For what purpose ?-*-In order to draw op
some bills ; ne wanted such papar as tke
newspapers were printed on, hot he did sot
know how to ask for it ; what was the aami 6f
It*
By bills, what kind of bills do you mean?--
Large posting bills.
Did you propose any paper to biinl-;-! told
him cartridge paper would answer his par*
pose.
Upon that, did Brunt say any thing ?—UpoB
this. Thistlewood gave Bnml some money to
fetch this paper, he saying, that either bis ap-
prentice or his boy should fetch it
Did Brunt sendf for it f — Yes.
Was it brought? — ^Itwas.
When the paper came, what did Tbist]^
wood do? — ^He sat down to write llie bills,
after a table and a chair being brought in>
From what place ? — ^From the front rooo;
Brunt's room.
Did he write? — Ves, three bills.
^fler he had done Uiat, did he say what be
had written ?— He read it to those that were w
the room.
After those three copies were written, ^
was done with them?— After the bills wen
written, I saw them laid down ^^'^^
then afterwards I saw one in the bands 01
Thistlewood, and another in the hands of lop*
Mr. Garaey.— We have given them notice
to prodooe thwem my lord.
Mr. Addpfm,--! admit the noUce ny ^•
Mr. Oume^.-^ive us the words he ^
nounced ?— " Your tyrants are destroyed ; t»
friends of liberty are called upon to come tor-
ward as the provisional governuient are no
sitting, James Ings, secreury, February jw»
1820/'
Did Thistlewood write, or attewpt to wn»^
any more than those three ?— No ; Tbistlewow
expressed himself, in writing the last biU, tin»»
he did not know what was the matter wwb
What appearance did he exhibUr-*
seemed to be rather agitated.
Iftls]
jbr Hfgk IVmcm.
A. D. 1890.
[1314
Were Oioet written small or l»vge?»~lB
larjirisb letters ; writing letters.
Writing letters, but large f ••-Yes.
Was it said in aoy part of the conversation
where they were to be placed ?-*They were
to be placed against the different buildings
that were set on fire, in order to let the peo-
ple, who caoM to those fires, know what was
done.
After that, did Thistlewood propose for any
other person to write ? — He proposed to Hall
to take the pen.
Did Hall do itf-He refased it.
Upon that did any other person take it ? —
Upon that another person took it; he had at
first refused it.
Do you know who that was ?*«-No, I do not.
He wrote somethiog, we will not ask what?
— ^He did.
Who dictated to him ?•— Thistlewood.
After this, did you see Ings do any thing?—'
Yes.
Did he accoutre himself in any way 7 — ^He
accoutred himself; he first put a black belt
round his loins ; after that he hung another
over his shoulder; this belt round his loins
was to contain a brace of pistols, the olie over
his shoulder was for a cutlass.
Did he put anv thing else over his shoulder f
-—He put a couple of bags over his shoulder in
the shape of a soldier's haversack.
What did he then say ?-^n viewing him-
self, he perceived he had not got his steel ; he
said he thought himself not complete without
his steel.
Did he produce any thing else he had? — He
pooduced a very large knife.
What kind of a knife P — ^A knife with a very
broad blade, and a handle with wax^-eads
wound round it.
Did he mention what was the use of those
wax-ends ? — ^To keep his hand from slipinng.
Did he say what he would do witn £is
knife ?-^That this was the knife he had pro-
cured for the sola purpoee of cutting off the
heads of loids Caalleres^h and Sidmouth.
Did the othexs who were in the room, do
ttsy thing with respect to the weapons that
were there ? — They all took an active part in
procuring themselvies pialols and cntlasseSy and
diierent things.
Do you remember nj coming in late in the
meeting ? — PaBn came tn.
Did Thistlewood and Brunt stav after that, or
did they go away ?-«-Tb^ left we room after
this.
About what time did tfaev leave the room f — »
It oonld not want a great deal of five o'clock ;
it might want twenty minutes or half an hour.
Do yon recoUecf Fftlin swing ai^ thing to
thejnuty that were there .'•^-Yes.
What did he say ?— He said he hop«d that
sdl present knew what they had mp t there upon;
he hoped if tbev knew what they were met
vDon that they had given it a consideration
wW they were going to do ; in the first place
be wished them to mom themselves^ whether
the assassination of the ministere was Ukely to
be a benefit to the country, ** if you find, or if
you think that it is likely to be a benefit ti»
your country, and the people will come ever
to you in consequence of doing it ; yon ought
to come to the determination between your-
selves, for every man to stiok true que to ano-
ther ; if it should be proved that any one of
you is in danger from the opposite party, the
others ought directly to go to his assistance."
If any man flinched, did he say what should
be done with him f — ^That if any man flinched,
that man ought to be run through; he wav
here interrupted hy a tall man, that was in the
room, saying, he could see the meaning of his
speech; but he spoke as if all in the room, he
ttkought, knew what Ihey were met there for.
The tall man said that to Palin ?--Yes.
** I see pretty well the meaning of vour
speech ; but you seem as if you thought all in
the room knew what wo were going to do? —
Just so.
What was said next ?-^That was what he
wished to know himself, and some bthere.
** That is what I, and some others, want to
know ?" — Yes ; '' I myself am not afraid of
myself, nor ought any man that turns out on a
thing like this.^'
To be afaid of what ?— To be afraid of hie
life ; there were some other words that I caiw
not charge my memory with, but Palin was
going to speak agfun, but Brunt came in.
What did he say ? — Seeing, as I thought, an
alteration in the countenances of the men, he
wished to know the cause.
Did he sav that be observed an alteration,
or what did he say ? — ^Ko, he did not say that^
Give us his words ; ^ what is the matter,'^
or what?-«>He asked, what wa^ the matter.
Upon his asking what was the mattes, who
answered him ?^This tall man.
What did he sav ^-^He said there weve soma
in the room, and himself, who arished to kaoss
fiirther , what they were going to do.
What answer did Brant give ?-^He told him
this was not the worn where they were to
know that; that if ^^ey would go vrith him to
a room in the Edgware-road, iSbert they should
know. *
What did Brant say then r-^He said, that aU
that weal idong with him, he would take care
they should have eoiaething to drink to pot
them ia spirits.
What did the tall laan say to thatF-^The
^ man said, he hoped that oa man^ |^iaga«
such a piece of buriness as this, would gel
drank ; ror, in so doiag, the man who placed
himself in the hands of his eaemies would ba
of no use to nobody*
Did any thing nirther pats before you left
the 90om?*-Kot that I recollect.
Was there a cupboard ia that room ^«~There
was.
What was kept ia that cnpbaaid ^— I have
seen a sword in it.
Any thing else P^I have seen tar and pitch,
and same of this oahmm stuff.
13151 IGBORGEIV.
trtai qfjckn Thomat Brwd
[\m
The materials for the fire«balU T — Yetf* *
Any thing else ? — ^Those hand-grenades were
kept there till they were removed.
With whom did you go away? — ^I went
down stairs by myself; I was followed by
aome strange men.
Did youy that evening, go to Cato-street? —
Yes.
What did yoa take with you?— I took a
blunderbuss, and a broomstidE that was pre-
pared to receive a bayonet, that was Brunt s.
Who showed you the way to the stable in
Cato-«treet? — ^Thistlewood and Brunt.
Where did yoa meet with themf — In die
£dgware»coad.
When you got to the stable, whom did you
find there? — On going through the stable, I
found Davidson and Wilson ; Davidson ntting
down, and Wilson standing up.
Did you go up into tlie loft ?— Yes.
Whom did you find there 7—1 found several
men there.
This stable is the first building in Cato-
street ?— Yes.
Cato-street is a little street turning out of
John-street ? — ^Yes.
You enter it under an archway ? — ^Yes.
When you get through that archway you
turn to your right, and directly enter that
steble ?— Yes.
At the further end of the stable you found a
ladder, by which you got up into the loft ? —
Yes.
And in that loft there was a carpenter's
bench ? — ^There was a bench in the loft.
Were there any weapons upon that carpen-
ter's bench ? — There were.
Oi what kind ? — I saw pistds and cutlasses.
Was there any light ? — Yes, a dandle on the
bench. •
Before any persons came, who afterwards
added to your numbers, do you recollect any
thin^ being said about your numbers ? — ^Yes.
What was said?— On Thistlewood looking
round, he said, '' There were eighteen in the
loom, and two below stairs.''
What did you do with your blunderbuss?—*
Leid it on the bench.
Can you give roe the names of those who were
there, or many of them ; Thistlewood yon have
mentioned was one ?— Thistlewood was one.
Brunt, Ings, Hall, Bradbum, Davidson, WU-
son, Harrison, Stranger, Cooper, and Tidd.
Tidd was not there in the earlier part ?— I
am stating them all now, all that I haTe any
knowledge of by name.
You stated, that Thistlewood said, ^ There
are eighteen of us now in the room, and two
down stairs V — Yes.
How were any of them employing them-
selves f —They were all preparing themselves
with their different arms.
Did Thistlewood remain in the toft or did
he go down after you' w^nt up?**He went
down.
Did you go down?— Yes.
On' going, whom did you find below ?^0n
S»ing down, I foond Thistlewood, fimiit,
avidson, Harrison, and Wilson.
Was Ings there? — ^I cannot charge my B^
moty whether be was below at that time.
Do you remember any thing being iaid or
your going below, or, perhaps, it was whea
you returned ? — ^Below stairs, when they per-
ceived that I was coming down the Udder,
and coming into the stable, ^ey turned them-
selves round, and expressed themselves all oo
a sudden what good news they had got; tbt
there were six or seven carriages seen abeady
coming to lord Harrowby's house, and Bnst
expressed himself, saying, *< What a ran haul
we shall have to-night V*
At this time had Tidd arrived ?— No.
Did any thing pass about Tidd befoie «e
came ? — Up in the loft.
You and the others went up into the loft
again?— Yes; but Brunt proposed before ve
went up again, that there should be a doaUe
sentry put upon the stable door, and that no
one should be admitted unless he could give
the counter sign.
Did any thing pass about Tidd not hario;
oome ? — Up in the loft.
What was said about him P— Some fear was
expressed lest Tidd should not comei wbkh
Brunt noticed ; he came up to the bendi| vA
said there was no occasion of any fear o*
account of Tidd's not coming for be wookt
venture his life on Tidd's comii^.
Do you recollect Ings saying any thin?
about dropping or not dropping the plan^-
Ings expressed himself like a madman Qpoo
this; he said he would rather hang himself of
cut his throat, if they talked of giving op »
plan now.
Did Thistlewood say any thing ?--Thww-
wood said, he hoped they would not drop tw
concern ; if they did, it wooM turn oat another
Despard's job.
Did Tidd come ?— Just after that.
Any body with him ?— I do notknow; I W
not see him come up the ladder.
But you found him among yon ?— Yes.
Did Thistlewood, after Tidd arrived, m»wn
to you how many there were ?— Afterhc had too
some little conversation with Tidd, be goes i*
the stable, and expresses himself by sayofr
'^Supposing lord Harrowby to bafe sfftej
servants in the house, what is thai; they «o*'^
not be prepared, and we should.'' ,
Did he say how many there were of y«^-
— This was the time he k>ofced them oter.
How many did he make?— Eighteen wt«
room,, and two below stain. «
That was what he said before IBdd earner
How many did he make out »^ J'*^^
came ?— He said there were twenty »» •"• ^^
I he say how the business ^^r!T,
r— He proposed that there sbooW oj
en men pi^ed out of the twenty to f«
Did
done P-
fourteen men pid^ed
into the room.
Did he begin picking out?-The »« ^^
begun to be picked out by 11iisttew«« «»
Brunt.
fn»
1«191
f^ High ZW^^fi.
A. D. 18^.
a2i«
WfccM Ml l¥M doing did ^ou liettf any
thing below ? — Atiet tliiiy on this being done,
Bninl introdoGed i, gin bottle^ he ofers me a
glas^, and called nie among the foatteeo.
(Sometime before thn, on Brant finding the
men rather apprehensiye tiiey had not eufii^
t^nt strength, Brant came np to the table and
addressed then in a few words.
What dkl he 8ay)-^H« alluded to those
persons that were in the room that did not
Know eiactiy the fyteparations they had got ;
he saidy ^ we have got things here along with
us that we ean take tiiat will blow their house
down oter their heads ; so bent am I on doing
the job, that if there were onl/ eight or nine
men, I am determined to go and do it;*^ he
mfs again, '* if there are only five or six that
will go, I mil be one'* and should he find
himself in danger, he would take those things
with him and set fire to them, and blow the
house oTer their heads all together, and perish
aQ together; just at the time where we left off
beibre, I heard a noise below stairs.
That was after the men were picked out and
Uie gin bottle handed round T— -Yes.
All the fourteen men were picked out f —
Yes.
Did you hear any words?— Some one comes
to the bottom of the ladder, and cries, ** Holloa,
show a light 1" 'Thistlewood takes a light got
from the bench, comes to the stairs and looks
down, and seeing who they were, sets the
candle down again.
Did you remaik any thing in bis appearance
at that time ?-^He seemed rather confused.
Upon that who came up the ladder? — ^The
officers ascended the ladder and came into the
room.
Do you recollect what either of the officers
said on entering the lofL?— On entering the
loft, to the best of my recollection, they said,
** here is a pretty nest of you gentlemen, we
. have got a warrant to apprehend you all, and
as suOT, I hope you will go peaceably.''
^After this did either of tne officers do any
thing in particular? — At this time an officer
that was on the ladder, b^ind the man that
had entered the room, cried out, ** let me come
up."
Did he go ibrward ? — He came fbrward.
Did you then observe any room going out
of the loft? — Those that were on that side of
the room, sidled off into a little room that there
was.
Did that officer, who came forward, go t6»
wirds the little room?-^I did not perceive
him advance into the room.
Did h^ ^ towards the doorP-^No ; to the
best of my recollection, I think not.
Was Thhtlewood one of those that went
into this room ? — ^Yes ; ( saw him go into this
fuom.
What passed upon that?>-On this officer
coming into the room, the others rushed to*-
wards the doorway ; at that moment I saw an
^nn ru^ fbrward ; at that moment I saw a
pisstol, and this pistol fired off immediately.
VOL. xxxiir.
Wliat became of that officer?— I cannot say
tliat I saw the officer fire ; for no sooner was
the pistol fired, than the candle was out di-
raetly.
I suppose there was a good deal of confu-
sion ?— A great deal of confusion.
In the result, did you get down the ladder
and into the stable P — Yes,
Did you get away ? — ^Yes,
Did yon go home to your lodgings that
night P — Directly.
When were you taken up ?— On Friday the
tl5th. '
The day but one after P — ^Yes.
Did you go out after you went home till you.
were taken ?— After I left Cato-street, I went
into my room ; never did I lay my hand, to
the best of my recollection, even on the latch
of my door, nor was I out till the officer took
me out*
And you have been in custody ever since? —
I have. '
Robert Adams cross-examined by
Mr. Cvrwood,
I have very little to say to you. I think you
told us the last time you were here, that after
you had escaped and got home, then it was
that you repented of your iniquities ? — I did.
And that was the fact, was it ? you repented
when you got home? — I certainly did ; and
before that my mind was convinced that I was
wrong : I was afterwards more convinced of
that, and my mind received a conviction of it.
Did you receive that conviction after you
returned to Christianity, or before ? — I received
it after I had received a conviction of the
error of my ways r I can adcnow ledge Chris-
tianity, but before that I could not do it.
You told us the other day that you studied
religion a little, and that made you a deist ? — I
can tell you, that until the time that I received
that infernal publication, which I did from Tidd,
and I will speak of that before I ha^^e done, I
had been as carefbl, I. vrill not say always, but
I had been very particular in those things.
And you mean to say you were a good
christian till you l-eceived that Infernal publi-
cstiofi, which corrupted you ? — I cannot say t
was so good as I ought to be.
But you were a diristian in profession ?*^
Yes.
Then that book made you a deist ?*—Yes, it
did.
flien, when a halter got about your neck,
you became a christian again ?^-«That book,
and the principles, Mr. Brant, the prisoner at
the bar, wished to instil into my mind : the
sole intent of Mr. Brant was to Knock dovm
the pillars of Christianity aHogedier, and I can
prove it.
And you at one time lent him your aid to
knock down tlie pillars of Chrisiianity ? — More
to my shame.
You admit that, do you ?— I do.
More than I expected. What age were you
when you changed your religion r — Between
41
15^19] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of John Thmas Brunt
[}JHO
forty-five and forty-six, and now I am between
forty-six and forty-seven.
Vou are sure you are entirely convinced of
your religion now f — I am convinced of this ;
I have felt an inward satis&ction from what I
have done.
You find an inward satisfaction from having
slipt your neck out of the halter f — Not on
that account; I find a satisfaction in the
atonement I have made to my maker, in ac-
knowledging the error of my ways.
In the worst state of your religion, did you
feel it morally right to murder any man in
cold blood ? — ^I never had an idea of murdering
any man, and I thank my maker it was not my
wish.
You acknowledge that you were one of a
party to do this?— I acknowledge that. Do
you wish to know
Mr. Gumey, — Answer questions, but do not
ask them.
Mr. Curwood. — I hare no objection to it.
fFiAiest.— I will answer you.
In the worst state of your reprobation, did
you think it morallv right to murder any man ?
— I never did ; I thought it inconsistent with
reason altogether.
Inconsistent even with your reason ? — ^Yes.
Then how came you to join any party that
had that ibr its object ? — ^Well, I do not know
that that might not make it worse for the pri-
soner, it might bring out some unpleasant con-
cerns for his family, and I do not want to load
the man further than be deserves, or than is
necessary.
It is mercy to the prisoner that restrains
von ?— I think of them that may be left be-
hind him.
You may have some meaning but I cannot
understand it. — ^To t^l you the truth in a few
words, I will not pretend to say it was that
altogether, my mind was very curious upon
Mr. Brunt ; I had a doubt upon my mind that
that man was not as he ought to be.
What do you mean by that? — After this
going from Thistlewood to Camaby-market,
tiiis man substantiated the supposition I had
of him ; he candidly told me there in Leicester-
square, that he met a friend, as he said an
acquaintance, this acquaintance came up to
him to shake hands, and in pulling his hands
from his pockets he grasped his hand, he had
got his hand full of pound notes ; this was a
likely thing; when he gets home he finds
liimself seven pounds the better; I think if I
shook hands with a man I should not find
mprself seven pounds the better for that ; if jrou
wish me to go further, I will do it
Mr. Gumty. — Confine yourself to the ques-
tions asked you.
Mr. Ctinooo(2.->The first time yoo saw
Thistlewood was the 12th of January ?— Yes.
Before that you have told us there was a
design to murcler his majesty's ministers ?— As
I have not told you all that pamd betsea
me and him, I wiU explain it
• Was it or not on the Sndof JaDmiytk
the prisoner, in an interview with y<m in tl^
street, told yon of a design to unrder b
majesty's ministers ? — Yes.
And on the 12th of Janvary you were in-
troduced to Thistlewood?— Yes.
You, with ten days consideiation, tbooght
proper to join the people that were to cooBit
this nefarious deed ? — I joined them from ^
motives I have told you, and that day coi-
vinced me that Brunt was a rogue.
You have told me no motive?^! Indi
motive, but for the sake of his fiunily I wnI^
wish not to enter into it
How came you to join Thistlewood on *•
12th of January to aid in a plot which ra
communicated to you on the Sod?— Thioajii
the insinuations of Brunt, I joined them.
And you continued until you were taken isitf
custody ? — I did.
Attending meetings sometimes twice a^^
—Sometimes twice a-day, I will admit ^
Yourself being occasionally the chaima
— Once in the time.
And as you told us, communicatiogto tw
that their design was suspected at lord »a-
mouth's office?— Yes.
Therefore you did all you coold to dtfesi
detection ?— I went that rooming with »«
others, to aid me to put a stop to it, «»
Palin, Potter and Bradbum, one of t«
prisoners at the bar ; if the man had caadwr
enough to acknowledge it, he would sayit«»
so. ^
Did you not say the other day, t'^^f^'^
them, that you felt it your doty to all to w
thait which concerned all? — ^Yes. ^^
And added, "What would yon have tboy»
of me, if I had suflfered you aU to be taken . -
Yes. , , i^
All this you did, meaning boncsUy to b"
nothing to do with such a ^?'"'®^fp2
would not enter into any ^^°?»j ^
wanted to protect me upon it, and to»I
word upon it, but as soon as I mentioneai»»»
they were all like a set of »«!««» "P*Xl
Palin was a particular friend ^J^\a
never saw Palin tiU the Sunday beloie, ^
you never heard me say so. • v . ke
Do you recollect Mr. E^^^^Vni «jeeB
was there from the beginning, and 1 »« ^
Mr. Edwards pull a pair of pw^'j^IT
pocket, and say, he never ''«n^'""^iJJ.
And you saw him very busy m Jsxvsx^
ing the grenades } — ^Yes. ^
Was there any regular committee, » ;^
have mentioned a committee?— p^^^
committee regular, tiU the Sunday »on»^
the 20th. % um
What did you caU yo^Kolw* |-^" ^j,
was any particular name given to tbein,
more than I heard. . _ ^
You vrere chairman of the coinn»t»f».^,^
you do not know what was the name w j
Yes, I was very careless of it at Uie on
12211
for High Treatyit
A. D. 1820.
C1222
knew I should, on my plan, be very soon be
put out of it.
You were careless of it?— Yes, I wished to
put a stop to it.
How came you not then to report it at
proper places ? — I wished to save the trouble
of being exposed in this sort of way.
You wished to save the trouble of these
trials here ? —Yes.
And you wished to save the interference of
the officers ? — ^Yes ; you do not believe I am
such a fool as not to wish that.
Mr. Cwicood, — ^No, I do not take you to
be a fool I assure you.
Robert Adams re-examined by Mr. Gvmey,
You spoke of certain publications which had
]>erverted your mind ; what publications were
those ? — Paine's Age of Reason, and the pub-
lications of Carlile.
Ekanor Walker sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gvmey.
I believe you are the niece «nd ser^'ant of Mr.
Rogers, of No. 4, Fox-court, Gray's-inn-lane ?
—Yes.
Has the prisoner Brant lodged in your house
for any length of time ?— Yes ; a twelvemonth
it would have been at Easter.
What rooms did he occupy ? — ^The two front
rooms on the two-pair of stairs ; he lived in
^ne and worked in the other.
Do you remember any back room, two-pair
of stairs, being taken by a roan of the name of
logs ?— Yes.
Who introduced that man to you ?— 'Brunt
The prisoner at the bar P-— Yes.
Was it a furnished room ? — ^Yes.
Did logs say any thing (to you about
fdmitare? — ^He said he might bring hb goods
in, in a week or better.
Did he ever bring any goods in ? — Not to
mtj knowledge.
Yoor master keeps a shop ? — ^Yes.
Do your lodgers enter at the shop door,
or a back or side door?— A side door.
Docs that door lead to the staircase ? — Yes.
Can persons, therefore, go up and down those
stairs without yon in the shop knowing any
lUog about the matter ? — Yes.
Mmy Rogfin sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gumey.
We widerstand yon live in Fox-ooort,
Gngfa-imi-laiie ?— Yea.
fio yoa veeoHect a man of the name of Ings
a lodnng io your house?— I recollect
it bow; I did not know his name then.
Tcm allenraids fcond his name to be Ings ?
— Yi
ftve^I
He paid
weeks did he pay you ? ^Four or
be posiiive which,
left vipnd?— Yes.
',m possibly five ?— Yes.
week?— Three shillings a
Do you recollect any evening when you
were about putting your children to bed;
seeing, any men go up stairs ?— Yes, three
men.
Was there any thing particular in the per-
son of either of the three ? — The middle one I
perceived was a black man.
During the time that Ings had this lodging,
did you inquire of Brunt who and what he
was ? — I did.
What account did he give vou of him ?— He
said that he knew nothing of him, only seeing
him at the public-house, and hearing him
inquire for a lodging.
Did he tell you what he understood him to
be by trade ? — A butcher.
No furniture was brought in, I believe ? —
Never to my knowledge.
Lord Chief Baron. — He never slept there,
did he ? — ^Never, to my knowledge.
Mr. Gtprney. — No bed was ever brought?—
No, nothing of the kind.
Jotepk Bale sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gumey.
You, I believe, are apprentice to the pri-
soner Brunt? — Yes.
Did you live with him in Fox-court, Gray's-
inn-lane ? — ^Yes.
We understand he had two rooms there,
one a living-room, and one a workshop ? — Yes.
You slept in the workshop, and he and his
wife in the living-room ? — Yes.
Do you remember a person of the name of
Ings coming there, and taking a room ? — Yes.
What room was that? — A two-pair back
room.
Who looked at it with him ?— Brunt.
After they had looked at it together, did
you hear Brunt say any thing to Ings ? — Yes.
What ? — ^He said, ** It will do, go down and
give them a shilling."
How long before that day had you known
Ings ? — About a fortnight.
That was the first time you remember to
have seen him ? — Yes.
In whose company had you seen him before
that timef — He was with Thistlewood, in
Brunt's room.
The evening upon which Ings had taken it,
did he come again ? — Yes.
Did he go into your master's room ? — ^Yes.
What did he ask for ?— He asked Mrs. Brunt
for the key.
She had the key then ? — ^Yes.
Did she give it to him f — Yes, I believe she
did.
Did he go into it ? — Yes.
Who was with him ? — ^A man of the name
of Hall, a tailor.
Did they go into it ?— Yes.
In the course of that evening, did you hear
other persons come into that room ? — I believe
there were.
Not having seen them, did you hear them
come and go into that room ? — xts, 1 did.
1333] 1 GE<MIGE IV.
Trial ^Jdm Thomat Brunt
CltS4
Fren Ihit time, vatil jonr nMter wu
taken «py were there meetiDgs hekl in th^
rooiB ?^Ye8.
Can you give me the names of some of the
person^ whom you saw resort to it ? — Yes.
Who were they P— Thistlewood, logs, Tidd,
Hall, Davidson, Bradbum, Strange, Edwards.
Did yon see Potter ? — Yes.
Did you see Adams ?— Yes.
Besides those you have named, were there
many others? — Itiere were others at different
times in this room, and coming up and down ?
Did your maater use to be with them f —
Yes. '
Always, or generally T — Generally.
Upon any occasion, when you passed that
room, was the door open ? — ^Yes.
Did you see any thing in the room T— Yes.
What did yon see ?— -I saw some long poles,
like the branches of trees, rough-cut.
You mean not trimmed, bat with the baik
on ? — ^Yes.
flow many should yon jadge ? — There were
about twenty.
At what time of the day were those meet-
ing^that you obserredt— 'Mostly in the even-
iiig.
Did you ever hear any work going on in
that room ? — Yes.
What sort of work? — Hammering and
sawing.
Do you mean that you have heard that ODce>
or several times? — ^I have heard that more
than once, I believe.
Your muter, I believe^ was taken up on
Thursday the 24th of February ?-—Yes.
Did those people call each other by dieir
names, when they were there P~ Sometimes.
By what name did they usually call Tliistle-
wood ? — Sometimes T. and sometimes Arthur,
On the Sunday-morning before your master
was taken up, was there any meeting in that
room ?— Yes.
Was that a larger or m smaller meeting than
usnal P — Rather larger.
Were all the persons you have named tome
there?— Yes.
Did they go away all at OBcey or not ?•— One
or two at a time.
Was your master with them ? — Yes.
After the meeting was ever, did you see
any of them in your masters room, with yoor
master? — Yes.
Who was that ?->Strange.
Was there another meeting on the Monday ?
— ^Yes.
And on the Tuesday ?— Yes.
In the afternoon of Wednesday, was there
another ? — There were several people up there.
Did all of them go into the back room, or
any into the front room ? — Some of them omne
sometimes into the firont room.
Do you remember the name of any who
came into the front room ? — ^Yee,Thistlewood ;
and I remember Ings came in once.
, Do you remember Strange being then ? —
Yes.
Abo«t whnl time ?^Abeiit two VoMk.
Were any |>ersons with him ? — Yea.
Whidi room did they come into ? — They
came into Bmnt*s living-room, and then kit*
his workshop.
Do you remember Strange and tka othem
with him doing amy thing in the wodeabopf
— ^Yes, they were flinting pistols.
Do you know who those were that wot
with hmi? — ^No.
How many pistob were they fliatiag?^*
There were five or six.
Did they finish them ? — ^No.
What prevented tfieir finishing them ?— One
of the men said there were peiswis overlook*
ing them from the opposite hooMy and Bnnt
told them to go into the back room.
And they did so ? — Yes, they did.
In the course of the aAemoon did Tlasli^
wood come o«t of the back room and aak yea
for any thing ? — Yes.
For what ?— 'He asked me if I oould get him
a piece of writing paper.
Did you give htm some ? — ^I did.
To what plaoe did he take it ^«i-Illlo the
back room.
After that, did Brunt come into the ftoet
seom to tell you to get «n^ thing K^Yte.
What 9 — Some cattridgo-papev.
How much ?— Siv eheeta.
Did he give yon the money to heylt }— Tcs.
Did yon go end buy ii?— Yes.
To whom did yon give it f «-»To BrlbU
Whatdidhedowithit?«--He toek itinto
the back room.
At about what time, to the best of your i^
collection, did Bnint leave the be^ room
finally, and come into Usowa roeea r *^ Afadat
six.
Wu there any persea wi^i Urn?— Yes,
dwre was apenoBy bet I Ad not kxMw kink
Did he and that penRm go asray together f
—Yes.
Before that, had you heard othin go dove
stairs ? — ^Yes.
After he was gone, bed year eusrtieaa eeca-
sion to make tea f— Yes.
Where was her tea^taUe then I -^ ]» the
Whet did she desire yea to do ^ ~ fike tstt
me to go and get it.
Whal did vou do? — ^I went and knodced at
the door, ana got it.
Who gave it you out at Ae door ? -^ A man
of the name of PoOer.
When the door opened, did you pereeave
whether there was any other peraoo there
besides Potter?— Yea.
How many do you (hiek?«-«'Ibere were
Ibttr or five.
Was there a fire ?— Yes.
After thaty in the coiiree ef the eveniM;^ did
Tidd call ?— Yes.
Did he come into yoar rooaa?^-Yea.
Did any thing past between him aad Mrs.
Brunt ?-«Yes.
What ?— Mrs. Brant took him to the
1836!
Jvt High Trtaiaiu
A. D. IfiaOk
USftf
board, and showed hiift. a pilfe4iMd tmd «
sword.
"What did she ask him about them? --She
tolced hfim what she covld do with them.
What did he say ? — He said if she would
give theiii to him, he would take them away.
Where did he take them to .^«-^iiito the back
iroom.
Tliese were in your liTiDg-room, were tbey ?
—Yes.
After that, did yon bear any person go
down stain ? — ^Yes.
As from the back roomt-^Tes.
To the best of y6tr recollection what time
wns this ?--It was near eight oVlock.
It was after seven, you are sure ?— Tes.
After that did any person come and give
Mrs. Brunt any message?— Yes.
What was that message ? — He told her, that
if any persons came, they were to be sent to
the White Hart.
Shortly after did any persons come ?-^Yes.
Were they sent to the White Hart ^-.Yes.
Did they know their way ? — No.
Who showed them ?— I did.
Upon your return from the White Hart^ did
you find any persons at the door ? — ^There was
a person came up after I had been at the door
a few minutes.
Any body with bim ? — ^Yes, some others.
Did you send them 4e Um White HaKt—
Yes.
You did not go to show them the way } — ^No.
Did they apoear to know the way? — ^Yes.
At about wnat time did your master goom
borne ? — About nine o'cloek.
Was his dress in the same state as it was
when he went, or in what state ? — It was dirtier
than when he went o«^ partioularly his boots
and his great coat.
Did he appear to be in a composed stale?—
No.
How tben ? — ^Be seemed rather conteed.
What did he say to his wife ?— He said, that
where he was a lot of officers bad been.
Can you give us bis esaet words; did he tett
her any thing, in short, as to the sesnU ?— He
said it was all up, or words to that effect ; thai
where he had been a lot of officers had come
in, and that be had saved huUfe, and that was
all.
Directly after this did aay other person come
in ? — ^Yes.
You do not know that person's name?—
No.
Upon his earning in, what did Brunt say to
hkar— He shook hands wiiii him, and asked if
be knew who had iafonned.
What did he say P— He said «< No."
Did the other man say what had happened
to bim ? — ^Yes.
What did be sav? — ^He said he had had a
dreadfal Idow on the side, and was knocked
down.
From the manner of their spenlriwg to eack
otber, did it appear to ymx as if they bad baen
together ?«-Yes.
After that, did ^amt say aay Unftg ^-^Hesaid
^ ihete is sefmethbig to be done v^**
Upon his sayinff that, what did Brant and
the other man do ?— They went awa^ together.
After they were gone, did your mistress and
you go into the bade room ? — Yes.
What did vou tod diere ?-«-There wtere
several rolls of brown paper in the cupboard,
with tar in them.
Any other things? — Yes, there were fbor
large balls made of string, with tar on them.
Wbat do you now andentand theos to be ?
— I have heard sinoe they aie called kauim
gveaaoes.
Any iron pot ?— *Yes.
To whom did that belong ?— To Brant.
Did yon find any begs ?— Yes.
Of what ?— Made of bits of Hvrntd.
Full or empty f--Two ^ them were Ml o.
something.
Was there any pole or stick in the room ? —
There was a long pda.
Did your mistress leave them there ? — ^Yes.
About what time did your master come
home P— About eleven o'clock.
Did he give you any directions wbat todo ii^
the morning ?— Yes ; he told me to get up, and
dean his boots.
Did you get up early, and dean his boots ?-^
xes.
Did he then ask you, whether youlmew ai|y
place? — ^Yes.
What place did he ask you whether you
knew? — lie asked me whether I knew the
Borough ; I told him ** yes.''
What did he ask you next?-^He asked ae
if I knew Snow's-field's ; I told him « no."
That is a sticet in the Boreagh ?— Yes.
. Whatdirection did hegiveyou ? — ^He directed
me to go to Kirby-street, Snow's-fields.
To whom f — To a person of the name of
Potter.
IVhat did he tell you ytra were totaSce there ?
— ^He said he had got some things in the back
room for me to take.
Did be and you go together into the badk
room ? — ^Yes.
Taking with you what ?— We teok eadi a
rush basket.
What did he do, or direct you to do with
respect to these baskets ? — He told me to put
the things that were in the cupbond into the'
basket.
Were all the things put into thetwo beskets t
—Yes.
Except the pole "whidt was too latge t— Tes,
and the iron pot.
After that, was any thing done with either of
the baskets 7— Yes.
Whatf— Oneof (hem was tied up ln«i>lne
apron.
Belonging to whotn'?^TD Mrs. Brunt.
What use had been made of that blue aprihr
beft>Te ?— It had been made use of as a curtain,
to the window of that room.
Wacte:oterticd €ip?^No, <wawrantinto
Brunt's room to look for somelldflg4e^it aipy>
and two officers cue in«
13S71
) GEORGE IV.
Trial of John Thomai Brunt
Lisas
And took him ?— Tbey did»
Did the officers go into the back room and
lake the things ?-^Yes.
7^4WMif Smart sworn. — Examined by
Mr. BoUand.
Are you one of the watchmen of the parish
•f St. George» HanoTcr-square ? — ^Yes.
Were you on duty on the night of the 22nd
of February, in Grosyenor-square T — ^Yes, I
tvas.
Did you observe any persons there ? — ^I ob-
served four about the square.
Was there any thing particular about those
men that made you recollect them ? — I thought
that they were after no good, and I went up to
them ; two were very tall men and one was a
man of colour.
Do you mean a black man ? — ^Yes.
Ckarlei Bittur sworn. — Examined by
Mr. BoUand.
You are a watchman of St George's f — ^Iam»
in Grosvenoi^quare.
Were you on duty in Grosvenor-square on
the night of the 22na of February ?— I was.
Was your attention called to any persons
particularly ? — As I was calling half-pa^t eight
o'clock, that would be a quarter before nine,
there were two men passed me, one was a man
of colour.
What were they doing ?— Taking particular
notice of the houses.
Of what house P — ^They took particular no-
tice of lord Harrowby's, and likewise of Mr.
Maberley*s in Grosvenor-square.
Hemy Gillan sworn. — Examined by
Mr. BoUand.
You live at No. 15, Mount^treet, Berkeley-
aqnare ? — Yes.
Do you know the Rising Sun public-house ?
—Yes.
Where is that? — ^The comer of Adams
Mews, in Charles-street, Grosvenor-square.
Were you in that public-house on the 22nd
of February last ?— Yes.
While you were there did you see any per-
sons come in ? — ^Yes.
Who were theyP — ^Two men; Brunt was
one, and Adams was the other. .
Had they any thing to eat and drink ? —
Yes ; a pot of beer and some bread and cheese.
Did any thing pass between you ? did you
amuse yourselves in any way ? — ^No, nothing
more than while we were playing ; there was
no particular conversation.
"What did you play at ? — Brunt challenged
me to play at dominos, and I played him two
games.
What time did they go away ? — I do not
know; I went away first.
At what time did you go ? — I went about
ten o'clock.
Mr. Baron Gorroio.— Yon mean ten at night
I suppose 7— Yes.
Edward 8imp$on sworn. — Examined by
Mt. BoUand.
You are corporal-major of the 2nd regiment
of life-guards ? — Yes.
Do you know the prisoner Harrison ? — ^Yca.
Was he in that regiment ? — ^Yes.
Was he ever at the barracks in King-streeif
—Yes.
Was he quartered there ? — ^It is not a bas-
rack for men, it is only for horses.
Was he acquainted with those barracks, ajid
the interior of them ? — Perfectly so.
Have you any windows, or had you any win-
dows wtuch looked out into the Mews ? — Yes;
into Gloucester-mews.
Are they walled up ? — Yes ; they have been
since the affair in Cato-street.
Are those windows so situate, that fire-balls
could have been thrown into them ? — ^Ves, into
one of them particularly.
Was there any hay or straw there ? — ^There
was some quantity of straw within about two
feet of the window.
Mr. Adolphus. — What do you mean by some
quantity f — Perhaps two or three 'waggon
loads.
John Sector Moriton sworn. ^Examined by
Mr, BoUand.
Are you a journeyman to Mr. Henry Thomas
Underwood, of Drary-lane, a cutler? — ^Yea.
Were you so at Christmas last ? — Yes.
Do you recollect any of the prisoners coming
with a sword there? — The prisoner Ings
brought one to be ground at Christmas.
What sort of a sword was it ? — A small one ;
a scimitar.
Have yon seen that sword since ? — I have.
In the possession of the officen ? — ^Yes.
What airection did he give with it ?^It was
to be ground sharp from the heel to the point,
and likewise the back of the point to he
ground.
Who called for it ? — ^The prisoner logs call-
ed for it, about three days after he left it.
Did he approve of the manner in whicb it
was ground ? — ^Yes.
Did he bring you anyone after that ? — ^Yes ;
in about a fortnight afterwards, he brought me
a very lodg one.
Who called for that ?— He called for it him-
self.
What directions did he give as to that ? —
He said the first one was ground to his liking,
and I was to grind that in the same manner.
Did he leave any name ? — He left a name,
as I understood him, Eames ; the second time
I did not ask him his name.
Jama Aldout sworn. — Examined by
Mr. BoUand.
You are a pawnbroker, I believe f — ^I am.
Do vou know the prisoner Davidson, the
man of colour ?— I do.
Did he ever pawn with you a brass-barreOed
blunderbuss?— He did.
12391
fur High Treaton,
A-D..1S«0.
[1980
Do you .recollect on wliat d&y he pawned it?
—In January.
Did he redeem it ; and if so, when ? — On
the 23rd of February.
Have you seen that blunderbuss since ? — I
have ; Mr. Ruthven shewed it to me ; I be»
lieve it to be the same that was pledged and
redeemed*
John Momiment sworn. — Examined by
Mr. SoUcitor General,
You are at present a prisoner in the Tower of
London? — ^Yes.
What are you by trade ? — A shoemaker.
"Where did you live before you were con-
fined?— No. 8, Garden-court, Baldwin's-gar-
dens.
That is near BrookVmarket, I believe P —
Yes.
Do you remember, at any time, seeing This-
tlewood at a person of the name of Ford's ?—
Yes.
As nearly as you can tell, how far back is
that from the time when you were apprehend-
ed ? — I suppose near three months.
In consequence of your meeting Tbistlewood
at Mr. Ford*s, did Tbistlewood afterwards call
upon you ? — ^Yes.
How long was that after you had seen him ?
—I believe about a fortnight or three weeks.
Did he call alone, or in company with any
person ? — In company with Brunt.
The prisoner, John Thomas Brunt ? — ^Yes.
Were you at home alone at that time, or in
company with any person ? — My mother and
my brother.
What is your brother's name? — ^Thomas
Monument.
After Tbistlewood had been in your room
for some little time, did Tbistlewood make any
proposal to you to go out? — He said he
wished to speak with me.
In consequence of that, did you and Tbis-
tlewood go out of the room ? — Yes.
Leaving Brunt in the room, with your bro-
ther Thomas Monument ?— Yes.
When you went out of the room, with Tbis-
tlewood, will you tell us what Tbistlewood said
to you } — Yes ; he said that great events were
at hand, that people were everywhere anxious
for a change, that he had been promised sup-
Sort by a great many men who had deceived
im, but now he had got men who would stand
by him.
What further did he say? — ^He then asked
me whether I had any arms.
((
What did you say to that? — ^I said, *' no ,
he said that every one ought to have arms ;
^ all of us," says he, ** have got arms; some,''
savs he, ** have got a pistol, some have got a
Fike, and some have got a sabre." He said
could buy a pistol for about four or five
shillings. I told him I had no money to btty
pistols; he then said he would see what he
could do.
Do vou recollect any thing more that
passed r— I do not recollect any thing more.
Did you return again . into the room ? —
Yes.
Did you find Brunt there ? — Yes.
. Did Tbistlewood and Brunt go away toge-
ther?—Yes.
Do you recollect Brunt calling upon you on
Tuesday the 22nd of February? — Yes.
Did be call alone, or in company with any
person ?— In company with Tidd.
Were you alone in your room when he call-
ed, or in copspany with any other person ? —
My brother was with me.
Thomas Monument? — ^Yes.
What did you say? — I said, on his coming,
** I thought I had lost you ;" and he said ** the
king's death has made an alteration. in our
plans."
What did you say to that ?— I asked him
what plans ; he said there was to oe a meeting
the following evening up at Tyburn-turnpike,
where I should hear all the particulars; he
then turned to Tidd, and asked him whethev
he should give me the word.
What said Tidd to that ?— Tidd said, yes, he
supposed there was no danger.
upon that did he give you the word ? — Yes;
he told me when I came to the place, if I saw
any people about to say 6, «, U
What was the place r— Tybum-tumpike ; he
did not tell me any particular place, and if
they were friends they would answer t, o, n. ;
he said he should be at our house again in the
morning to tell me more about it, and at what
time it was to take place.
By the morning, do you mean the next
morning ? — Yes, the Wednesday morning.
Did he call again the next morning ?^No,
he did not c^l till about half-past four
o'clock.
Did he come alone ? — ^Yes.
What did he say when he came there ? — Qe
called me down stairs.
Was your brother Thomas Monument, there?
— Yes, he called me down stairs, and told me
I must go with him in half-an-hour ; I told him
I could not go so soon as that ; he asked me
'^why ?*'I told him I had got some work to do that
must be done ; he asked me at what time it
would be done ; I told him about six o'clock ;
he said he could not wait so late as that, so
that I. must go with Tidd, the person whom he
brought the day before, and he told me. where
he lived.
Where was that? — ^In Hole-in-the-wall Pas-
sage, leading; to Dorrington-street.
Did you, m consequence of this, go to Tidd's
house ?— Yes.
About what time ? — ^About half-past six.
Did you find Tidd at home ?— Yes.
What did he say to you?— He said he had
been waiting for some more people to go with
him that he expected would be there, but if no
one else came before seven o'clock, we should
go toffether.
Did any persons arrive before stven o'clock ?
—No.
Then when seven o'clock came, what did
iMl3 IGEOKOBIV.
IVirf^JUbi Tk0imBniU
ilVH
Tidd #»r— Ae mnt to a cotmt of tiie reem,
and took a pistol.
What did U do wilh it ^--Put it iB a belt
dial ho had got rovnd his body, ondeniealh his
great coat.
What dso did ho do F^Ho took about iia or
eight pikosy wrapped up in brown paper.
Do yott mean pike-handles or pike-heads f —
Pike-heads ; and a staff aboni A>Qr fleet long»
with a hole in one end of it.
Wat that hole adapted to receive one of thi
piko-heads T — ^Yes.
After he had eqnmped himself in this way,
flhnt did he do ?«— lie went down stairs.
Did yon go with him ?— Yes, into Brook's*
iH^eet, and from Brook's*street into Holboniy
and along into Oxford-street.
Did he tell you what you w^re going to do ?
—No.
What paewd between you ?— When we were
hi Holbom, he gav« me the pike-lwndle, and
lold me to earr^ that • as we were going along
Oxford-street, I think it was^ I asked him to
tell me. where we were going to ; ho said I
should know when I got to the place; I had
asked him before we came out of the room
what plaee it was up at Tybum-tumpike we
were going to ; he said it was at a mews up by
the Edgwara-road.
In gaing up Oaford-street, he told you
you would know what you were going to do
when you got to the place ?^ Yes; I taked
Mm whether we wefe going to the House of
Commons ; he said no, there were too many
soMSers tfa^e ; I then asked him again where
we were going to, and he told me we were
going to Orosrenof -square.
Did he say to whose house in Oroerenor*
square?— No, he did not; I asked him whe-
ther any one in particular lived in Grosrenor-
sqaare ; he said there was to be a cabinet din-
ner there.
Did any Airtfaer eonversation that you re-
member, pass between you before you got to
Caio-street ?*— No, I do not recollect any.
Did you go under an archway P— Yes.
Were there any persons under that archway ?
—Two penotas stood under that archway.
Had they any conrersalion with Tidd f —
There were some few words passed which I
eould not nndemtand ; he was before me.
How far is the stable from (he archway ?— -
It is directly under the archway ; you turn to
the right hand.
Did you go into the stable t— Yes.
What did you see when you first went into
the stable ? — ^There were three or four ssen
there.
Did Tidd go into the stable with you 1-^
X es.
Were those men in the stable armed ?— 1
cannot say.
Wu there any light ia the steble P'— Yes,
one.
Did you go up the ladder f^Tes.
That is at the further end ?— Yes, on the left
hand.
You w«at up into (he loft?^Ym.
Did you find people there?— Yes.
How many nuc^t there he ia the whole, d»
you suppose, below and up stairs?— I sbiaU
AaTe supposed, from the appearaace, tv» or
three-andktwenty ; but some one spoke im
after I got in about counting then, and Tbiille-
wood said there was no occasion for oooati^
them, there were five-and-twenty.
Was there any thing like a table or cir-
penter's bench ? — Yes.
What was upon that ?— A quantity ef svords
and pistols.
Was there a tight there?— Yes, there vu
oue light; I do not know whether theie were
anymore.
You obsenred but one light?— No, I doost
recollect any more.
Was that light on the bench ?— Yes.
After you got up into the loft what passed?
— ^There was a man in a brown great cmt, sit-
ting on a low bench, on the other side of the
oarpenter^s bench.
Near the ladder ?--No, on the other side;
he was speaking of the impropriety of goiogte
lord Harrowby's ; that was the irst time I beud
the name I think ; he sp^^e of the impropriety
of going to lord Harrowby*s with so smili
number as fi?e-and-twenty men. Ihistlevood
said, that number was quite sufficteat, for tbeit
only wanted fi>urteen men to go into the rooot
and supposing that lord Harrowby had sixtett
men senrants, that number would be quite sof-
fieieat ; the man in the brown coat said, '^ Whee
we come out, of course there will be ft crowd
of people round the door, how are we to mate
our escape?'' Thistlewood said, '< Yot knot
the largest party of us are already gone.
Davidson then said,—*
Davidson, the black f— Yes; be told ta*
not to throw cold water upon their prooeedios'i
for if he was afraid of his tife, be might ^
they would do without him ; and Brant fliot
sooner than they should go from the bnsines'
they were about, he woiild go into the bojie
by himself and blow them aH up^ if he penshed
with them; says he, •'you know we saw got
that that can do it/' and after that the mu »
the brown great coat said, that though be did
not like goiug with so small a numberi xettf
they were all for it, he would not be agaiDStB.
he then proposed that diey should all pot di^
selves under the orders of Thistlewood.
posed that die fourteen who were to go»^
the room should volunteer from the peijow
that were there assembled* .
In conseqoence of that proposal of Tw^-
wood's, what was done P— About ^^^Ji
thirteen ki a few ihinutes toluirtecred, w»
tfiose tlat were to do that were to g*]* jr
Wher side of the room ; the right head si«f
Can you gife us the names of lome of »»•
that so volunteared ?—TWd, Brunt-*-*
12331
for Hi^ Treai<m*
Brunt, the pdaoQer ?— Tes ; DaTidson, Wil-
Ings ? — ^No ; I do not recollect seeing him
there.
Hall ?-^I do not know Hall's person.
Do you know Harrison f — I was brought to
the Tower with him, but I did not know him
befbre, till I saw him at the Secretary of State's
office*
These you have mentioned were among the
twelve or thirteen ?— Yes.
What took place about this time ?— Thistle-
wood stepped down stairs, and he came up
stairs again, and said, that they had received
intellif^ence that the duke of Wellinffton and
lord Sidmouth had just arrived ; I do not re-
collect any thing more passing till the officers
came up.
When the officers came up, what took place ?
•-They came into the room; t did not see
them till there were two or three in the room ;
they told them to surrender, that they were
officers ; they told them there was a guard of
soldiers below.
You yourself were taken into custody when
the soldiers came f— Yes, I was taken into
custody up stairs.
John Monument cross^xamined by
Mr. Curwood,
Have you been reading Paine's Age of
Reason f — ^I have read it.
- Did that turn you from Christianity ?— No,
it did not, because the bishop of LlandaflTs
answer was with it.
You had, then, an antidote t— Yes ; after 1
bad read that, I got a person to lend me the
bishop of Llandaff 's answer, which I have now.
Then you mean to represent vourself as hav-
ing been a Christian all along f — ^I cannot say
but that that book shook my faith ; but I kept
on reading the bishop of Llandaff all alonff with
it, till I saw that he completely answered him.
And it had no ill effect upon your principles ?
——No.
What political society have you belonged
to ?— I have not belonged to any.
You never mixed at all in those political
neetings ? — ^Yes, I was at two.
You took no part with them? — ^Yes, at two
flaeetings.
And at onW two f — ^At only two!
Bow long have you known Brunt ? — I never
saw him till Thistlewood brought him.
How long have you knovm Thistlewood ? —
I never saw him, except at the public meetings,
tin I saw him at Mr. Ford's.
fiTaving known very little of Thistlewood,
and nothing of Brunt, you consented to go
with Brunt and Tidd, not knowing what you
were going about, as I understand you ? — ^No,
I did not. •
You saw Tidd arm himself ?— Yes.
And you accompanied him ?— Yes. *
As yon went up Oxford-road, you asked him
whether you were going to the House of Com-
mons?-—Yes.
VOL. xxxin.
A. D. 1820* [123^
Seeing him going armed, and to meet others,
and supposing you were going to the House of
Commons, what did you suppose you were
going about ?-«I naturally thought they were
going- to attack it.
You thought they were going to murder the
members of the House of Commons, that is a
delicate way of putting it ; did you think they
were going to murder the members ? — I did
not know ; that was the reason I asked.
Still you went vrith him ? — ^Yes, I did.
Having reason to believe that something
vras intended ? — Yes.
But you had no reason to believe wh&t was
going to be done till you got to Cato-street ? —
No.
Now, remember what you told- me the other
day, ^'He told me it was a cabinet dinner
and then I knew what ffe was going about ?''—
I certainly thought it could be for no other
purpose but to destroy the persons there.
And you, a Christian, wnose principles had
never been shaken, joined them in it ? — I was
forced to join it, I could not get away. ,
What forced you to Tidd*s, and forced you
along the streets? — ^Fear.
You told us just now, that a man in a brovm
coat was told he might retire ; why did not you
retire? — ^I should luive been loth to take him
at his word.
It was fear brought you into it, and fear
kept you in it ? — ^Yes, it was.
Tkomas Monument sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Solicitor General.
You are the brother, I believe, of the last
witness ? — ^Yes.
Do you remember Thistlewood at any time
coming to his house ?^-Yes, he did ; he came
one evening.
Did he come alone, or in company with-
some person? — He came in company with
Brunt.
With Brunt the prisoner? — Yes.
After they had been some little time in the
room, did your brother go out with Thistle*
wood ? nvhat did Thistlewood say? — He asked
if he could speak with him.
In consequence of that, did Thistlewood
and your brother go out ?'-*Yes, they did.
Did Brunt remain behind in the room ? —
Yes, he did.
About how long, as well as you can recol-
lect, were Thistlewood and your brother out of
the room ? — ^I do not suppose they were out
above two or three minutes.
After they returned into the room, did Brunt
and Thistlewood go away together? — Yes,
th^ did.
Do you remember on Tuesday the 22nd of
February Brunt calling again upon your bro-
ther P — Yes.
Did he call alone, or in company with any
person ?— He called in company with a man
of the name of Tidd.
Tell us what passed when he came in ; what
did your brother say to Tidd ?— When Brunt
4K
12351 1 GBOBGB W.
came io, my brotW taidy ** I thouglit I had
losi yoa ;** there was something passed con-
oeraing the king's death. Brunt said, that the
king's death had made soxQie alteration in their
plans. My brother made answer, and asked
mm what plans; he said, they had different
objects in view.
Do you recollect any thing j&irther ? — No ;
I recoUect Brunt asking Tidd, whether he
should give us an outline of the plan ; I do not
know whether Tidd made any answer, I did
not hear ; but Brunt then said he would give
us the pass-word, which consisted of the lettera
hfUjt; that we were to meet oq the following
evening at Tyburn turnpike at six o'clock, and
if any of their party were there, they would
answer I, o, n.
Were you asked to eo ? — Yes ; I ^^as a^iked
to go.
Did you refuse or consent 7 — I did neither
the one tM>r the other ; I suppose they expected
me; but they chiefly directed their discourse
to my brother ; I suppose they did not know
me.
Do you remember on the following day, the
Wednesday, Brunt caUing again on your bro*
ther ?— ^Yes, he called between four and five
0>'clock ; he could not go just then*
Tell us what passed ; what did Brunt say ?
—He only asked him if he was ready to go ;
we were busy at work ; my brother told him
he could not go then; and Brunt told him
when he was ready to go, he was to call' in
Uole-in-the-wall Passage on Tidd, and he
would take him.
After Bnint had said^ this, did he go away ?
—Yes, he did.
What timiB did your brother go out? — It
was nearly seven o'clock, as nearly as I can
recollect.
Did you yovrself go?— No, I did not.
Your broiAier did not oome. home ag^n ?•—
No ; I never saw him afterwards, till he was
in custody.
Mr. Sofidtor Qeneral.^lt your lordship
irill permit me, I will ask John Monument
one question which I forgot.
lord CA^JBiflro?!.— If you please.
Joi^ Monument called again. — Examined by
Mr, SoUcUor Oeneral,
Do yQu remembei bieing taken to White-
hall ?— Yes.
Were you i^Qured in any way ? — ^I was kept,
with about two or three officen.
Were you handcuffed to any person? —
When I was taken to Whitehall the first day ?
Either day ? — I cannot exactly say ; I know
I was put into a room by myself.
Did any conyersation pass between you and
Thistlewood?-^Yes, that was the last day; I
thought you were asking as to the first day^
Was Brunt in the room then P — Yes.
Were the other prisoners in the room?-*-
Yes.
Tbiey went for the purpose of being ex-
Tkofitljl Brunt
nm
anHned?-«-Ye^; weweie all put mtheim
together.
^an joo recollect irhat ThisQesood toU
you ? — ^Ile told me, when I came to bs a*
arained before the pnvy-«ouncil, I vss to nj
that it was Edwards led me into the meetiB^
that it was through Edwards I came there.
What did you say to that?—I said, bof
can I tell that falsehood when I never saw tJK
person ; hfi said it was of no eonMqacoce; if
you are asked what sort of a penoa he «1^
yoa mzv say that he was not ntach tsU^i ^
yourself of a sallow comp^zioB, vA ^rw4
m a brown great coat.
Do you ?emeraber being seated wiaA^
room at Whitehall F^Yes.
What did Thistlewood say?-He told m
that Edwards was the person thai l^^W
them, and to pass it round amoag tie ^
prisQners ; I did not like to do it ; I toU kin
I should be noticed^ «»^ he Vm^ Q^tQ
another prisoner.
Who was tbatV-pradbura wa3 sitting ^»t
to me, but Bradbum would not take opticioi
what Thistlei^ood said.
Did hft lean pa^t for the purpose of conni*
nicating it beyond ? — Yes.
Did you ever see Edwards ?— I^o.
Thomas Hid^ sw^fi)— S^iuiuned by
Mr. Gvmey.
I believe you have, carri^ oa t|tf l>*jj
of a cow»keeper and dairyman in Unt^
ter-mews ? -» I have.
You have now the misfortune to be is P**
for debt?— I have.
When were you arrested?— A week ^
last Wednesday-morning.
You were taken in execution for dewH
Yes s I had a law^ui^ and lost the cans^
Do you know the pnsoner Wiboa?— **»*
do, perfectly well.
Did Wilson make any prppositioa to job »
be one of a party to do an^ thing ?-t^ ^
days before the 23rd, he asked me if I wj
be one of a pa^ty to destroy alibis n^pV*
ministers.
Did he say wbeue they were tobedejW
ed P— He said at a caibinet dinner; ^^.r^
tbey had got all things ready, and *«*2^
for a cabinet dinner, and that they m gw
such things as I. never saw. . ,
Did he say what,80rt gf thi»gs?-B? s«J»
large things bound round with tgrpaw* JJJ
cords, and fiUod full of naiU »d »«»«?"
other thingi» and that the stMXO^ <» »^^
very strong. .
Did he 96^ what effect they woald w«-
He smd if they were ligbted, they ^^^
up one of th^ walla of thja houses on the owf
side of tbe way in t^e street thai w« ^^
walking in. , i . Ai?
Did he say what more tb^ ^^^^Jj|^
— ^He said they were wailing for a ctf^
dinner ; thai they meant to set fi» to wj
houses, and by keeping the town »» ■JJ^.
confusion for a few days, it would 6W
10873
ydf H^l Trea^oa.
A.D. !«».
C1339
^b«ril; ft^ iiUA lhos6 thiftfi inere to be pnt into
ibt h>6Hi whtirt the gentlemen ifrere at dinner.
The things w^th the tarpanUn ? — Yea ; and
th^ meant to set fire to lord Harrowby*s hoase.
What did they say wduld be the effect of
putting them into the room where the gentle-
idM wei^e at dinner?— He said that sdl who
escaped the ex(>lteion wer^ to die by the edge
of the sword y or some other weapon.
Did he mention to yon the names of any
persons whose booses were to be set fire to ?—
The duke of Wellington's, lord Harrowby's,
lord Sid mouth's, lord Castlereagh*s, the bishop
of London^a, Imd one more that I ctonot re-
member.
Did yon tell him you would be one 7 — He
told me they should depend upo^ me for mak-
ing one, and I told him I would.
Before the 23rd, did you write a letter to
my lord Castlereagh ? — I did.
Did yoU go to his house ? — I did.
You did not get access to him f— I did not.
After you had done that, did you go and
watch loitl Harrowby out of bis house to Hyde-
park f — ^I did ; I went two or three times ; at
fast I saw a gentleman mount his horse, and
go towards the park.
DM you deliver to hiih the letter yoU had
written to lord Castlereagh ? — I did.
Is that the letter? ($howmg d Utftr io the
wUnest^J — ^This is the Tery letter.
i do not ask you what passed between his
l^ship and you ; the next day did you see
\^ilsdn sigaid r — Between four and five o'clock
id th^ eftenlo6n, I was (oing up Manchester-
stfeet \9ii\i one of my little ^rls, he said,
^ Hldjen, y(>u are the man I want to see.''
What nldre did he say ?— I said, " Wilson,
mMt if there going to be ?" and he said, there
IS a Cabinet dinner to-night at lord Harrow-
by's in Orosveiior-square ; I asked him where
tbey Were going to meet ; he told me I was to
go up into John-street, and at a public-house
the comer of Cato-street, the si^n of the
Hotse and Groom ; and there I was to stop in
the public house, or to stop at the comer at
tbe post till I was shoved into a sthble close by.
Wh&t did yoil ask him next? — I asked htm
what time I wal to meet him, and he said I
wiis to meet therit at a quarter before six, or
hfOx o^clock at fiirthest; and if I did not
make haste, the grand thing would be done
befete I came.
Upon thiS) did you ask him any fuHher ques-
tions ? — I asked how many there were to be , and
he §taA between twenty and thirty ; I asked
him if that was all the party that was in Cato-
street, and he said there was another party ;
o^cf piiHy in Gray's-inn-lahe, another party in
thi Borough, another in Gee*s-court, or in the
city, I am not cei^ain Which.
I>i4 he say any thing more abbuf Gree's-
codtt? — He told me I had no occasion to be
alamied, all Ge^'s^cotirt wak iii it.
-What descHptioH of persons lire in Gee's-
co«tt?-rI b^tteVe then! to bi almost all Irish,
what I know of tbem«
It il ill Oxford-street ?— One end of it runs
into Oildrd-street.
Did he say any thing about the Itishmen ? —
He said the IriaSimen were all in it, but they
would not act till the Englishmen began first :
as the Englishmen had so often deceived the-
Irish, they would not begin before the English
had.
Did he mention what places those parties
were to go to ? — He said our party was to go to
lord Harrowby*s, and do the grand thing, and
then all parties were to retire and meet some-'
where about the neighbourhood of the Man-
sion-house.
Did he mention what was to be done in
other places? — He told me there was two-
pieees of cannon that would be very easily
taken by knock ihg in a small door.
Did he mention any others to be got else-
where?—He skid there were four others, at
some Artillery-ground — I do not remember-
where — ^which were easily to be gbt at by
killing a sentry.
Did you theft leaye him?-~I then, I believe,
left him.
Did you go to John-street that evening ? —
I did.
At abonf what timeP — Betweeti six and
seven o'clock, I believe it to have been near
seven when I got there.
When you got near the gateway by the
itorse and Groom, whom did you see? —
When I got near the gateway, I there met
Wilson and Davidson m^ coloured man stand-
ing near a post.
Had you known Davidson before ? — Yes.
And conversed with him? — ^Yes, many times.
I do not, at present, ask you what had pas-
s^ between you; what did Wilson say? —
Wilson said, ** You are come ;" I said, " Yes,
I am come, but I am behind my time $" I told
him that I had to get some cream, which I
was obligated to go and get.
Did Ihividson then say any thing f — David-
son asked me if I was going in ; he said if
I wak going in, Mr. Thistle wood was in there.
Did you ask them any question ? — I asked
them what time they would go away from
there, as I must go and get some cream ; nnd
he told me they meant to leave that place
about eight o'clock.
Did he tell you what you were to do, if they
should be gone ? — They told me, if they were
ffone from there before I came back, I must
follow them to Grosvenor-sqnare, the fourth
house fVom the comer, at the bottom, on the
other side, I should find them.
ThomoM Hiden cross-examined by Mr. Curwood,
How long have you known Wilson ?— Four
or five, or six months.
You must have been very intimate with
him, I should think? — I have been a good
deal with him, at a master tailor's, a friend of
mine that worked for me, Mr. Clarke's. *
I observed, the very thing he asked you was,
wb^th^r yoa would be one of a pAhy to lull
13301 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial ^John Ihumu Brunt
[1340
his muesty's miiiisten?^He did; he asked
me, whether I would be one of a party to
destroy his majesty's ministers.
And yon told him you would ? — I did.
Had you been at those political meetings }
•^I had never been to any but two ; I went to
what they called a shoemakers' club twice.
I do not ask as to shoemakers' clubs ? — I
was induced by my friend Mr. Clarke to go
with bim to it on a Sunday-evening.
And you found yourself mistaken when yon
got there ? — ^There was nothing particular that
evening.
You went again?— Yes, another Sunday
night ; and those were the only two times I
was ever there.
You never did attend those private meetinn?
— ^I never was at a private meeting in my lire.
You will swear tnat ? — Yes.
Do you know a man of the name of Ben-
nett ?— I do, perfectly well.
What is the Bennett you k|iow? — I know
one Bennett a bricklayer.
Did you ever persuade him to attend those
meetings ? — I never persuaded him ; I said
one evening, when Mr. Clarke called on me,
** I dare say Mr. Bennett will go with us."
Did not you tell him something was to be
done for the good of your countiy, and per*
suade him to go ? — I said perhaps he would
go ; there was Mr. Clarke as well as me.
Did you not persuade him to go, and tell
him something was to be done for the |food of
this country ? — I cannot swear that I did, nor
that I did not ; I asked him to go down to the
shoemakers' club widi us.
Look at the jury P — I ean look at them.
Did you not persuade him to go, and tell
him that something was to be done for the
good of the country } — I cannot say positively
that I did.
Will you swear you did not ? — ^I asked him,
whether he would go down with my friend
Clark and me to a club ; we were all neigh-
bours together.
He will be called to contradict you if you
deny it ; did not you persuade him to go and
tell him that something was to be done for the
good of the country P — I cannot say ; I asked
liim if he would go with me.
Will you deny that you told him something
was to be done for the good of your countiy r
— Upon my oath, I do not think I did.
Will you deny it, or admit it? — 1 can say
no more than I recollect.
You will not deny it, nor admit it ? — ^I can-
not say further.
The first time that you saw Wilson was the
23rd of February?— It was, till I came into
this court.
Ii was not till the 23Td that you knew the
meeting was to ber in Cato-street? — ^Yes, it
was before the 23rd I knew there was to be a
meeting.
Was it told you where till the 23rd ?— No,
it was not.
You did not know it till the 23rd?— I did
not, liU thfe afternoon of the 23ni«
And joa made your oomnnmcation to kad
Harrowby on the 22nd } — ^I have not said that.
Mr. Gumey.— No, he has not fixed the day.
Mr. Curtoood.-^It was before the 23rd? —
Yes.
You did not communicate to his lordship
the place where the meeting was to be?— -x
did not.
You wrote the letter yourself? — ^I did.
Take a pen and write a word or two?
Mr. Ovmey. — It should be at the table.
Mr. dcnooocL — ^I am told he cannot write
at all ; I may be misinformed.
IFt^iett.— There is my name — (hamdmg im
the paper) — is that enough ? I am not muck
of a scholar.
Mr. Curwood. — Yes; it is a mistake cer-
tainly ; 1 was told he could not write.
BnoU.— My lord, I desire that witness may
leave the court.
Wilton, — Turn him out of court.
[nepmoneri kitted the tokneuoikepamei
the bar.^
The Earl of Hamnob^ sworn. — KTamined by
Mr. AUanuy GeneraL
You are a privy councillor, and one of his
majesty's ministers ? — I am.
Be good enough to enumerate the noUesien
and gentlemen who compose what is called
the cabinet?— My lord chancellor; the etoA of
Westmoreland, lord privy seal; the eail of
Liverpool, first lord of the Ttreaaoiy; Mr.
Vansittart, chancellor of the Exdieqner; vy
lord Castlereagh, secretur of state Ibr tlie
foreign department; lord Sidmouth, eecretair
of state for the home department ; my Una
Bathurst, secretary of state for the colonial
department ; lord Melville, first lord of die
Aamiralty; the duke of Wellington, maHei-
general of the Ordnance ; Mr. Bobineon, pie-
sident of the Board of Trade; Mr. Btwggt
Bathurst, chancellor of the duchy of Lancas-
ter; Mr.' Canning, president of the India
bo8^; Mr. Well^ey Pole^ master of te
Mint ; and the earl of Mulgrave.
Has it been usual for these noblemen and
Jentlemen to give what are called cabinet
inners ?-^It has.
In consequence of the deaUi of his late ma-
^ty, had those dinners been suspended f—
ey had.
Had your lordship intended to give aci^
binet dinner on the 23rd of February last f-^
Certainly.
How long before that day had the cards of
invitation been issued by your lordship ? — ^K
believe on the Friday or the Saturday pre-
oedinff ; probably on the Saturday.
Did your lordship, before the 23rd of Feb-
ruary, see the witness who has been jest
examined, Hideu? — ^I saw him in the Fm,
near Grosvenor-gate ; he is the same penoa
whom 1 hare just seen eiainined. .
S
I
14411
Jor High IWoMM.
A. D. 1820.
C134I9
Oq wliftt dty was it P-— On Tuesday^ the
32nd of February.
At what time of the day?-— I believe be-,
tween two and three o'clock, but I am not
quite poettiye.
Did he give you any letter addressed to my
lozd Castlereagh ?— He did.
Is that the letter ? (thomng a tetter to hii
^0nitAtp>— That is the letter.
Had your lordshin any conTersation with
faim at that time } — 1 had.
Did you ask him for his name and address ?
—I asked him whether he had put his name
and address in the letter, as he had expressed
a wish to have further communication with
me ; he told me he had not, and he then gave
me his card, containing his name and address.
When did you see this person again? — I
saw him again by appointment the next mom*
iag, in the ring in Hyde-paric,
You appointed to meet him there to avoid
observation? — Aa he appeared to me to be
afraid of continuing the conversation with me
when I met him at Grosvenor-gate (having
appointed to meet him at Grosvenor-gate),
when I came there I told him to go on to the
ring, and I met him there on the Wednesday-
morning.
Was the dinner given at your lordship's
house on the Wednesday? — It was not
Did the preparations for the dinner go on
until the evening of the Wednesday ?— The
g reparations for the dinner went on as if it had
sen to take place.
At what hour did your lordship apprize
rur servants that it would not take place? —
wrote a note from the earl of liverpool's,
where I was dining, between seven ai^d eight
o^dock on the Wednesday-evening, to inform
my principal servant that the dinner would
not take place.
' I forgot to ask your lordship whether those
noblemen and gentlemen, whom your lordship
lias named, are privy councillors? — ^They are.
Ther are all principal servants of his majes-
ty in the administration of the government ?—
Yes, they are privy councillors, and form what
is called the cabinet ooondl.
>
John Baker sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Attorn^ Oeneral.
1 believe you are a butler to the earl of Har-
rowby ? — ^I am.
Do you remember, by his direction, sending
out cards of invitation to a cabinet dinner to
be had at his house on the 23rd of Febmaiy f
—I do.
On what day were those cards of invitation
issued ?-»The 18th or the 19th; I believe on
Saturday the 19th.
When did you first receive intimation that
Out cabinet would not dine at lord Harrowb/s
house ?— About eight o'clock on the Wednes-
day-evening, or it might be ten minutes after
eight
Up to that period, bad the preparations for
aho ainaer gone on in the expectation that the
cabinet would dine there ?--£Tery thing en-
tirely ; nobody had an idea to the contrary.
Do you remember whether on that night
there was any party at the ardibishop of York's,
whose house adjoins lord Harrowb/s? — I
believe there was; I saw carriages stopping at
the door.
About the dinner hour ?— It was rather be-
fore the dinner hour that was to be at lord
Harrowb/s; it was between six and seven
o'clock.
Lord Chief Baron.^The archbishop of York
lives the next house to the earl of Harrowby's?
—Yes, the next house coming out at the door..
Bi^ard Munday sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. LUtkdaU.
Where do you live ?— At No. 3, Cato-street.
Do you know a stable in that street ?— Yes.
Do you remember^ on the 23rd of February
last, seeinp; any body go into that stable ? — ^Yes.
What time of the day was it when you first
saw any body go there ? — ^About three o'clock
in the afternoon.
Whom did yoo see then ? — ^I saw Harrison
in the stable.
Whom did you see afterwards ?— rl came
home from work about half after four, or twen*
ty minutes after four, and I saw Davidson
walking up and down the archway that leads-
to the stable.
Where did he go to after he had been
walking up and down? — ^I do not know; I
went in and got my tea, and ^ame out again ;
and I had occasion to go to the chandler's
shop to get some cofiee, and after that I re«
turned and got a pint of beer, and after that
I bad occasion to come out opposite to the
stable, and I saw Davidson pass with two can-
dles in his hand.
What time might this be P— A quartes after
six.
Did he do any thing with those candies ? —
Yes, he went and lighted one of them, and.
took it into the stable.
How many people did you see go in an4>
out of this stabler-- 1 saw two going in and.
three coming out as I passed for the cofiee
and back again.
Did yon see more people than those at any
time?— Not at that time; after Davidson, I
saw two go in, and then one go in.
Did you observe, in the course of the day,
whether any thing had been put up ? — Yes p
when I came home to watering in the after-
noon, I heard a knocking, and looked up, and
they were nailing up a coarse bread bag, or
something of that kind, to prevent any person
looking in ; I thought it was to keep out the
coldness of the weather.
Do you know whether that stable had been
occupied shortly before that? — ^Mr. Firth re-
moved his cows just before Christmas.
Had it been unoccupied from that time ? —
Yes,ithad.
1049} ^ GBOMB IV.
Ur.UHMtk.
Where do you live?— ^At No. 2, Cato-etit«l.
Did you 8«f any pecson on the $3rd of
Tebruaiy, who attracted your attentioa f — ^Yei;
a man of the name of Harrison.
Where did you see him? — ^I saw him go
into the stable.
Did ke say any thing about the stable ? —
He said he bad taken two chambers, and was
cleaning them up.
Did yoa see waj p«Mons fO into tfiait hAXb
Ibal evening f— Yet; I supirase ffom tt^edt^
to tweBty-i?e I saw go in and oet.
G«0ifs Tk$mat Jimfk JRartAwn sWQn&.*---£x-
amined by Mt. MoUaniL
Yen are a conltable at the pablfc office at
fiow^stiaett^Iam.
Wei% yoa diracted, on the 29rd ef Febmdry
Ipet, to go to Calo^stieety Sdgwve-road ?-«-l
wa4.
▲t what time did y<m get there ?--^Abeut
six o'clock, when I first went.
DM yoa go alona^ or with Any pvrCy of
police oflScers ? — I had three then.
Were yon afterwards joined by more ? — I
Tritd qfJoMn Tkdnuu BnaU
[15144
Did you go to thb Horso-and-Ght)oia pubiio-
Imius^ whea[ yoa first went ?— I did.
When you were in that house, dUf yon Sea
either tf the prisoaers at the bat dame in ?—
Ooppes a^d Oilofari^
Did Cooper bring any thing witk Urn l^^A
stiek<
What sort of a itsok ?-^A mcip^iidc.
Did ha leave that stickf-^He did^
Did yon take possession of that stiek t — I
You baye it ?— I have it.
After this did yoa go into any stiible t-^I
did.
At i^bat tine didr yoo eater thd stift)]e ?^
About half«>piat eight, U near as can be.
Upon going in, what did yau observe? — i
observed a man with a gnn on his shookier,
alid a aword by his side.
What was he doin^?-i->Wa]kin^ backwatdi
and forwards, appearing as a sentinel.
Do yon know at all who that man was t — ^I
dD not.
What did yon do J^l called oa the |laTty
following ne to seize tbat man, scad take Osire
of him*
What did yoa yonnell do?'-^t went up a
lidder in the stable.
Tberd ^km a ladder from the stable conmth
nieating with the room above P^-^There was.
When yoa reached th^ icp of the hdder,
what presented itself to you r^^i saw seveml
men ; I tkw a bench, arid heatd the olattsiliig
of arms.
Did Ton pereelve any ariif P— I did.
Of wWoescriptioii f-^wordi and pistoll
Did any of the officers go up witlt "^I-^
They did.
Whidl of (lem ^— EUU and Smiteta.
Dia yon see any body in the room wbom
you kaeW t-^Yed.
Sutt Who tha( person wis?— TbisUewood.
Where was Thistiewood f — He stood on the
right of the behch, as we went up stairs.
Had you known Ibistlewood before?— I
hAd.
Did you say any tiiiajp on having gained tba
loft ?^-:l did ; I said, ** we are officeis, tcse
their arms/'
Did Thiitlewood do any thing opoa Uiat?— >
He did ; he drew i sWord from the table, and
retired into thtf smidl room on one side.
With his sword in his hand ?— Yes.
Was there any Hi^t in die first room, in the
loft ^-^There wast.
Was there any lig^t in tiie small room ? —
There was*
What did Thistiewood do with that iwwsd I
-^He stood fencing with it ; shaking bis mtm
round in that sort of way.
Whilst he was so fencing with it, did Smi*
thers advance towards him? — He did.
On Smitbers advancing to bim, what did
Thistiewood do ? — He put his arm Ibrwaid in
that manner {deuriking tt), and stabbed htoi.
What became of Smitbers ?~He fett bade,
saying, ^ Oh, my God 1'' or^ <" Ob, I am done ;'
I do not know whieh.
He was killed P—s^He fell against ma, he£^
directly, I believe ; I beard no more*
What ibrtber passed ?-'A pistol waa fired,
and the lights were put out.
What Imppened after the Hghts weif^ jpnt
out ?--In Uie room labere Thistiewood was, I
heard'^ rake cry oat^ ^ Kill the b < sa, tliiww
th^m dbwo stain.*'
What did you do npon taeariage ibal ciy ? —
There was a rusb towaids the staii^ ; I joined
in the cry, and got down with them.
Yoa joined in the cry, ** Ayef, kill thein laH^"
and got down with thent^— Yes.
Ob going ent^ did yon meet the aoldiefa? — ^I •
did, in JohD*street
Did yoa retnm ?-~I did;
Upon your return, did yon see eitber of die
prisoners at the bat ? — I did ; "Hdd.
Where was Tidd ?--*He was then abou| dglit
or ten feet, I should think, not mucli inore
from the stable-door.
What wo he doing ?-^Ht appeared to me
endeavouring to get away.
HtMi be any di&^in his bud?— I did net
obeerva it then, till i said te^seinebody ** Sciia
thai man ;*' he tben lifled his arm as if to fite,
and I saw he had a pistol in his hand.
Did you seize him i^I laid b«M <tf te grta
iawMdihe had the pistol, aaU swung Hm
round, and fell upon a dung h^,^ and be apOtt
nie.
Did vof one rslsase yml fn>m thai sit«atioQ'f
-^The soldiers we^ up' diteetfy,^ attd the pirtol
went off.
Was Tidd taken into custodvP — ^He was.
Did yoa saanh tum' ^^I diA.
SuiiebvirtaiiiPU «Dioiitrfd» aiiilMlfM
*i
ifti$i
jfor High Tnr«o«i.
A, p. 189Q.
11046
leather belt round bim^ ^n^ two baU-«atin4s^*
Where were they ?— In his pocket.
Wd yaagptprt»Q UoT?e apd Groom ^r-Tt
was in the Horse and Groom wh^r^ | searched
him.
Waf Bradbum brought in ? — ^He was.
Pld you search him I — I did-
How was he accoutred ?— tie had a string
ti^ found bis waist four or five times, and be
bad six ball cartridges in his pocket, and tbre^
loose balls.
A String was tied round his waiit a« a belt
or sash I — ^It would act as a b^U to carry fivj
thing in.
Where ware the ball ca^tqdga^ ?-^i\ bis
breeches pocket.
Where were the bullets ? — In his breeches
fkPcKet.
Was Davidson brought in ? — He was.
Was Davidson searched in your presence ?
«— ^e was searched, while I waif searching the
other, I believe.
Was Wilson brought in? — ^^e was.
. Did you search Wilson, or not ? — I did 9al«
Did Davidson say any thing whan ha waa
brought in ? — He did ; he damned and s^ore
against any man that would not die in liberty's
caufie ; he gloried in it ; he likewise sung part of
the song, "Scots, wha ha' wi' Wallace bled.''
Pid Wilson say any thing? — He said it was
aB up ; they might knock him on the head now.
Did you return to theloft after this? — ^t did.
In what state did you find the loft ? — I found
several soldiers there, and some of the police
th^re.
Any of the prisoners T — ^Four of the prisoners.
After the candle had been put out in the loft
when ^ou made your escape, was there any
firing in the roaa or from the loft? — Many
shots, I should think between twenty and
thirty.
From the loft, and in the road ? — Some of
fbe shots appeared fired out of the loft ; the
noise was not similar to those within.
Out of the window ? — Yes.
Did the shots proceed from the party that
yoQ saw in the loft ? — I have no doubt of it.
Mr. Baron Garrow^ — Not from your party ?
— Certainly not.
Lord G^ Boron.— Did they shoot imto the
stable, any of them ?*-! am not aware*
Had any of your pacty gained the loft be-
sides yowraelC^. BUis» and Snlthers ?-r-I was not
aware myself of any more.
. Dlid VQU fire ai^ sbot?^— I did not; I at-
temtea, but Ae p^Hol missid.
Bibs did &r8 oncaP — ^I bave.UBdentaod ha
4id.; I do not know it nyaaUl
And Smithers not at allf-^-Certaialx aot ; i
fSUk answer lor him, far be was ladier befibre
ai tbia time ota mgr ngbL.
James ElUt sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. AUmnty GeieraL
I believe you are a conductor of patrol at
the publk office in Bow<«trtet?«*I urn*
JM f^ SO with Eutbveii on iha $v«DUig of
tl^ 2ZH of February to CatoHitreei ?•*-! did.-
Were you with him wben be entaifd fke
atabla?-^As ol<i#a t^ him as I c^uld possibly
follow.
Wban you oama into tba stable^ did yon see
any men in the stable ? — I did.
Where did you see any one?— There was
one man between the foot of the Isddar and
th^ door, with hi^ face towaids the door.
Did you observe whether he had any bdltt
on ^— He b«d two belts aoros^ bis shoulders,
white ones.
^ad be any thing in bis baad ^t-Id bis right
band be bad a catbina or short piece, sobm-
thing of that kind ; and at his left sidei a long
swonl.
Pid you observe, whether be was a man bi
colour or not ?— On passing him, I turned him
half-round, and looked in bis ibce, and ob-
served be wss a man of colour.
What sized man ? — A tall stouiish man.
Have you seen the prisoaei Davidson )-rI
b^^ve $ I believe it to be him.
Did you see any other person in the stable?
•— Thera was another near tha manger, ia tb#
furthest stall.
Near the ladder P^Between the foot of the
ladder and the manger of the further stalL
Did' you observe what sort of person that
was ?— I bad a very slight view of htm, but he
bad a brown coat on, and appeared shorter
than tft«e man of oolour, at least a dark-colattvai
coat.
I believe Entbven mounted the Udder first f
— He did.
And you followed him? — ^l did.
As you were going up the ladder, did yoia
boar any person from the staMe say any thing
by way ot abirm to the parsons above ?^l did;
I beard some person below say, ^ above men ;^
tbe l;»t words Ware men, but I cannot ba oes»
tain to the expression.
Wh&t did ybu observe, when yen got up the
ladder into the loft ?— I observ^ a nvmbaic of
men falling back between the bench that stood
in the room, towards the wall on the side of
the room.
Did you observe what was i^pan that beach?
—I observed there were lights tipoo it.
Did you. observe any thing ebe $ were there
any arms? — ^Xhare were aome airaos^ hot ^^dit
I cannot say.
Do you know Tbistlewood ?— I know him
now.
bid you see bm in A« loft when yon got
up? — I did ; he was at the end of ihe car-
penter's benchi with two of three men, near
the door leading into the little room.
Had he any thing in his hand, or did you
sde bin take any tbing in bis band T-— Ha bad
a. sword in his band.
Did be move fnun the fdaoe where he was
when you came?— Not in tbe fiist instaiteet
not materially so ; ba held the sword at Ine,
and shook it in bb band in a tUcateoing afr
titude*
1347] 1 GEORGE IV- Trial «
What did ycra do upon that ?— I dedred lum
to desist, or I would fire at him, at the sane
time presenting my pistol.
What did he do vpon that?— He hacked
into the little room.
He retreated backwards into the little room?
—Yes.
Did yon see Smithen? — ^Yes, at that time
he gained the top of the ladder.
Smithen followed yoo then? — Yes, up the
ladder.
. And by that time he gained the top of the
ladder ? — ^Yes.
Did Smithers adrance towards Thistlewood ?
<— He went straight forward, to the door of the
little room.
In the direction of the little room?—- From
the top of the ladder to the little room is
straight.
He was advancing towards the door?—- Yes.
Upon his adrancing, what did Thistlewood ?
—Made a posh with his sword, and stabbed
him in or near the right breast.
What happened noon that?— Upon that, I
saw Smithen throw his hands up m this way
[idacribwg tf], his head fell back on bis shoulder,
and he exclaimed, ^ Oh, my God I"
What did you do ? — 1 instantly fired at the
person who aid it, Thistlewood.
Your fire did not take effect ?— It did not.
Upon that were the lights extinguished ?—
At tne moment that I fired, the lights were put-
iog out ; the flash of my pistol was the last
light that I saw.
What ensued upon that f — Smithen fell past
me, slightly against me; and a rush was made
towards the iMder^ and I was foroed down the
ladder.
Upon your getting down the ladder, did you
go down by the stable into Cato-street? — I
went to the door, when two shots* I belieTe,
were fired from some part of the stable, and
passed me in the door-way.
They were fired towards the door? — ^Yes.
And passed you as you were gaining the
door ?— Ves.
Was there any firing from the window of the
little room ? — Yes, there was ; but after I saw
those two shots, I saw a man fire from under
the ladder in the stable up towards the manger.
In what direction did ne fire ?— Up towards
the manger of the furthest stall ; I observed he
was a taU man, but I could not see any more.
Was he coming down the ladder?— He was
standing with his side under the ladder in this
direction, and firing into the stall.
, Lord Chief Bartm, — ^Towards your men ? —
Towards the manger in the stall; I do not
know who were there.
• Mr. Attorn^ GenenU, — On your gaining the
stable-door, did you find any firing from the
amaU room ? — ^Yes : some shots were fired out
of the window of the small room.
In what direction? — Towards the stable
door, as if the^ were pointed at me.
Did you assist in taking any of the prisonen ?
Tk$mai Bruni
[124s
—I heaid the cry of ^ stop him,*^ and saw a
man of colour, and pursued him, and took
him.
He ran in the direction towards Qneen^
street?— He did. .
Was that Davidson ?— That was Davidson.
Did he make any resistance ? — ^He made a
cut at me on my fint closing in upon hiaa^ bdt
afterwards he inade no resistance.
What had he upon his perscm vffaen joa
took him ?*— He haa a carbine at his side, and
a sword in his hand.
Was that carbine slung to him, or had be it
in his hand ? — I do not know whether it was
or not ; I almost think it was slung to him.
What did Davidson say upon his being
taken? — ^I do not recollect any precise vrodis
at that time.
I believe you assisted in taking some of the
other persons? — ^When I went back to the
stable, after leaving Davidson with^two of oar
people, I tied three or four of them together in
the stable.
Do you know who those were? — Wiboa
and B^nument were two of them ; but tibe
othen I am not any vfray acquainted with.
WUliam WeUcaait sworn. — ^Eacamined by
Mr. Gvmey.
You are a Bow-street officer, I believe ?— I
am.
On the night of the 23rd of Febmaiy, did
you accompany the other officen to C«bo-
street?— I did.
We undentand that Ruthven and Ellis and
Smithen went up the ladder?— Yes, th^ did.
Did you observe any person in the rarther
end of the stable ? — I did.
Who did that turn out to be ? — ^Ings.
I believe you had some conflict with Ings ? —
Yes, I had.
While that was taking place, did joa hear a
confusion and firing in the loft? — I did.
And the officen came tumbling down? —
They did.
After they came down, did you observe any
person come down that you knew ? — I did.
Who was that ?— Thistlewood.
What did he do, or attempt to do to you! —
He presented a pistol at my head.
£Hd he fire at you f — He did.
Did you throw up the pistol he had at all ?
— I put up m V left band to save my head.
Did the ball go through your coat ?— Yes ;
and wounded my hand, and went thiwigh my
hat.
Did he do any more to vou? — I made a
thrust to seize him as he fired, and I received
a blow on the right side of my head, and I im,
and he made a blow at me with a swovd^ and
rushed out of the door, and escaped.
You afterwards went up stairs, and tend
poor Smithen dead, and the aims tiiefe T— Yi%
afterwards.
John Wright sworn.— Examined by
Mr. Gurney,
You are a Bow-street patid ?— Yes«
fiMdl
ffSt Hi^ Trtason.
A. D. 1820.
[1250
You tceompuded the other officers to Cato*
street?— Yes.
I will. Dot so throngh the particulars ; did
you ttfterwann assist in securing Ings ? — ^Yes.
Did you search him T — No, I did not.
t>id you see him searched ? — No, I did not.
' Had you any conflict with any mah in the
•ti^le T — ^Yes, with the prisoner Ings ; I took a
loufe find a sword from him.
Was that while your brother officers were
to the loft?— It was.
What kind of knifie ?— A butcher's knife.
Any thing particular with the handle? —
Tied round with wax end.
After that, I believe tou were knocked
down, and be escaped from you? — I was
knocked down, and received a stab in my
side.
He was taken shortly afterwards? — ^He was
taken diat night.
Jo$eph Champion sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. LUtUdak.
' I believe you are one of the Bow-street
patrole?— Yes.
Were you in Cato-street on the evening of
the 2drd of February? — I was.
Amongst others, d6 you remember seeing
Ings there ? — I do ; he was standing at the
ibot of the ladder when we went into the
^ble, and as Ruthven was going up the
ladder, he cried out take care above.
Wflls Westcoatt endeavouring to secure him
then ?'^Yes ; and as I was proceeding up the
ladder I saw Westcoatt knodk him down ; and,
ks I was goinff up the ladder I looked behind
tae, and saw the lower part of a man's body in
the hay-rack.
At this time, were there any shots fired ? —
Several from up stairs; and imagining this
person wlu going to lire at us, I proceeded to
the rack to beat him on the legs, to drive him
back into the loft again.
Who was that ? — I do not know.
After this, did you see any body in Cato-.
Street with a sword ?^— I saw Inistlewood
tunning up Cato-street waving his sword as he
weot along; during this time Ings had es-
caped, and I pursued him up John-steet into
the £d^ware road, where I found Ings in the
possession of Brooks and the watchman; I
assisted in securing him, and took him to
Mary-le-bone watch-house, there we searched
him.
What £d you find upon him f — On taking
off his great coat, he hsul two haversacks across
his arms, one on each arm, slung by cross-
belts.
What did you find in his pockets ?-rThere
trai a tin case with some loose powder in it :
three pistol balls, a pistol key, and the case
of a large knife.
Lord Chief Baron» — In one of the haversacks
yoa found something?— A tin case of loose
powder.
VOL. XXXIII.
Lieutenant IVederick fttzdarenee sworn. —
Examined by Mr. Bolland,
You are in the Coldstream-guards ? — ^^I am.
On the 23rd JPebruary were you applied tOy
to go with a picquet to Cato-street? — I was.
What time did you reach it? — ^About eight
o'clock.
What did you first perceive on arriving
there ?— In John-street 1 met a police-officer,
who cried out, " Soldiers, soldiers 1 the door-
way, stable !*' I ran on, and met two men at
the door, one of whom presented a pistol, and
the other made a cut at me ; I parried his cut,
and exchanged several cuts, but seeing the
body of the picquet coming up, he ran into
the stable ; I followed him ; and on entering
the stable, I ran up against a man who cried
out, [** Do not kill me and I will tell you all ;*'
I gave him over to the picquet, and went into
the stable into one of the stalls, where I took
another man, I gave him also to the soldiers ;
I then led the men up the ladder into the hay-
loft, where I found three, four, or five men,
and a quantity of arms on the table; the
soldiers came up and took them all into cus-
tody.
Did you see any person lying upon the floor
of the loft ? — Yes, I did, he was rising ; half
lying and half rising.
Did you find any person ?— Yes, I did ; on
lifting my feet, I touched the feet of poor
Smithers.
Samuel Heradei Taunton sworn.— *
Examined by Mr. Oumey.
You are an officer of Bow-street ? — Yes, I
am.
On the morning of Thursday the 24th of
February, did you go to the lodgings of the
prisoner Brunt ? — I did.
Did you apprehend him? — I did.
At about what hour ? -^ Between seven and
eight in the morning.
What room did you find him in ? — In a front
two-pair of stairs room.
You had, I suppose, another officer with
you? — ^There was.
Did you leave him in the front room in
custody of that officer, and go and search the
back-room two pair of stairs ? — Yes, I did.
I need not take the enumeration of that
now, but did you find a quantity of fire-balls,
grenades, gunpowder and other things?-— I
did.
In two baskets? — ^In two baskets.
Did you, upon that, return to his room,
and question him upon the subject of these
thinss ?— I did.
What did he sav?— He denied having that
lodging ; he said he had nothing to do with
that room.
Did you ask him about these things? — ^I
did ; he said he did not know any thing of
them.
Did you ask him who had had thMroom ?•—
No, I did not at that time; I sent down for
the landlady; Mary Rogers.
4L
1251] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of John Thamoi Brunt
[\m
She came up ? — Yes.
Did you ask her any questions in his pre-
sence ?— I did.
What did you ask of her P — ^I asked of her,
who occupied that room ; she answered, diat
some man had taken it in company widi the
prisoner, Brunt; I inquired of the prisoner,
who is that man ; he denied havii^ any know-
ledge of him ; he had only seen him once in a
puhlic-house.
Did he say any thing more about htm ?—
No ; that was all that passed.
You took him into custody and took him
away P— Yes, I did.
Did you then proceed to the lodging of
Tidd ?— I did so.
Did you there find some more grenades, and
cartridges, and bullets ? — I did.
Mr. Gumey, — ^That is all I propose to ask
him at present ; the enumeration we need not
go through twice.
Lord CiU^Bortm.— No.
Daniel Biihop sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Chtmey,
You are an officer of Bow-street ?»I am.
Did yon apprehend the prisoner, Thistle-
wood ? — I dia.
When ?— On the 24th of February.
That was Thursday, the momiug after the
Cato-street affair ? — ^Yes.
At about what time? — Between ten and
eleyen.
Where?— At No. 8, White-street, little
Moorfields.
At a house kept by whom P — Kept by Mrs.
Harris.
Where was his own lodging ?— In Stanhope-
street, Clare-market.
Mr. Baron Garrow, — Does his family reside
there P
Mr. Gtim^.— Did his wife and son lire
in Stanhope-street with him? — I understand
they did.
Mr. Gtinify.^That will be all, except the
production of the amnunition and the arms.
Lord C%i^Baron.-^entlemen, there is no
other evidence to be produced but the arms,
and as we cannot possibly conclude to-night,
and you must necessarily therefore be kept for
the night, it is better to rise now than have the
arms and a great deal of powder produced
now ; we shall meet to-morrow morning at nine.
[A^aumed ta ta-tnorrow momingf at nmeo*clocL']
SESSIONS HOUSE OLD BAILEY.
TuzsDAT, Apbil 35th, 1820.
The Prisoner was set to the Bar; William
Davidson, Richard Tidd, James William
Wilson, John Harrison, Richard Bradbum,
John Shaw Strange, James Gilchrist, and
Charles Cooper, being placed behind him.
George Tkomat Jootfk JUrfAoM called agiiiL-
Examined by Mr, GanKy.
Do' there now lie upon the taUt the vu
found at Cato-street ?~There do.
Except some of the pike^iSTBif-Tk
dozen oipike-staves.
I obsenre these pike-staves sie kmk^
except some from which, owing to the glees'
ness of the wood, the ferrules have falleD of!
— ^Yes, they were all ferraled at the time tkej
were found.
And holes bored for the purpose of leeeifng
something ? — ^Yes.
Mr. Banm Oorroio.— Were they takes iitke
loft ?— In the loft, or in the stable.
Mr. Gvmey, — Did you also find these pike
heads, some of them being bayonets, and smk
of them old files ?— The soldiers foond thesi.
Mr. Guniey. — ^We have here, my lord,eTB7
person who found each article, but mylemed
niends do not exact our calling them, 'te
holes are made for the reception of iQchtlDip
as the pike heads ?--Yes. \0m wancntdolt
a$laf.] ^ .
What quantity of other things were tbenr
-—I have not the list.
This is the list ; thirty-eight boU-caitniifeSr
fire-lock and bayonet, one powder-flask, tlu^
pistols and one sword, with six bayonetspibi
and cloth belt, one blunderbuss, pistol,foQrte«
bayonet spikes and three pointed filev^
bayonet, one bayonet spike and one s***^
scabbard, one carbine and bayonet, tv*
swords, one buUet, ten hand-grenades, tMV*'
balls, one large grenade and bavooet, nfe
ladder, one sword^tick, forty baJl-cirtndJ
and one bayonet, thiee loose balb: tu »•
things were found in the loft?— Yes.
Found in the pocket of Bradbum, sno*^
cartridges, three balls and some stiios P
round him to act as a belt ; a pistol that Tm*
fired, a pistol that Wilson attempted to ^
blunderbuss in the stable, sword, beM»
scabbard in the stable, one pistol in^^
another pistol in the sUble, one sworn »»
stable, twelve sticks with fewdei; »"JJ;
pocket of Tidd, two baU-cartridges, vAim
him a leathern belt ; two ball-cartridgtfWJ
the stable, and ten ditto in Newnbai^JWj
one musket cut down ; and one swtf* *""
Davidson, one haversack, c'^jjjjj^-i
pricker, bayonet, scabbard, cartooche^
a belt round his body ; two haferrt«»» ^
belt, and tin powder case fi"'" *"&
pistol balls, one pistol kev, and a kmie
irom Ings ; one haveisack, «>n*'""?y j^
teen ball-cartridges, three balls, on«P^
one pricker, one worm for drawing ^JJia
one knife and a turn screw, one ftwjw
receive a bayonet, left in the publiH»oo*
Yes ; that is correct. . , ^x^
Have you the knife f-Thatis it. [p*^
Has that the appearance of a butcher's kfl*'
—It has.
i
13591
far High Treason.
A.D. 1820.
[1254
Do you find the handle worked round with
wax-eods ? — It is.
Have you also the knife case ? — ^Yes.
Pot that also into the knife-case. [It um
dcme.] Does that belt appear to be of the same
doth as the case for the knife ? — ^It does.
Mr. Baron Gorrou;. — This is not a case
made by a cutler, but a cloth case ?
Mr. Otamof, — ^Yes, my lord, it is made of
Uoe cloth ; the witness seeing it by dark took
i t for black. [Several cf the artideiwert handed
to tke Jury.'] — Produce the two haversacks
found on the person of Ings, and slung to his
shoulders. [IVy vjere handed to the Jury,]
Produce now the hand-grenades ? [The tott-
net^ produced the jmie.]— This is the large one.
That has a fuse in it, like the other, I be-
lieve ? — It has.
Three have been opened ? — ^Yes.
And you now produce the remainder here ?
— ^Ihere have been four opened.
John Hedor Moriton called again.*— Examined
by Mr. Gutney,
Yon have spoken to two swords having been
brought by Ings to you to be ground and
sharpened; look at that, and state whether
that is one of them } — Yes, that is one.
What were the instructions he gave yon re-
specting it? — ^To nrind it at the edge from
heel to pointy and likewise at the back of the
point.
And you had it done ? — ^Yes.
That was at Christmas Eve ? — ^Yes.
&Miie^ Eercula Taunton caUed again. —
Examined by Mr. Gwmey,
You mentioned yesterday, that upon search-
ing the two-pair back room in the house in
which Brunt lodged, you found two rush bas-
kets?—Yes.
Produce those two rush baskets? — These
tore the two baskets, [yrodwang them]^
What does that basket contain? — Nine
diiferent papers of tar, rope-yam, and things
of that description.
Are they what you call the fire-balls ? — ^They
jure ; and there were some steel filings.
Lard Chief Boroit.— For what purpose were
the steel filings ?
Mr. Cfumey. — We suppose them to have
been the result of the filing which had taken
place. Supposing files had been filed to a
riiarp point, would that operation have pro-
duced the filings you have before your — I
■faovld think it would.
Have yon now the basket which was tied up
in a blue apron ? — ^Yes.
' What have you in that basket ?— There are
foior grenades, three papers of rope-yarn,
ter, and more ing^redients, two bags of gun-
powder, of one pound each.
Produce those bags of gunpowder ? — ^These
ire they ; and five empty- ba^, a paper of
wwder, one leathern bag withsixty«three balls
a it [producing them].
Those were all you had in the basket?^ Yes.
Besides that, was there an iron pot? — ^Yes.
Does that iron pot appear to have been used
for the boiling of tar F — It does.
Did you also find a pike-handle? — I did,
this is it [producing it].
These were all the things you found in
Brunt's ?— Yes.
Are the four grenades you found there the
same as those which are upon the table? —
Exactly the same.
You stated yesterday, that after you had ap-
prehended Brunt, and found those things, you
went to the lodgings of Tidd ?— Yes.
Produce the things you found at Tidd's; iu
the first place give me the haversack [It was
produced,] — What articles are there in that ha-
versack P— There are 434 bullets, 171 ball-
cartridges, 69 ball cartridges without powder,
a brown paper parcel with three pounds of
gunpowder.
Produce the coarse canvas cloth. [It wa$
produced,]~^lu that what did you find? — ^Ten
grenades.
Are they of the same description as the
other?— They are.
All fitted with fuses ?— Yes.
Eleven bags of powder, one pound each ? —
Yes.
How many empty bags 7 — Ten.
What else ? — ^A small tin powder fiask, with
powder; sixty-eight bullets; four flints, and
twenty-seven pike handles, which are these
[producing them] ; and these, all of ihem, had
iron ferrules round them the same as this> but
some have dropped off in consequence of the
greenness of the wood.
Besides that, did you find a trunk ? — Yes,
this is it.
What did that trunk contain?— 965 ball
cartridges, done up in parcels of five each.
Oeorgt Thomas Joseph Butkoen called again. —
Examined by Mr. Qvmey,
When these several fire-arms were found in
Cato-street, were they for the most part loaded }
— ^They were.
Were the charges drawn, in order to produce
them here? — They were.
Were they loaded with ball?— They were;
one of the guns with largish shot.
Edward Haison sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gvamof,
You, I believe, are seijeant in the Royal
Artillery ?— Yes.
Take in your hand some of these flannel
bags of powder; what do you call them? —
They are in imitation of a six-pound cartridge.
A cartridge for a six-pounder ? — Yes.
For a piece of Artillery to carry six pounds }
— ^Yes. Thisis gunpowder. I have examined
some of these before, and there was exactly a
pound of powder in each bag.
Is it very good powder ?— Yes ; it is ex-
actly the same as the hand-grenades were made
of.
1255] 1 GEORGE IV.
TrM ^Jah» Homt ^^nmt
USfiQ
In the Artillery you make up tho^ bags,
not in flaDDel ?— No, it is a twilled serge ; it
is rather stronger.
, This would answer the same purpose ?— It
would*
Look at these fire-balls ; have you examined
them before ? — ^Yes.
Of what do they appear to be composed f —
There is a difference in some of them ; they are
in general oakum, tar and rosin ; one I liaTC
examined I found without brimstone ; all the
others I have examined were with brimstone.
Would any admixture of steel filings increase
the effect of those fire-balls, by increasing the
heat? — ^No; the steel filings would be part of
the composition of the priming of the fuse.
Would these fire-balls, if they were thrown
into a window of any house or building of any
kind, be likely or certain to produce fire ? —
Yes ; they would set any wood on fire.
What length of time would they bum? —
Three or four minutes, according to their size.
If thrown into the hay-loft of the King-street
barracks, do you thinx they could possibly
avoid being burnt?— If there was forage there,
it would have produced a conflagration most
undoubtedly.
Take one of these grenades to pieces ; there
is an outer coating of rope-yam ? — Yes.
[The wiinen opened one of tkem in the praence
qftheJwy,]
A Juryman (Mr. Aldeney), — Is that the
usual outer coating? — ^Yes, they are all the
same.
Mr. Gurneif, — Is that the usual outer coating
of hand-grenades of military men ?— No, not of
ours ; that is iron metal.
Have these tlie appearance of having been
made by military men 7 — ^No, by no means.
But mough not so constmcted, are they so
constmcted that they would have a great
effect P — Yes ; the more hard they are bound
the greater will be the explosion and the effect
resulting from it ; this I 4taye come to is a
piece of paper cemented ; here are some nails ;
here are a number of pieces of iron.
What is that you have come to? ^ Dry
oakum.
Cemented at the bottom ? — ^Yes.
Now you have come to a tin box, or case ?
--Yes.
There is a fuse to it?— Yes.
Is that fuse brazed in ?— Yes.
Break it off and see whether the case is filled
with gunpowder ?^[ The wUness took out thejute
and poured out the powder.] — ^Here is a number
one round shot in it, with the gunpowder.
What quantity of gunpowder does that con-
tain ?— One I before opened contained three
ounces and a half, and this appears to be th§
same.
That 18 as much powder as you use for a
nine-inch shell? — ^Yes, rather more.
Would it be su6&cient to explode the grenades
you have taken to pieces?— Yes, it would.
Do you find several piaoes of icoft in that!
— ^Here are twenty-five pieces in munber.
In the ey«nt of explosion, would those pieces
of iron fly about a room like so many ahoi?
— ^Yes they would.
And if thrown into a room in whidi that
were fifteen gentlemen at dinner, in joer
judgment, would it most likely prove destruc-
tive to the lives of many ? — ^Y^ it would, no
doubt.
What length of time would it take from iSkt
lighting of that fuse to die explosion ?— Neaily
half a minute.
Mr. Attorn^ (SjenerdL—lHj lord, that is te
case o^ tl^ part of the pros^ution*
[The SoUcUorOai^ handed^ a i9ote totk
Omrtf and their lorAhtpe contuked tegetikr.l
Lord Chirf Baron, — Mr. Solicitor-geoeral:
we shall certainly take an opportunity ol
noticing this circumstance of the sheriA coa-
ceming the students, who are not allowed ts
come to the place whiph ought to be kept ea-
tirely for them.
Sheriff Parkini^ — Certainly, my lord, it is a^
desire that it should be so ; I have vrished it
should be so from the commencement; it b
not my fault.
Lord Chief Boron.— I do not say there his
been a fault any where.
Sheriff Parhm, — ^Yes, there has beeoa&ilt;
an authority has been exercised, but not wilk
my authority at all, but against my antbority.
Lord Clvief Baron, — ^This box is for them,
and you find it so laid down in Mr. Justice
Foster's publication, and also b^ Mr. Justice
Kelynge ; we must insist that it aliall he at-
tenoed to ; accommodation must be made ibr
those gentlemen.
Mr. Baron Gamno^ — I was yeiy mavj yaaa^
ago in the habit of attenduojg here vhea a
student, and it occurred to us that upe wan
intenrupted, on which t had oonfisrenoe vidi
other gi^tlemen, and we mrbposed this rcgaia-
tion, which was immediately madfl^ — that eve^
gentleman who presented himself with his
certificate that he was a student of one of the
Inns of court, and in his gown, should he ad*
mitted, and no other pemoii admitted, unless
there was ample room for the students. I re-
member one occasion on which an applicatiflai
was made to the cburt, and I was the author
of that applicatioiL
A Student, — ^We are very mudi obliged ta
your lordship.
. Lord Chi(^ Baronj^J^ isof great nuVUe im-
portance, that gentlemea wLo stu47 the law
should have access to the court.
[All who were not gtudents were tsMiedisft^
cofi^U to retire from the ttvdemtt ioT*]
DBFENCB.
Mr. CSMnoood.— <}tntl^9aa9 of UpA joxyclf
13A7!]
far High Tnmov*
A. D. 1890.
UfW8
YOU had been iecluded for the Ifai week
from a knowledge of what has been passing
in this court, some at least of the observations
which I shall feel it my duty to make to you,
would be unnecessary. But as you know well,
not only from your knowledge, but from what
has been proclaimed to all the world through
the medium of the public press, that this is
the third time that it has been my duty to rise
to address juries, on nearly similar occa-
sions ; the Court and you must feel, that
however oppressive the dn^ was in the first
instance, it has become more oppressive by
what has since taken place.
In reviewing (and 1 assure you I have done
tt with anxious consideration) my own conduct
in these i^uses, the coarse that suggests itself
as fit for me to pursue in this particular case
(and I adopt it upon the best consideration I
am able to give the matter) appears to me to
be not to attempt to address you in what may
be called a speech, but rather to consider
myself in your situation, as a juryman, and
calmly, deliberately, and with the utmost care
and attention, weigh the evidence that has
been given in this case, and see how far it
lupplies to the issue which you have to try.
\Voatever may have passed on former occasions,
whatever former verdicts may have been, I am
sure I need not tell you, that you are to judge
of this case according to the impression which
the evidence in this case shall make on your
minds ; and it is not without some degree of
confidence, tbatl hope, upon adueconsideration
of thee?idence,youmay nnd youiselvesjustified
in giving a verdict of not guilty in favour of
tliis prisoner. Because I confess thai when
I first heard the evidence which has been now
thrice repeated, detailed, it produced a con«
▼ictiou in my mind, which upon more serious
consideration (and I have turned it over in my
mind repeatedly) I do not think it deserves.
And if an^ of you should think as I do, not-
withstanding what bi^ pass^ on former oc^
casions, you will be bound t/o act upon ypur
present amended judgments, and not upon
your former. However, before we can apply
the evidence, it is necessary that you should
consider the charge to which that evidence is
to.be applied ; and you will consider (I will not
go now into the details of the indictment), that
the charge you have to t^, is whether the
prisoner is guil^ or not guilty of laces which
anvmnt to high treason ; it is not enough for
you to be convinced that he meditated to corn-
mi^ a very atrocious crime; it is not enough
ibr you to be convinced that he mesMit to raise
a great commotion in the town; it is not
enough even for you to be convinced that he
medimed that m.Q^ honid crime, as every man
iaasX feel it to b^, the assassination of all his
majesty's ministers. If you believe all this,
and. stiU do not b^eve there is evidence in
the caie which satisfies your minds tha^t he
meditated rebellion^ o^ in the la^guag of the
record, th%t he ^onspired to Hvy ^v ^^i^l
kin ms^^ty in hit doiffinioQi^ €p; tl^ porpp^
of compelling him by force lo change his mea-
sures, you will, notwithstanding all the horror
you must feel at his conduct in other respects,
in the discharge of your duty to your country
and to yourselves, find him not guilty of thift
charge.
The two charges in the indictment which
we now understand are relied upon^ are, that
the prisoner conspired to depose his ipajestyi^
and that he conspired to levy war against him.
Those are the charges in questioui and are
both made treason by a late statute, the 36th
of his late miyestv's reign. ^ Foir many, very
many years, the law of treason did not in?
elude those offences; for by a statute, to
which all Englishmen have looked i|p with
veneration as the best protection of their libera
ties, I mean the famous statute of ^ward the
3rd, treason was so correctly defined, as con«
sisting in acts and not in intentions, that my
lord Coke, in commenting upon that statute,,
calls it a blessed statute, because i^ defined
men's duties as to treason so clearly and so
accurately, that no man could fall into the
guilt of treason by any thing like implication
or inference ; and that statute also contained
another very important provision, for it de-
clared, not only tha^ there must be specific
facts to constitute the guilt of treason, but a
man must be pnvabfy convicted thereoi. And
the same learned writer expends a whole
section in commenting upon the word provably,
which word means, as he says, that he must be
clearly, ^nequivocally, undeniably, by evidence
that cannot be doubted, convicted of their of*
fences, and not by the testimony of fov(l an4
guilty accomplices, orby that sort of ^stimoQjt
which juries do and must and ever wUl receive
with the greatest doubt; but he says, it must
be by testimony clear and unequivocal : and
although this indictment is not framed upon
that statute, yet vou will bear in your minds
the spirit of the (aw upon that subiect; an4
though you have a most serious charge (found-
ed, it is true, upon another statute) to Uy, yet
you will expect the treason to be proved ac-
cording to the spirit of the treason law in thii^
country, namely, by evidence, pure, unequir
vocal, uncontaminated, and by witnesses 09
whose testimony no suspicion can be thrown ;
or if you are obliged to resort to a witness of
that sort, you will expect him to be ooQfirme4
by witnesses who are pure aud unsuspected.
Although at various times since the passing
of that admirable act (in the diseased times of
the state I may say) sjubsequent laws have
produced many enactments of new treasons,
yet it has ever been the effect of the British
constitution, when it has revived from those
convulsions, and has recovered the vigoui; of
health, to sweep away all Uie new-&ogled
treasons, and to revert to its ancient ^d wholes-
some law on this subject, and I tru^^ it m%y
again.
But to the law as it is. Now, as ifig charge
9ppn this ij^dictment is the levying ifrar, or
i^tfier a qf^avgimfy to, \n^, ^ar, it if jtm ^
12591 1 GEORGE IT.
Trial qfJokn Thomas BrutU
fl260
to consider first (supposing you belicre all
tbe evidence), ivbether the facts there stated
would amount to a levying of war, if the in-
tention had been carried into effect. What
Aall or shall not be said to be levying war
is a pure question of fact, which is entirely in
the judgment and discretion of a jury to decide
Qpon. I do not know, except in some few cases,
diat it has been decided precisely what shall
or what shall not amount to a levying of war.
But this I know, that a very great and a very
learned judge, and one most eminent not only
for his legal knowledge but for his piety, his
honour, and his wisdom in all respects, has
given an opinion upon it ; I mean lord Hale,
and his opmion ought to have great weight, for
he, gentlemen, was a judge of such great in-
tegrity, as well as learning, that living in the
time both of Cromwell and of Charles, he was
employed by both of them. His learning was
so extensive, and his integrity so valued, that
even the usurper called him into his employ,
although he had the boldness to tell that
usurper, that he doubted the legality of his
commission, and constantly refused, on that
ground, to sit on the crown side of the court
at the assises. But even with that protest, and
in those times, Cromwell would not lose his
services, and Uiought his character would add
lustre to his judicial bench. And afterwards,
when he was tailed into the service of his
legitimate monarch, he equally opposed him-
self to the tyranny of the monarchy, and was the
haX and firm friend of the liberties of his country.
That learned judge, in commenting on con-
structive treasons, — and here perhaps I should
explain a little more what the law has called
constructive treasons ; and I take leave to say,
that constructive treason is a departure from
the common sense and the plain language of
that admirable statute of Eaward the 3ra : —
Constructive treasons are the inventions of
servile lawyers in bad times (I must of neces-
sity recur to things I have said before); to
support the oppressive designs of wicked
statesmen. While we adhered to the letter of
that famous statute of which we have been
speaking, no man could raise a question what
was levying of war, or what was not ; the facts
themselves would speak for themselves; but
when you come to constructive levying of war,
you do not know whether in time every com-
mon riot may not be considered as a levying of
war.— Lord Hale ffoes through a great number
of instances, whicn have been held to be con-
structive levyjngs of war ; and many of which,
in common sense, would amount to nothing
more than great and enormous riots ; and he
has these remarkable expressions: he says
** Every riot is not a levying of war, because if
so a great number of acts of parliament would
be useless ; but'' he says ^ these last'' (alluding
to certain instances which he quotes) '' have
been decided to be a levying of war; but we
ought to be very carefol indeed how we let in
constructive treasons, for no man knows where
they will end;" indeed, gentlemen, no man
does know where they will end ; ^ those cir-
cumstances," he says, ^ have been decided to
be a levying of war, and being so decided we
must acguieKC in them." Now I pray yoa,
mark that expression, we must acquktce in
them ; when a man says he acquiesces in a
thing, he means that he gives a reluctant con«
sent to it ; it is not convincing to his mind,
but the circumstances compel him to give a
reluctant assent; and he says, ''if any new
case applies, it is safer to go to the wisddm of
parliament, than further to extend constructive
treasons.'' Now the way in which I mean to
apply the doctrine of that great man, who in
the words of wisdom thus lamented the exten-
sion of law by construction, is this : if my
learned friend, the Attorney-general, cannot
show you a precedent exactly in point, where
the courts or law have ruled that a riot, or an
attempt of this kind, has been distinctly held to
be a treason and a levying of war; then, I say,
you will follow the advice of that great and leann
ed judge, and not for the first time enlarge con-
structive treason, by declaring the circam-
stances in evidence to be a levying of war,
which never before, that I know of, has been
so held. For if this be so, every resistance to
lawful government may be considered a levy-
ing of war ; and every riot in a play hovae,
where the guards are called in, and a resistance
is made to them, may be held to be high trea-
son, by resisting the king's troops. Such
being the destructive consequences of con-
structive treason, whatever you may think of
the moral conduct of a person, do not enlarge
the law of constructive treason, but fiilfil your
duty and say, it is not treason.
liaving considered what the charge is, whidi
you are to try, of course the next thingis, that yon
should consider the character of the evidence
by which it is supported. And my learned
friends on the other side admit that they are
obliged to resort to the evidence of accom-
plices. And here in order that I may set myself
and ray learned friend right in one respect in
which we have been misrepresented, it may be
said and supposed (because it has been sap-
posed alreaay) that we have argued, an ac-
complice is not to be believed under any cir-
cumstances; that we have asserted, that an
accomplice is totally incredible in every thing
he states. Now, I never meant so to aiigue,
nor did I understand my learned fnend so to
argue; but we said in discriminating the
evidence of an accomplice, you will consider
how far you can believe him; it does not
follow that every fact that he has stated from
beginning to end is false ; but we sav, if he is
not confirmed in any of that part of his tes-
timony which ofpUcM to the cAorge of high trtmtam,
and in which he ought to be conSrroed, to
substantiate the charge on this indictment,
although he may be confirmed as to some
circumstances, and you believe him to be so
confirmed, still you will be warranted in pro-
nouncing a verdict of not guiHy, unless yon
felt that he was confirmed up to that point
1361]
Jw High TrMscn*
where the crime of treason beg^ios. Peibaps
no accomplice that ever came into a court of
justice, inyeiDted a story fahie in ail its par-
ticulars ; and if he is to be believed in every
particular, because he is confirmed in some
particulars, why then the necessaiv conse-
quence would be, that an accomplice may
build upon a narrow foundation of truth, a
proof 01 the grossest system of falsehood. And
yet, if one or two of his immaterial facts are
confirmed, you are therefore to believe him in all
the system of falsehood he builds upon that
narrow foundation. What therefore I would
have you most particularly to bear in mind,
will be to search whether you can find the
accomplice confirmed by pure testimony, in
any oi those facts from which you can infer
the crime of high treason: if you find him
confirmed in other respects, and do not find
him confirmed in any one of those respects
which go to the guilt of treason, then our
argument is, that he is not confirmed in that
necessary and material part, which would
warrant yon in returning a verdict against the
prisoner.
In considering bow far an accomplice is
confirmed, it is not immaterial also to con«
sider how &r he might have been confirmed,
supposing that bespoke the language of truth ;
and if from any source or means whatever you
see and know that there are other witnesses,
who might confirm him, and who are not
called to confirm him, that of itself must
necessarily raise in your minds a strong
suspicion that if those witnesses were called
they must have told something which would
detract firom or perhaps totally destroy bis
credit. If, therefore, you should see that
there are other witnesses on the part of the
Crown that could confirm him as to that which
is most material, namely as to those foots
which constitute the guilt of high treason, and
they are not put into the witness-box, judging
safely and wisely, you will say you will not
convict on evidence which is unconfirmed, and
which might be confirmed if true.
It may be said there are also vritnesses who
might be called by the prisoner to contradict
the accomplice if bis evioience be false ; and if
tbey are not called, it must be taken tliat his
evidence is true. — If you do not find those
witnesses called, I admit you will ask your-
selves why are they not called? Is it in the
Eower of the prisoner to call them P Could
e easily obtain them ? But if in answer to
that question, you find that he could not bring
Ids vritnesses here without a halter about their
own necks, is it probable, you will say, that
be could use sufficient influence to induce
witnesses to come forward under those circum-
stances to give evidence in his fiivour? It is
not to be expected that any process of the
court, or any process that is issued to bring
-witnesses, or even any inducement of friend-
ship will prevail upon men to come forward
and put themselves into so perilous a situation.
I observe my learned friend, the Solicitor-
A. D« 1820« [1262
general^ makes a note of what I now say, bom
which I suppose he feels the argument may^
be easily answered ; it might be so, if these
were witnesses of perfect innocence, but I do
not put them as witnesses of perfect innocence
though they may not have been guilty of high
treason, they may- have been guilty of enough
to make it a fearful thing for them to appear
here. And they will not come here either to
disclose their own crimes, or hazard their
personal safety ; though if they had eome and
bad admitted their own crimes, they might safelv
swear they had participated in nothing which
amounted to the crime of high treason. There
is that peculiarity in this case — ^and it is the
misery and wretchedness of the thing — that a
man standing here in my situation, as advo-
cate for the prisoner, cannot go to the jury as
in a case of perfect guilt or perfect innocence,
but here I am bound to admit there is proof
of much guilt and enormous crime, at least a
meditation of guilt and enormous crime;
though I think I am justified in contending, as
I do contendi that it b not the guilt oi high
treason.
As I said before, in the execution of my
duty to-day, I shall endeavour to reason upon
the evidence as though I were one of your*
selves. I hope I shall not be betrayed even to
raising my voice from that pitch necessary fbr
you to hear me. You will consider if yotf
please what the plot is, that is, the plot of
treason, and who it is that states the main
parts of it, indeed all of it which constitutes
the treason. All the particulars which relate
to treason are stated by the witness Adams
alone. You have had before you three wit-
nesses, who speak distinctly to certain parts
of the plot, and of certain things to be done :
Adams, Monument, and Hiden. I admit they
all speak to so much of the transaction as is
confirmed by the state of things in Cato-street ;
but there is a material distinction to be taken
between what passed at Cato-street, and what
is supposed to have passed in the course of
the pnor deliberations at Ings's committee-
room. I hope I shall be able to convince you
that all that passed at Cato-street is confir-
matory only of so much of the supposed de-
liberations as related to that horrid deed, the
assassination, which I am afraid was in contem-
plation ; all that passed there is confirmatory
of that statement only, but I say is not confirm
matoryofthe supposed deliberations to over-
throw the government ; that I say rests solely
upon the testimony of Adams. Now who is
Adams?— Let us pause, and consider the
manner in which he represented himself. I
take his character accoraing to his own ac-
count of it. That he was implicated in the
whole of the plot whatever it was, cannot fbr-
a moment be denied ; he avows that he unhe«
sitatingly mixed with those conspirators whose
object was cold-blooded assassination (when
I speak of the thing I always tell you I want
words to express the degree of horror every
man must feel at that dreadful plot of asnssi-
190S] 16B0R6BIT.
Trial ^Jokm Tkmmu Bnna
C1S64
mtMa of wkicft wo haveKmd m miM£);bat
bo, withovt nmoi9% joued in it; he next
betityi his compuiioiis. Thtt does BOt add
■lochy I think, to his recommendation, ibr
amongst the most depraved of mankind there
is sndi a contempt of treachery, that those
who have lost every other bond, still haTO
something like a sort of feeling of hononr to
those who hare embarked with them eren in a
oommoB caose of wickedness, tliat it is the
greatest reproach to such a man that he be->
trays his companions. What is he in religion ?
A OMB who at the a^ of forty-five avows to
you that he forsook his religion and disbelieved
the truths of Christianitv ; then you hkve
before yon a traitor to his king, the Mtrayer of
his companions, a man who has apostatised
from his religion, and denied his God ; this is
the man upon whose testimony the whole of
the facts which constitute the treason rest.
Then what is the stoty which such a witness
tells you ? always bearing in recollection that
yott are the jndges of how far he is to be
oredited. Why the plot which he tells you for
effecting rebellion is one so very ridicidoosi
that it conld do nothing more than excite
laughter and ridicule in the minds of sensible
men, if it were not mixed up with so much
borror in other respects, as bears down all
inclination to langh, and stifles all propensity
lo ridicide. But if it were not mixed up with
other matters of more serious aspect, the
thing is so ridiculous, that if it were told upon
the credit of the most unexceptionable witness
living, you would not believe it for a moment,
you could not receive it with a mve conn to*
nance, and yet von are required to believe it
because it is told you upon the testimony of a
nan against whom I do not say too much
when I say that he is one of the most base of
mankind. As for as relates to the treason of
this case, he tells you that their first delibe«
ration, as I have taken it, was a few days
before the burial of the late king. There
they first broached this idea, and nowhere do
th^y state that they expect to have above
forty men. It was then he says they first
broached the ridiculous story that they were
to take the two pieces of cannon in Gray's-inn-
lane. Now as to that, all the use it is possi-
ble they could make of them roust have been
veiy small indeed ; because it does not appear
that thev had any balls or any ammunition ;— *
th^ had half a doien flannel bsigs, which it is
said were meant for cannon cartridges ;— they
are to take six other pieces of cannon from the
Artillery-ground ;— they are to assassinate his
majesty s ministers; — they are to fire the town;
—they are to snrronnd LoDdon ; — ^for that is
part of their plan ; — ^for, vou recollect, not an
orderly was to go to Windsor to recal the
troops ; — they were to prevent even one ordev-
ly^ by any rout, reachmg Windsor, of giving
notice to the soldiers there ; — and even if he
did ^et there, they were of opinion that the
soldiers would be too tired to return to rescue
this great dty, and they should easily hold
London ;— they ifere to send to nio sen-ports $
—and then he throws in that which be bas
somehow or other found to be veiy neoeannryy
tbey were to take the Mansion-house as the
seat of provisional government! I ha:ve not
written the evidence three times orer, but I
think it was on this occasion he said tbey were
to dig a trench round London to impede the
march of cavalrv. If such a plot as mis were
told you, could you believe it to be adopted
by men out of Bedlam. My learned frieodsy
the Attorney and Solicitor-generals, both fetU
ing the ridicule whidi must foil on sndi a
statement, say, men of ardent minds (I do net
affect to use their exactexpressions, and tbevs*
fore I shall not do it so forcibly)^ bent on their
ultimate objects, oveilook all intermediaie
difficulties. I sive my learned friend eredit
for the truth of Uiat observation. I adnrit aseii
bent on ultimate objects, will overlook inter*
mediate difficulties, but they must be objects
which come within the reach of probability
or possibility. Men who walk about the town
wittioot a strait waistcoat cannot oveikwA
some things. There are certain diffio^ies
which men with even the gUmmenngs of an
understanding cannot overlook. If the pri-
soner and his confoderates had been statea to
have met and conspired to batter down Mew-
gate with peashooters, it is not a wbit more
ridiculous 1 for they might as well attempt to
batter dovm the massy walls of that prison
with peashooters, as they could attempt to
attain their supposed ol^ects with tbe force
and means detailed in evidence.
Now, gentlemen, the inference is that the
thing is not only improbable and impossible,
but so improbable and so impo!»ible, that yon
cannot believe it to be true. And yon cannot
believe it to be true, more particulaLiiy coming
out of the mouth of such an infomous witness.
You may very well conceive that a witness of
this sort, coming up with a halter aboot hm
neek, and with the terror of his own gnihy
conscience appalling him and disordering^ his
understanding, may invent all kinds of ab-
surdities and fictions, because (however erro-
neously) he may conceive it is the wish of those
who employ him to convict certain persons of
high treason. I say however erroneously As
may conceive it ; for do not let it be suroosed
that I am myself insinuatisg any thing ot tfiat
sort; r firmly believe, indeed I know and am
satisfied that neither of my honourable and
learned friends would appear here to ask a
verdict from von whkh they did not con-
scientiously think the benefit and advantage of
the country called upon ihem to demand.
They have done right to lay the case before
you ; they have done right to lay all the evi-
dence they bald, sudi as it is, heme yon ; end
you will do riglit, and will dischai^pe your
duty if in judging of that evidence you shall
decide that it does not prove that which tbey
charge to be the legal effect of it, if you ahaH
think, upon due deliberation, it frdb short of
its intenaed objitct.
laei]
for High Treason*
A.D. 1820;
[1266
I do not think it if ill be necessary for me to
^o through all the absurd details which this
man has given : when I have taken this gene-
tal outline of the case, you may say it is very
absurd ; but is there such evidence as compels
\is to believe it, however absurd it may oe ?
I ask the same question, is there such evidence
as compels you to believe it, however absurd
it may be? Surely if it rest solely upon the
testinkony of such a witness as Adams, you
^U not believe it. Then you will ask, whom
is it confirmed by? is it confirmed by Monu-
ment? is it confirmed by Hiden ? Now, both
these two witnesses stand implicated, to a
certain degree, in something; in what they
are implicated, we shall see by-and-by ; both
stand implicated, at least in so much moral
guilt, that you cannot look to them as wit-
nesses fit to confirm an infiimous witness ; then
recollect, gentlemen, neither of those witnesses
Were present at the consultation, a little before
the king's fiineral, at the consultation on the
122nd of February, at the consultation on the
23rd of February, and it was at tliose three
consultations that all that could make this plot
high treason, is said by Adams to have taken
place ; all that could convert their guilt into
the guilt of high treason, took place only at
those three consultations. Then if neither of
those witnesses were there, so much of the
plot as gives it the character of being a plot for
the purposes of high treason, rest upon the sole
and unconfirmed testimony of that witness
Adams. Now, let us see what confirmation
Adams receives ; and here I will not go into
the details of the evidence, but just look at
the facts as they are confirmed. Permit me to
remark to you upon one part of the case,
where you might have expected confirmation,
if he spoke true, and find none. He comes
here certsunly, to prove a case of high treason,
that is, to prove a case of intention to over-
turn the government, and exciting to insurrec-
tion against the constitution and the govern-
ment ; and therefore he savs, that at one of
their meetings, I think on the morning of the
23rd, Thistlewood sent out for some paper,
for the purpose of writing certain proclama-
tions ; now first, as to the absurdity of vnriting
ft proclamation ; he sends out for three or four
sheets of paper; three or four proclamations
were to be' written, and stuck up in different
parts of the town ; conceive the absurdity of
such a measure. This was to be the mode of
informing the>whole of this great town of Lon-
don, that the government was overthrown, and
that a provisional government was sitting ; to
be universally diffused by three or four written
hand-bills. But what was the motive of the
iritness in this piece of absurd evidence ? his
motive here was, to give a character to the meet-
ing, other than it really was; he is here erecting
their scheme, whatever it really might be, into
a scheme of high treason, and thereibre be
I^Bves vou this bill. ** Your tyrants are de-
stroyed. The friends of Uberty are called
upon to oome forward, as the provisional go-
VOLXXXUI.
vemment is now sitting. James Ings, secre-
tary." Now, gentlemen, observe this bill ; if
it had really been in contemplation, or if it
were distinctly proved to your satisfiiction, it
would give a decided character to the meet-
ing, and would certainly implicate them all in
the guilt of high treason. • But have you a
tittle of confirmation of this important docu-
ment; have you a tittle of evidence of the
existence of it, except as far as Adams chooses
to state it P It is supposed there is a confir-
mation of this fact, because at one of those
meetings, indeed at the very meeting a lad
was sent out to get six sheets of cartridge
paper; but the mere foct of procuring six
sheets of cartridge paper I apprehend you will
not consider as confirmation of. what was
afterwards supposed to be written upon that
paper; if a trace of one of those bills had
been found in existence, — if there had been
the slightest firagment left, so that it could
appear to have been written on, — ^if you found
the name of ** James Ings, secretary,'' or the
words " provisional government," or one word
of the kind, I would have said the witness was
confirmed ; but when there is not the slightest
evidence of confirmation as to what was writ-
ten on this paper, this bill being almost the
only piece of evidence to give a character to
the meeting, when you find this to be the only
piece of decisive evidence, and that resting
solely on the testimony of such a man as
Adams, what can you say to it ?
There are other parts of his evidence, which
if he* had spoken truly, must have been con-
firmed. If there had been rebellion as well
as assassination in the plan, there must have
been a greater number of men engaged; it
was not the twenty or forty men that were to
go to lord Harrowby*s that were to take the
cannon at Gray's-inn-lane, next to take the can-
non at the Artillery-ground, from thence to go to
the Mansion-house, &c. But, if he is to be
believed, there were to be simultaneous opera-
tions by other bodies than the Cato-street
assembly ; and this was so near their time of
action, that the others must have begun their
action also. Now, is there a tittle of evidence
to show, that either at Gee's-court, at the Bo-
rough, at the Artillery-ground, or any where
else, any bodies of men were in motion, that
any attempt was made to take the cannon, or
that they were acting in any other part of the
town, or that any suspicious movement was
observed any where? Here is confirmation
wanting, where, if the story told had been
true, most probably there would have been .
some confirmation; I infer, therefore, from
this also, that so much of his story is a fabri-
cation. And remember, and never let it pasa
from your minds, that it is not the believing
part of Adams's story which will convict the man •
at the bar of high treason. You must believe
this story to its whole extent ; you may believe it
to be confirmed in every part of the assassination
plot, and yet, if you oelieve no further, yoa
cannot find the prisoner guilty of high treason^
4M
I267J 1 OEORGB IV.
Tru^^Jtlhn TkamuBnvA
[I96t
After biB e^ideoce is finiabady thi69 wit-
nesses are called who coDirm him aerely aa
to the fuct, that a room was taken ia Fox-
court. NoWy I admit he is confirmed as to the
facty that these conspirators (for so I will call
them J took a room id Foz-coart ; but do noi
Ibrgety gentlemen^ that that fact is not decisive
of the question. It is not that these men met
in a room in Fox-court ; it is,' what ww the
subject of their deliberations when they were
there assembled, thai you have to ioTestigate ;
that is what yon must take into your consi-
deration beftue yon can arrive at a conclusion
ef guilt. Now, I will put this question : Sup.
pose they had met for any purpose, lawitil or
mnlawful, and one infamous witness had come
and slated that in their deliberations they were
tonsulting on certain specific matters (say
matters of high treason) ; could it be any con-
firmation of this story to prove tiiese men
bad met together ? What would be the situa^
lion of mankind ? A dub of the most inno*
cent of men may be the subjects of an inform-
ation to government. You and I may be all
members of a club; one io£unous man may
aay that our deliberations are all treasonable,
and the confirmation of that fact is, that true it
^ we were members of a dub, and the club
did BBeet there ; now, is it confirmation at all
ef what Passed in the room that men went
there ? Then, the next head of confirmation
appliei certainly to so mudi of the statement
as goes to the plot to be executed at lord
Harvowby's. The wafecbmen in the square are
ealled, and they trol^ prove (for there is no
impntatioA upon their evidence) that foorof
th«Mie men were seen watching about the
house ; is that a confirmation of the purpose
for which they were alleged to be watching ?
What is that purpose ? That purpose, it is
stated, was the destruction by violence of some
of the highest and most valuable men of the
oountiy ; but base as that act is, it is not high
treason. Then, if those two facts, confirmed as
I admit by unsuspected witnesses, do not go
to confirm that part of the case on which alone
yomr verdict can be founded, see whether it
ean be confirmed by any other evidence*
The next witness adled was Monnnent;
and he was put forward, I suppose, as a wiu
ness toconnrm the former witness, Adams.
The observation I before made to you upon
lus testimony, you will hear in mind. Mouup
nent was at none of those deliberations, and
therefore neither then nor now does he affisct
to relate what pa^d at those deliberations ;
bat he says Oiat he is a shoemaker in Bald-
winVgardens, that he met Thistlewood^ and
had a oonversation with Thistlewood— there is
nothing very important in that oonversation.
Afterwards Brunt, the prisoner at the bar,
called upon him with Thistlewood, and Thie-
tlewood at ooee told him they had something
great to do, and asked him if he would be
one ; that he had been promised support bjr a
gveet many men who had deceiveahim, but
now he had got men who would stand by him.
Brunt called again in the aftmnoosik; «ndhe
not being then ready, went to Tidd^s house
about half-past six o'ctock. Tidd said, he had
been waitii^ for some more people to go with
bira that he expected would be these ; b«a if
no one else came before seven o'clock, th^
should go together. Whea he came to Tidd'v
he saw Tidd arming himself; he potabmce
off piatoia into his belt; and as they west
going along, he desired to know where ib«j
were going to ; were they going ta the Home
of Commons ? Tidd told hin^ no^ they wess
not going there, for there were too asany
soldiers there* Now, what do you think of
this witness, who avows thai he went out wnh
an armed man, and thought he was going t»
the House of Commons ? for what jnucDom
youare left to guess. Buthesays^ Tida al
last told him there was a> cabinet diiuMr ^ and
then he adds, he was fuUy awace whas was
meant— 4e being fully aware what they were
about, joins them in this neforiona sdbene*
Now, I should Uke to ask my learned fiiend,
whe^er they mean this witness to oonfism the
witness Adams ? Isaot this rathe? a man who
wants confirmation himself I Then do ihi^
call him to confirm another iiJamoiis vitnemf
Gvi you consider a man a pnae wncan-
taminated witness, who^ according to \m one
avowal, is going out to commit mnrder ? and
then when he is cross-examined as In what he
thinks of his own conduct, he says, to be sure
he acted very fiolitkUf I that is the leader waf
in which he speaks of his own atsodooa eoo-
duct* But, gentlemen, you heard him fiuihcr
crose-eKamined. If asi accompUoe be sin-
cerely contrite and repentant of hmciiaea,and
comes to tdl a story of tnuh» at least hie con-
duct and demeanor should be sudi as to eosk
viace yov, that he is so sepentant thai evciy
tittle that he speaks is consistent witk tt«
most rigid truth. When I asked bin, whe>
ther he himsdf did not attempt to aediaoe aae-
ther man, whose name I do not now laceUeeW
you heard the manner in which be ^ifv^uft^
that question. He shuffled ; he woiyd gise
me no direct answer, he could not reeoQect.
Do you believe he could not xeeoULect? he
dare not deny it; and I will teU yon why he
dare not deny it, becanse that nan aoidhlbt
called.
A Junman (Mr. OsoddW).-*! heliwie yea
are mistaken, sir; you will paidosknc^ I bdsBW
that came from
Mr. Cunoooif.— (Gentlemen of the Jury; I
hope —
Mr. SoUeUor Genera/; — ^It is mcieily
dental.
Mr. Guncood.— These wilnessei have .^
changed; they have not come in tha asflM
order as they did in the last case» which tod mm
into the error ef supposing that wl^at '"**-^
(O the first witness applied to th^ seen
Mr. GoodMd.^1 auk peifeetitraMn e<
that; yoa will excuse th^ inteiniptieB.
13891
JIW* Hif^ TreoBon*
A. D. 1890.
[1270
Mr. CftmMi^I am obKged to yoit, lir, for
it But this be said, Aat being Infornred there
wai a cabinet diiiDer> he wm ffeiCactly awane
irtwt tbey were about. When he was eiked,
why he did not desert these m&Of the comsioii
sHd fliMBjr answer presents Itaeli^ ^I was
aInML" Could a man be afraid of leaving his
oonpanlone m the niddls of the streets of
Loadooy and ^ng to die fifst magistiate forth-
withy and iostaBitly idisdosing swsh a homble
ecen^ f D^ yott bekLeve he mtired from fear,
or do ]rou not rather belteTe, that he ceme fc4r*
ward to speak what he says, because the halter
is about ms neck ?
What he says is not however so very im-
portant in my view of die question, because he
does not speak to that which constitutes the
guilt of high treason ; it is true, he gives con-
firmation to so much of the story as relates to
the assassination of bis majesty's ministers;
but as to all that which makes high treason,
namely, the deliberations to overturn the go-
▼emment, and the proclamation, there he, bad
and infamous as I may call him, gives no con-
ftmation to that part of the story.
The nesDt witness, Hideo, is put up as one on
wlKMn you may rely, because he is the witness
irlio told lord Harrowby. I ask^ must not this
witness, from his own acoount, be deeply Im-
Cicated in the iniquity of some plan ; because
I represents to you that Wilson came to him
itt the open street^ and without any hesitation,
witheot any ve^ or disguise, at onee addressed
liim upon the subject, and asked him, whether
he would be one to assassinate his majesty's
ditnisters? That they were waiting for a cabi-
net dinner, and all things were ready. He
showed no horror and no aversion to this plan;
bnt, on the contraiy, aceerding to his own ac-
ooont, he readily assents. The use I make of
this avowal of his, is this, that he at least must
be so infamous a man, who could so conduct
himself, that he is not fit to be set up to con-
firm the testimony of another infamous man ;
he is not that imre and unsuspected witness,
wiM> ought to be caUed to confirm an absurd
and ridiculous story coming out of the mouth
of another infamous witness. Thus mudi ap-
peals upon the testimony of one of those two
men (I do not immediately reooUect which)
that in a conversation Thistlewood had with
him, Thistlewood told him it would be neces*
sary for them to get arms (I understand this
was MonusMnt), for all his friends got arms.
This wiU he stated as evincing hostile inten-
tions against the government of the country.
Geatlemei^ be it so ; take that fact as proved,
thai Thistkfweod desired thmn to get arms ; does
it psove the factef a deliberation and consulta-
tion to ievy war against the king ? For such is
Hk Baaguage oi the indictment, to levy war
afahnst his majesty. Are there not other
known circumstances to account for this desire
to procure arms 1 You cannot bk>t out of your
minds all the knowledge that you have ac-
quired in your intercourse with mankind ; it is
a Mstaftdioly thing, bnt il isao lets true than
melaiMholy, that there was a great ferment i»
the country, and particularly among the lower
orders of ^e people, who unfortunately for
themselves and for the countiy, have taken to
die — study it would be absurd to say— but
have taken to the consideration of politics^
You cannot fail to recollect, that in August
last, in Manchester, where there was one of
those meetings of which we have had so many,
a very singular scene took place, of which,
standing here, I would refrain from speaking in
any terms that might be likely to excite feelings
of irritation is any breast; but ^s, is very
certain, that it was a transaction on which the
feelings of mankind were very much agitated
and much divided, and many persons, welU
wishers to government, thought that an un*
armed mob (however mudi they might dis*
approve of the proceedings of that mob) having
been attacked by an armed force, it was a
matter of serious regret, and they altogether
did not Quite with government in considering
as proper certain votes of approbation they
had given before inquiry bad taken place ; but^
on the other side, there were muiy of the
lower ordem of people who were quite out*
ra^eous, v?ho gave it a name of great oppro-
brram, ^the Massacre at Manchester;'' and it
was publicly given forth, that inasaauch as the
military had attacked an unanned force in their
delihemtions, they would in future go armed
themselves. This will serve as a clue to ex-
5 lain tliis part of the conversation ; it is not
enied that Thistlewood was deeply embarked
widi those persons who evinced, I admit, a
determined intention to resist certain laws
against such meetings ; and it vras natural, with
their feelings, that £ey should procure arms to
prevent their dispersion; but still that does
not amount to the crime here charged on the
prisoner, namely, high treason; and that ex-
plains satisfectorily why diose parties should
have been so anxious to procure arms, without
the necessaiy consequence being that dl those
arms were for the purpose of overturning the
government.
I have said something upon the absurdity
and ridicule that must necessarily follow any
supposed plan of overturning the government
with such forces as these men could raise. You
see before you pretty nearly die whole armoury;
formidable I admit it is for the purposes of
mischief, but for the purpose of overturning
the government— a government supported by.
the i^venues of all die world I may say, and
by thousands of armed men-~the parish watch
would have been sufficient to have put them all
down ; not bnt that they might have dooe a
great deal of private mischief much to be de-
plored ; but still it comes back to the question,
was it meditated to overturn the government ?
You oannot overlook the evidence that their
means were so very inadequate as to throw a
contempt and to faisten ridicule on any plan of
the kind, and dierefore it is not likely that they
really had such intendons ; and so fully am I
conviJMied) that if tlus imputation had not been.
1371 3 1 GEORGE IV.
Triid tfJiAm Thmat Brwd
[1»3
nixed op with much at whidi the heart refoltty
there are hardly twelve men to be found in the
British empire, who, if put into a jnty-boz,
would not have disbeUeved the whole tale.
I have DOW endeanroured, and I intreat you
to do the same, to look through the evidence ;
some amongst you have heard it before ; re-
consider whether ^oo, like myself, have not in
your fint impressions given it too hasty belief,
and a credit, which, on minuter examination, it
did not deserve. And here let me observe
also, as I stated in the outset, it is necessary
to consider how far the evidence might have
been confirmed. Ask yourselves, who else
might have been called P Yon have in evi-
dence before you, that among these conspirators
there is a man of the name of Edwaros, who
was one of the motft active ; he is stated to
you to have been a man peculiarly busy in
making those hand*grenades. The govern-
ment have given him tp the prisoner among
the list of witnesses, but he is not called.
Now he is a man that could not only have
confirmed all that Monument and Hiden have
told you, but he would have told you all that
passed in those secret deliberations which now
rests solely on the testimony of Adams. If
he is not called, ask yourselves, why he is not
called in a case of high treason, where it is
most desirable that every man should be called
that could by any possibility support the case f
And I do not say too much, when I say, that
in the great learning and discretion that existed
in the learned gentlemen on the other side,
they did not call him because they feared that
in calling him something might have come out
that would have discredited or totally destroyed
all their other evidence.
There is also another man^ of the name of
Dwyer, who is given us in the list of witnesses;
and I may state it because I can prove it in
evidence to you if necessary. Dwyer was
called upon a former occasion ; and Dwyer
was represented as a witness on whom the
jury might safely rely, because he disclosed to
a major James immediately what was told him.
Why is he not called to-day? Because to-day
there is evidence in court that would show
you he is a witness wholly unfit to be put into
the witness-box ; my learoed friends, therefore,
in their discretion did not call him ; so that
now they rest their case, as far as it relates to
hiffh treason, solely upon the testimony of that
infamous witness, Adams.
Many other ol^ervations present themselves
to my mind, which I forbear to state, as they
will equally strike you. I hope I have observed
my promise; I have endeavoured strictly to
keep my mind cool and calm ; I have not at-
tempted anything that looks like declamation;
I have met the evidence fairly as it presents
itself to my mind ; I entreat you to do the
same; and, even if there should be some
amongst you, as I said before, like myself,
whose first impression was, that the evidence
was stronger than, upon a reconsideration, you,
loow find it to be : I do -not entreat you, be-
cause I know you will do it witlMNU mjren-
treattng you — ^I say so from idnt i fasicsm
of you upon former ooGasioii8--£ koov jn
will not hesitate boldly to do yoordstr: ad
if to-day, with the variation there it in ute pn-
sent case from further circomsUaices, w'ijn
think the evidence weaker than yon fonwif
thought it ; or if you do not think, apos noa
mature deliberation, that the eiideoce eitab>
lishes the case, I know yon will hare the oai-
lioess, notwithstanding fonner o^jaam, to
find a verdict of, Not Guilty.
Jo/mBenneUswani,
Mr. Gtm^.—Will my learoed frieodsua
to what point be proposes to eianiioe tkii
witness P I am not aware of the poiot «
which his evidence can apply.
Mr. CKTiuood.— To prove that whcD|Hiil«
invited him to the meeting, he told bim joa^
thing was going to be done there; be deon
that he said that.
Mr. Gtffn^.— No, I beg yonr puto; I
have my note here. " I asked Beosett to fh
and said, perhaps Mr. Bennett wooU go m
me and Mr. Clarke, beinga neighboar ofaiBC-
I cannot say that I told him somethiosr w^
be done -there ; he and I were nei#«w
together. I asked him if he would go wittae;
I do not think I could say so, but I wiUirt
swear I did not ;" bow his sUtementis tobia
contradiction of that I do not apprehend.
' Loftf C^/'Bflron.— It isconsistent,ccrtaiB^i
wiih his saying, that he could not swear tW
he did not say so.
Mr. Boron Gavynp.— It was pwjed ■?•
him, but he would not say that hedidBflt««f
so ; he declined doing that.
Mr. CttTwoorf.— Then, my lord, we do w*
ofl^r any other witness.
Mr. ili&>/pibttf.— Gentlemen of the jmT)J|^
case for the prisoner having dosed win*
the calling of any witness on hb bekal^"
nevertheless falls to my lot to addres to p
a very few observations, and that arisei nj
the peculiar benevolence of the law « *
subject of high treason ; and when I ^
that benevolence of the law, I »"* ^^jj^
that addressing mvself to such > J^^^
now the honour of speaking to, the P^^^^
of the legislature in forming the sUtutt •■»
granU me such a privilege, will not w^
tend iUelf to your bosoms ; and in prop*^
as you see our wise ancestors were auwj
that the prisoner should have erciy »«[■ ,
defence, you wiU afford h"«i€Tcryb»J
that defence, and will assist him as sma
you can, consistently with your oaths, m IPJ
effect to the deficiency of proof on ™^?L
the prosecution, or to whatever you w*^
ceive.favoumble in his case. ™ jTi!
of which I am now availing J"/*^^
doubtedly was intended as a barnflfV^
12731
fiv High Trea$dti.
A. D. 1820.
fia74
tbe influx of convictioiis from any cause what-
ever in a case oftreason, much more than, in
any case of felony.
Ify as my learned friend observes, you,
living amidst mankind, and your powers of
obsenration, and your* experience not being
circumscribed, may be supposed to have en-
tertained, even as members of the British
public, some pre-conceived notions of the
merits of the present case, if, I say, in. that
general character, by whatever means, you
must have some ppinions, and have acquired
some knowledge on the matter about which
you are shortly. to pronounce your verdict — I
know the majority of you have, in a more par-
ticukir manner, the means of forming such
opinions, you having before sat on the trial of
some individuals implicated in these very
Masons ; and being aware that tbe evidence
90 w brought before you varies but little from
that which has been produced on the former
occasion; and knowing perfectly well what
was then adduced, and which has not been so
now— :to such a jury, even if it were .my in-
clination to make a speech of any. great length,
it would be fruitless and unavailing ; — ^those
who have been present on the former trial,
know how much I laboured, and perhaps if I
can avail myself so far of their goodness, I
may pray of them, if there were any. argument
upon those occasions which can be made use
qt with advantage to the prisoner on this, that
they will import it into the present cause, and
give him the benefit of it.
Gentlemen, when I say that I shall follow
the example of my learned friend in addressing
you very shortly, it is not because I shun
taking upon myself any trouble which the exi-
gency of the case may require ; but I have not
lived to my present age without learning, that
be who desires that his efforts shall be useful
to any considerable number of his fellow-cresir
tures, must learn to proportion his exertions to
something ' like the probability of effect,—
that he who shows himself equally ready at
equal length, and with equal earnestness, to
urge every topic, may be censured as deficient
in judgment, — and that we do not advance
yur hope of convincing others, by showing
that we are incapable of being convinced our-
«elves. Now, although I entertain the same
opinions that I held before, still, as I know that
Boy two learned friends, the Attorney and
Solicitor generals, have made observations
upon them — as I know what observations have
been made elsewhere upon some parts of them
—I shall not advance all those arguments
ag^in, not because I do not entertain in my
own mind tbe prinoiples on which they are
iouqded, but because after a certain time I
may despair of using those arguments with the
effect I have always vrished, and at one time
«aoguinely expected. But let me not be nn«
^ierslood by that to abandon the cause of my
client; you know the case as. well by your at-
tention on this as on the former occasions;
and you know.th^ every tittle of evidence
which has now been brought forward as ap-
EHoable to this prisoner, has been used against
is two unfortunate predecessors, and will
equally apply to all the other eight, who re-
main to be tried under the present indictment.
To make, therefore, certain observations, sup-
nosing they are applicable to each, would
be of little or no avail, if you remember all;
which has been said upon the former occasions,
and make the distinctions which my learned
friend has made .to-day, and which it will be
my endeavour to enforce by a very few ob-
servations.
The nature of the offence being pointed out
to you, leads to the single consideration-' by
which you can be influenced in making up
your judgment; is there in this case consistent,
positive, supported evidence of an intention to
commit high treason, that is to say, to depose
the king, either virtually or personally, or to levy
war against him for the purpose of com|(^lling
him to change his measures ? Is there evidence
upon that subject so clear and broad, that you
can rely and stand firmly upon it, dischs^ging
from your minds (and so I pray you to do) all
the horror you must feel aoout that which I
take, for the purpose of this case, to be indis-
putably proved, an intention to do a guilty act,
but of a different nature from high treason ?
I am almost afraid I ask an impossibility, when
I ask a jury of Englishmen to discharge from
their memories, for the purpose of this cause,
that there was a conspiracy to murder fourteen
men of the first eminence and character in tbe
state, in cold blood ; and that in the progress
of the events arising out of that design, one man,
in the execution of his dutv, lost his life ; but
in order to determine whether this is high
treason or not, it is necessary you should dis-
charge that from your minds, so far as it may
operate in convincing you that there was an
intention of high treason; for if they MX- in
proving that by other means, whatever your
detestation or horror of the crime may be, yet
of high treason the man at the bar will remain
not guilty, whatever you may think of other
offences with which he is charged.
Although I shall not dwell upon all- the
points in this case, yet I implore you to take
the whole of the matter fully into your.con.i
sideration; to reflect upon the sort of witnesses
this case is proved by; and to consider whether
those witnesses, unsupported by others as to
any treasonable act or intention, are suchk as
entitle themselves to your belief to the extent
which the indictment charges, and to which
your verdict is required to go.
' When I have said on former occasions, that
this plot, of which Adams is the witness, de-
stroys itself by its improbabitity, I mean only
to say, that improbability alone, if the fact
should be distinctly attested, is not a ground,
for disbelief; but that when a man tainted to-
the degree Adams is (and he alone speaks of
the plot); when he alone, tainted to such a
degree, is brought forward, it behoves ^a juty-
to collider whether they can, upon his evi-
ItTAl 1 GfiOlOA IV«
TfMi^JUbi TimuiiBrmd
C1S76
deaoe^ dMsldt the ftte <ol twelve^ or itxttab,
•r fife •nd'twiity »», wbo mre wippoiod to
Imve ooMpiied; or whether they have only
the ficiieQS of a 0001, who ai the means bj
which he shall hesl teeune hie owa safety, and
laostsiirelyreeoiiiiBeiidhisselftojthepioteetioa
of others, has iavented a story so grossly im-
fiobable thai no ooe caft believe it.
I am not insensible to the efieci of an ob>
aervalioQ which has been made in the coarse
«f these triala, Uiat when yon are to try a
proposition of this kind, the rale of probability
tf a very fidlacious tnt, because, ss^ die
penoni allttdelo(I will not fl^y who ii was),
tt it were pat lo me, do I or do I not be-
lieve that twenty-five Irishmen met for the
Eipose ^ assassinating fonrteen or fifteen
l^lishmen, in cold blood, I should say the
improbability is snch, that I am obliged to
r^iect it from my mind ; and if I can believe
Aai on the eviMnee given (and it does not
appear to be met by any attempt at contradio-
tionXIoanalso believe an^ other improbabilitv;
at least I cannot refect it from my mind only
becanse it is improbable. I know that I am
not giving the verv words in which these ob-
aervatioas were delivered ; I am incapable of
doing justiee to the speaker ; bat, on toe other
hand, I am not purposely diminishing their
Ibrco, merely becanse th^ make agaust my
interest. Itisimpemible for an^ man who heard
this argument, not to feel it deserving of the
luglMet eoosideialion, were it only for the
respect doe to the indindual who produced it,
who adorned it not by studied elocatton, but
by a beautiful simplicity which has never been
exceeded, and which has all the elbct of labour
without its eflEbrt. This aignment it became
necessary for me to take seriously into con«
aideration, as it proceeded from the highest
authority in this court ; I admit the weight of
it, but yet I think it is pomible for men goaded
by personal feeling, misled by writers of the
very worst description, by arguments the most
atrocious, to have conceived the rash and
detestable project of removing oertain persons
as obnoxious to public opinion ; that they may
have wrooght themselves up to the pitch of
believing, that by so doing they should exe^
cute a great act of public justice, and render a
meritorious service lo the present age and
to posterity, and jrel never have meditated
that which is so improbable, so destructive
of itself, and so incapable of execution as
the ptlot charged upon them. Gentlemen,
what is the cause? My learoed friend has
pointed it out to you exactly ; the transaction
which had been publicly and rashly denomi-
nated, '^Ihe Massacre at Manchester/' was
particulariy thrown out for the discnssion of
the lower ordera, and when they had been thus
inflamed, every particle of discontent or dis-
affection that could be found any where was
brought together and practised upon by design-
ing intriguers, who inflamed and seduced
those whom they intended afterwards to betray.
One was peculi^riy fitted to be a leader, and
that WM Tlustiewood--^i
for jaan to have been apresatngbbuBNtmi
dissatisfaction against goveraaisBt— a im
who^ for the share he took in oestaiD gnitaid
notorions paMic meetings, was the mlqeettf
prosecution for high treason— a man whs ksi
been looeally liberated for haring tfansttssi
the life of one public minister, and Nnt t
challenge to anotner.
Mr. Gumey.-^The same.
Mr. ilrfD^vto.'*-! brieve it was so, tad Alt
lord Sidmottlh was the sahjeet both sf fie
threat and of the challenge. It is aotneotf*
sary to go into the particulars fiiither; M
thoe were the elements on which those pnt-
tioes could be dTectually used ; and acosid-
ingly yon will see, when you come to ennisi
a little the testimony of the witness Adas,
how Thistlewood and the wretcbsd ignonit
elements of that conspimcy have been |h»
tised on by a perpetual instigator, sod htie
been watched ny a peipetnal spy. The efi-
dence in the preaent case rests entiiely, n I
hope to show, on men who are to a certiii
degree implicated in the conspiracy, ^^
have only this inoet extraordioary merit «
having no one of the mock or inferior viitsn
which distinguish persons on similtroecf
sions. if men enter into a conspitieT}
fidelity to eadi other (how aracfa ssercr •
crime in itself) ; seems a virtue if A^ ^ *
quality requisito in a conspirator, i^ i> ^
courage which shall lead hiai throsgh thi
undertaking in whidi he is embariied. nit*
the recommendation of the wttoeises «M
oome before you to-day, is, that tbej bm
been conspirators, and therefore is bad «
those whom they accuse; but thw ^1^ ^
die latent sparks of courage or of hosoor, 17
having been covrards in action and tfujos
to each other, for the purpose of secorisglhtf
»fety. ^,
With respect to the witness Adtrw, M
alone has given you the secrets of bis ^J*
science ; but his character has been ^™^ !j
my learned friend, and I shall attempt to Ida
a little to in You who have had thst^
called before yon, have heard that iHii^iti|
important for you to Uke into yoor con»^
tionto^ay, that he, at the age of forty-fi'VJ'
nonnoed his Redeemer, and rejected the nflff
of Dfe; it is by his swearing opoo.thstWi
alone, that you are to give him credit; W J^
not hear it said, that on him,as 00 msny of^
persons, suffering has wrought contrltioo, w"
that he has become penitent ifi P««J»'^
be has perceived himself in danger. ^
U the evidence of that in bis conduct f woew
is there any thing that shall vo^^Tf^
believe in him who professes that he dj« ^
believe in his God, and giws »o/«?f J
beUeve that he has returned to ^ frij^"
the firet place, contemplate bis tw^Sir
those whom, at the moment of ha im^
he seems to have seduced into »«°I JV^
aclionsy and whom be now csmei i»^
1277]
Jbrl^b TrMMM.
A. D, teisa.
C1478
to betny. Wert he an infideL ke was at
laast a subject of tbe waJm, wui had been a
soldier; for him to join in sack a conspuracy^
shows he had neither the valour of a soldier,
the loyalty of an finglishmaiiy nor the virtue
of a man ; and that when he reuounced his
Kedeemer^ he anticipated only that sacrifice
of himself for which nis conduct throngh life
had been preparing him. What reason have
youy then, for belicTing the incredible story he
tells, what out of his mouth he ranks himself
among the most infiunous of mankind, unless
it is to be said, that your condosion is to be
aided by the very incredibility of the witness,
who comes to tell you a story having no re-
commendation but its ineredibilitjr? Gentle-
aaen, of Mr. Adams it is impossible to speak
without horror ; and if I ever saw an instance
in which in&my was carried to its utmost, it
was, when refusing a question put to him by
my learned friend, he used the most esUraor-
dina^ eipreasion, '< I abstain from saying
what induced me to do such a thing, because
I do not wish to do the prisoner, Brunt, more
misehief than my evidence must do ; I consider
his family.*' Good God ! Gentlemen, a man
with whom he had been walking about arm-
io-arm, eating and drinking with him, and
sharing the morsel his povertv could iU afford
for months together, comes here to-day to lay
upon him every aggravation that can be laid
Upon thn name and character of man, to
swear to a moftt inciediUe discourse of his
about not believing in God, and yet praying
to God (a ciccumstance totally unnecessary
bk the present case^ and a ficti<m inlro*-
dttced only to give countenance to the lest
9i the stoiy); and then affecting to oobh
passionate the case of that woman whom he
will make a widow if he succeeds, and those
babes whom he will at the same time make
orphans ; while he is engaged in the task of
wholesale destruction, aul will bring to the
eUows eleven individuals, with eight of whom
professes to have had some acquaintance,
with more as he would make you believe;
although, with respect to one whom he has
sepresented as having been present at two
9i their meetings, when he is presented be-
fore his face, he is obliged to confess that
4iB-'dM6 not know him. Adams's story has
been alreadjr dissected,and its improbability
—its impossibility indeed — pointed out, and
k is upon feith in his story that the whole case
rests.
• If Adams wants confirmation in any ^t,
yon •naiurallv and necessarily ask yourselves^
can that confirmation be given to him } It has
been already observed to you that according to
Adams's account, there is in the list a witness
«£ the name of Edwards, who has been not
^nly pieaent, but a material adviser and activei
agent in eve^ thing dene^ and Edwards stands
tba most pioBunenl man in the wh^ trwsae*
tira. Yon see'* him fint, him last, him midst,
^witlM>tttend." Whatever is «aad,£dw«ds
kaa a share in it; whatever is done> fidwaids
has a hand in it; and yet the incredibla AIn
Adams alone is called. Edwards, asAdama^
has expressed himself, had the title of aide^ei*
camp, and yet he is not called to support
Adams. Wm my learned friends say any
thing upon the subieot? — ^I have no reason to
believe they will from any thing which haa
passed. Will they merely say, that Edwards
would onW add to the number of accomplices^
and Uiereiore oiUy add to the number that want
confirmation? Then let us see whom hav*
they brought to us ? Is Monument less aa
accomplice, do you believe, at this moment^
however he may have stood on former occar*
sionst or is Hiden less an accomplice? Let
US see how thai is, and then we shall prove to
demonstration who are accomplices. Is Monu*
meat an accomplice ? That is beyond a doubt,
for he admits he did enter into the scheme ;
and he has diown no one virtue to induce you
to believe him upon his oath, except his ex-
cellent care for his own preservation^ which,
when the conflict had b^n at Cato-atfeet,
led him to bide himself in the manger, that he
might be prepared to give information. Mr.
Adams pursued the same conduct ; for whether
we are to believe him sincere^ or to believe
as I believe him, a sfy inm the v^ beginning',
who obtained confidence only to betray it, and
entered into those plans merely for the fuirpoaa
of disclosing them, still his care for bis own
preservation was such, as to lead one very
modi to believe that his escape waa favoured
by those who made ^ assault upon the places
Then does Mr. Monument, if he could do i^
support Adams, or is he himself supported in
that which he advances? Monument is brought
to support the evidence of Adams, by showing
that It was part of the plan of the conspirators
to be armed, and that they had declared that all
their adherents were so, or ought to be so, for
that Thistlewood had made that declaration.
When did he make it 7 Why, when they were
going to the public meeting at Finsbniy-market,
where it was to be part of the design of the
day, to show, that the meeting at Manchester
equally legal, with supporters equally respecU
able with their own, was attacked and dis-
persed; this was long before Adams gives the
date of the supposed conspiracy, which you
are called upon to try ; it was in October, long
before the taking of the room or the meeting
of parties ; it was at a time when their opera-
tions seem to have been confined to the hold*
ing of a meeting.
It baa been argued, and peihapa may be
hereafter, that however improbable the plan .
which Adams has disclosed, still it was formed ;
far diat they, being such rash enthusiasts, con-*
oeived that tiie British piiblic enteied into
their schemef » and that they would adopt them,
and bear down all opposition by accumulated
force; and tbis» too, is to be supposed the
opinion of men who had called and held the
meetings in Smithfield and Fiaabury, whem
they were hooted and derided^ and made a
sport of by that very populaee who woid4i it
1270!] 1 GfiORGE tV.
Trial nfJdm Tkmai Bruni
[im
is supposed, afterwards aid and assist tbenf in
the carrying into effect the itl-jadfed a^d pre*
posterous plans which have been impated to
them. Gentlemeo, rashness and enthusiasm
will not go so for ; no one can be an enthosiast
after a conriction that his plans mast neces-
sarily fail for want of support ; and no man
would expect, with twenty pike-staves, to arm
men sufficient to overawe the metropolis, when,
after having assembled in a pool and a quag-
taire, after retiring from their meeting pelt«l
with mud, their ensigns defhced, and their
persons insulted, it was impossible tbev could
expect numbers to support them, who had
never seen numbers assemble but for the
purpose of deriding them— that they could
expect men to risk their lives in their plans,
. who had risked nothing but rotten apples and
eggs to evince their hatred and contempt for
their persons. That such men may have en«
tertained a project of murder; that they may
have furthered it by a plan of plunder, I can
readily conceive, and readily believe ; the de-
pravity of human nature does not permit me
to withhold that admission from you ; and that
disclosed in the case not by Adams, but by all
the circumstances connected with the case, and
by the information collected in various quarters.
I do believe that much mischief was intended
to be done, and much terror intended to be
excited, and many houses to have been burnt
to further those plans of venffeanoe and of
plunder which they had formed ; but that a
thought so foolish as that of overturning the
government entered their minds, I cannot
believe ; you have no evidence of' it but from
Adams, and his evidence is refuted by his own
infamy, by the experience the supp<Med con-
spirators had already had,by the impracticability
of the [riot, and the utter want of combination
or support adequate to the purpose.
I will merely, in passing, touch upon the plan
stated by Adams; here are twenty or thirty
men, who choose to suppose they have adherents
in the Borough ; who choose to suppose they
have adherents in the city; who choose to
supjM>se forty or fifty Irishmen inhabitants of
Gee*s-court will rise and support them; and
they are hence to proceed on this project to
murder the ministers. I am afraid that per-
sonal vengeance, and the desire of assassina-
tion, which had been too long fostered in their
minds, have wrought them up to that ; to bum
houses may also have been a part of their plan :
but observe what is fixed upon that by Adams ;
-—one witness, called expressly upon that sub-
ject enumerated the houses which it was pro-^
posed to bum, and to which their numbers and
their preparations might be somewhat oom-
which the witness added tliere was one more,
but that is all. There is no high treason in
that, however atrocious the act may be; but
how dp they attempt to make it high treason ?
why they get the stoiy of the PorCtPan-street I
bftrraeks, intented by Adsms, tvtio Mas good
ntutm to know what he was tsAking stostu
Harrison, together with the bnraiug of Fni-
vai's-inn, which no one besides bimsetf Mens
to have known ; for he who enniBeratei th«
placet one by one, does not include that, lod
yet it coidd not have escaped the obaemtioo
of any man ; but that which is tnerelj ficdos
cannot be the subject of proof; and thitwbieb
Adams invented, of course no other oan loott
either attend to or observe : sack is tbegreaid
on which a charge of treason is erected.
We next come to the ridiculoos story of Ik
cannon to be seised without force, to be con-
veyed without horses to besiege the Ifaonoii-
house, and then to take the fitok, in whidia
guard is always placed, more than safficieatt^
destroy ten times over such a paltiy force;
even if they had twenty times die osmber.
Twenty soldiers, standing in the form inwindi
they would stand, with stone walls before iImBi
and muskets in their bauds, would htfeKSt
them scattered to every part of the tova ; jot
as was done in the year 1780, wbeo a strnihr
attempt was' made : the narrative was pm
me once by a noble lord, who bad been tke
officer commanding a division of troops ootte
occasion, in beautiful simplicity. Od tbeiitit
firing of the guns, a wonderfbl '^^^^^^ "Jfl
ceeded to antecedent clamour; you eow
see your way all down the streets, whidi W
the moment before been crowded; andtheie
was not a murmur to be heaid, except of tt|
multitude seeking their retreat; so that tte
first fire from the Bank would have disposei
them just as efl^ctually 93 the appearaaceot
that brave young gentleman, lieeteMiJ
Fttaclai«nce, did at Gato-street, wheo all die
arms and ammunition served only for an*
attempt on the lives of one or two indinda»
There was nothing which devek>ped that com-
bination or consistency which would comtitatr
high treason, but a rash and ill-digestedpi^'
datory attempt, totally distinct from the eiwtt
of those who seek to subvert a gow"*^
This is the plan which Adams wooW;l««
you believe, on bis single testimony, the Ci««
not calling those who were present attw*
consultations, not producing, *^^p^
active, i ntrepid, and persevering Mr. Ed**'*' ^
who could best of all, if there were any »?*» |
in it, give you an account of every thing p«^ ij
jected, and every thing transacted.
With respect to Monument, I belicfe I »«
irade the necessary observations; ^^'S
remark 5n':bne part of his evidence, «[*
may be relied on. It is said ^\JT
Monument had his interview wid» l**"-
wood, Thistlewood made^use of ^^^
sionfr— <*Grcat events are at hand ; *• J*Je
are* every where anxious for a change; 1 *7
been promised support by a great msj^ *■
have deceived me, but now I l»»»«SJy.
who will stand by me;" tie then a*edwj-
ther Monunient had any amis, and v^
that they all bad arms; "Some,"^"^
" hav« a pistol^ some have a pike, and v^
as8i3
fair High TteoMoiu
A. D. 18^«
[1282
have got a sabre ; he nid I might bay a pistol
for alwQt four or five tbillings ; I told him I
had no money to buy pistols ; he then said he
would see what he coald do ; I do not recoU
lect more of that matter." Now, gentlemen,
all this was for the Finsbury meeting : and be
says, that on Bnmt first accosting him, he.
Monument, said, you hare been absent so long
I thought I had lost you. This related to cer-
tain meetings which were expected to be
general all orer the kingdom; out they are
assnmed as the plots of an after-formed con-
apiracy, and as supportiDg the testimony of
Adams, who at that time did not know the
parties, nor had even seen the fisce of Thistle-
wood. Then how does it stand ? why thus :
in October or September, for I do not know
exactly when the meeting was, before the
meeting in Finsbwy-oarket, these great events
andffreaf changes had been announced; the
meeting in Finsbnry-market had taken place,
and the people who attended it.had been com-
5 lately discouraged ; their connexion had been
tssolTcd ; so much so, that when they came
together again, Monument said to Brunt, I
thought I bttd entirely lost you ; and now he
aeems to connect the two plans, that for the
meetings, and this for the assassination of min-
isters, which I am sorry to say was prepared,
and thus it is that Adams is sought to be
supported.
We have befmre us next, a most material
witness, Hiden, who, it is said, is not an ac-
complice, and therefore ought to be believed.
I was not present yesterday, for a reason
which it is unnecessary to state, when my
learned friend cross-examined him; but I
vftderstood he did not deny, at least, having
been so far imfdioated in transactions of this
kind — and I beg to be corrected if I mis-state,
because when i avow that I am speaking of a
time at which I was not present, I cannot be
snppoeed intentiomiUy to mbrepresent ; I had
rather be set right now than replied to here-
nfker; but I uiklerstand that witness, being
pteased upon the subject, did not go to the
€stent of denying— that he had invited one
•ther person, or odier persons, to join a meet-
ing of this kind.
. Mr. SoHcUor Genera/.— To |;o to a meeting
of a shoemakers' club, where it was said some-
thing was to be done for the good of the
country; he will not undertake to say that
aooiething of that kind was not said.
' Mr. Adolphtt^ — ^I am very glad to have the
fgiy words from Hw Solicitor-general; this
■lan' waa inviting another upon the very eve of
ihe «xeeution of this conspiracy; he does not
deny upon his oath, that he was the inviter of
some othev persons to join a meeting which
hat been described to you as « pretended dob
&t shoemaker^ that ia a dub where shoe^
snakers and tailors and others went. When
Aoemakera and tfUon have great mfatters ia
skgitfttion for the reform of the state, the state
iB oud^ohiiied to thei% it is doing die atate
VOL.XX£lU.
much honour to devote their boun to tobacco,
porter, and reform. But this man does not
show that he is incapable of inviting another
person ; he is not therefore that innocent dis-
interested person which I supposed him to be
from his evidence as first delivered, who took
the earliest and readiest means of disclosing
all he knew to the individual intended to be
sacrificed by it, namely, to lord Castlereagh,
but failing him lord Harrowby.
Gentlemen, does he not appear under con-
siderable suspicion of being one of those who
would wait till he had got something which he
could carry to an effectual market ? Does he
support any plot or plan except by the con-
versation with Wilson, arranged so as to bear
upon that part of the subject ? Does he telt
you of any thing relating to a plot beyond the
scheme of the assassination of ministers f
Let us examine his conversation with Wilson.
I hare given you already an express enumera-
tion, not to be departed from, of the houses that
he pitched upon ; they were lord Harrowby'^
lord Castlereagh% the duke of Wellington's,
the bishop of London's, and one other, which
he did not recollect ; now, when he sees Wil-
son first, he reports him to have asked, '* would
I be of a party to destroy his majesty's ministers
at a cabinet dinner, they were waiting for one,
and all was ready, and they had such things as
I never saw, they called them hand-grenades ;
they are, I believe, such things as nobody ever
saw ; they were to light up some fires ; they
depended upon me for making one; and I told
him I would ; he said, those things were to be
put into the «room where the gentlemen were
at dinner, and they who escaped the explosion
were to die by the edge of the sword, or some
other weapon ; they were to set fire to some
houses, and keep the town in a state of con-
fusion for several days, then it would become
a general thing ;'^ now these are the particular
words and expressions upon which this trea-
sonable conspiracy is attempted to be fixed.
Is there any pretence that he disclosed to
lord Harrowby, any thing like this ? Is there
any preten<4^ for saying that the matter went
further, from his declaration at least, than that
tiiere was a plot to destroy his majesty's min-*
isten } And here let me set myself right with
respect to a supposition once pat, as founded
on some unconsidered expression of mine^
certainly not arishig from a desire or wish to
misrepreient, which I consider it my duty t»
deny at the moment, and which I now deny
again ;' I never did sj^y, nor think, nor have I
any intention now to say, that lord H&rrowby
in particular, or his ms^esty's ministers in
genera], ever had the least thought, by the
encouragement of reward, or the hope or pro-
miseof SMvancement of any kind, to induce this
man by any endeavour whatever, to strain his
conscience to swear to one particttlar more
than he actually knew, or mOre espedally to
invent any plot or conspiracy for the purpose
of ft]Ttherin| their views, or that this migfil
haM any effect on the king^is subjects; Per*
4N
13831
1 GEORGE IV.
Trial ^Jakn ThomOi Bntni
haps I may be going further tlian my fioimer
atatement might neem to warrant, hat I will
make this qualificatioD ; I still believe that the
operating motiTe on Hiden's mind when he
made a disclosure to lord Harrowby, was
reward from lord Uarrowby or some one else,
and that therefore that motive would have an
influence on the mind of the witness, although
not inspired or encouraged either directly or
indirectly by the noble indiridual with whom
he communicated ; that I did believe, and that
I do believe ; you have heard he is a roan in
beggarly circumstances ; that he is a prisoner
for a very small debt in the prison of the
Marshalsea. — I am told that is not proved in
this trial, but that he is a man in some diffi-
culties, and I believe I am at liberty to state,
that appearin|f here bv virtue of a habeas
corpus, ne is indisputaoly a prisoner confined
for debt; such a man, under such circum-
stances, woukl therefore indulge hopes whidi
his majesty's ministers may not feel them-
selves disposed to excite, or at least would
not excite by promises, or foster by any de-
claration of theirs ; but the influence upon his
mind is the same, and we must consider what
his actual expectations were, not what his
reasonable expectations might have been ; but
I go further, if his migesty's ministers were
not apprised of it, and be was the first person
who gave them that information, I do say, as a
member of the community, this man has a
right to expect the remuneration which he
ought to receive, who has saved their lives ;
mt what time, or under what circumstances it
is to be made, it is not for me to divine, but I
have no hesitation in saying, it ought to be
made ; I do not press this into the cause, as
having an influence upon ministers, but as
having a possible influence upon the mind of
the witness himself, and therefore as being
not unworthy of your best attention.
Kow, gentlemen, what is the confirmation of
this witness ? How da the others each require
confirmation for themselves, namely, Adams
and Monument, and a third, as I humbly sug-
gest, not sufficiently clear from inl^tations of
this kind, to stand as an unimpeachable and ir-
itproacbable witness? Let us see what further
aapport they receive, principally from Monu«
aent's brother, who knows nothing of the con-
▼ersation with Monument, butonly corroborates
the facts of his being called out of the zoom,
and of their entering into conversation, such
as he has described, but not going into the
particulars. He says, ''Brunt called vrith
Tidd ; when Brunt came in, my brother said,
I thought I bad lost you; there was something
passed concerning the king's death; Brunt
said, that the king's death had altered their
plans; my brother asked what their plans
were; Brunt said, they embraced many ob-
Jecte ; Brunt said to Tidd, shall we give them
the pass-word, which consi|ted of the letters
h, u, if and they told us we were to meet at
the turnpike ;" and then he tejls you the curi*
pus sign and countersign, by which they have
leanad to spell the word bktUtu Ihttii the
confirmation which Monument bss recared
firom his brother, who does not pretend te
know what the plan was, but that the khig^
death had altered some plan ; to wfaatdegiec
or extent he does not say, except tbtt it bid
altered their plans to this extent, tint tia
cabinet dinner being given np, they coald h(
expect to meet the ministers together at i
cabinet dinner ; this being before Mr. Edwiidi
bad found the advertisement ia the newmer,
and when they were to go to thiee or hn
of their houses, and take off the meet ohaonw
separately.
With respect to the conspiracy Moneacnt
receives no support from hb brother, ens if
his brother were disposed to support bin t»
that extent. The witness relied on as entinl]f
innocent, and entitled to complete credit, ii
Hale, the apprentice, and we shall tee hot fiv
his confirmation goes. It is beyond dl doiM
and dispute — I mention the landlady oelj"'
the purpose of saying her ooofirmalioe IM
it proved— that there was a room t>keD,iB
which certain consultations were held; m
the apprentice does not tell you the aibjecta
those consultations, and he sapports his on
credit by not saying that le?ity or drunteawj
on the part of his master had emiodM"
him to drop a single word u to the object;
but he says, he was told to direct any peoMi
who called on the fatal night, to go to »
White Hart, and that he seat one nan, of ^a
name of Potter, to the White Hart, «odtt«
is supposed to be a confirmation of their pai>>
That is no confirmation of their plaos, beoiie
it appears that there were twenty or »*•
abouts, at Cato-etreet, of whom tweg
thirteen only have been named, sod ttitfw)"
there is still room for Potter and hit fne^a
have been there, and they may hare reeane
an intimation at the bar of the Wbte^
where they were to go, a secret «^^»**?
not thought fit .to entrust this appiennce^
It is said, that when Brunt came h«»«"^
tattered, dirty, and miserable conditioo,.*«2
pressed himself in these terms, "^J^^
over yet." to one person with whom f Jj
conversing, and tlutt he went oat ^^
man. Gentlemen, all wu not over; he n^
seek to promote the escape of •^V?S
whom he knew well where to meet, wj»
intent to bring them together agaiD;.""'!".
re-tiniting the scattered parts of »«/J*5
racy, every bo4y must know th^ n*^^
utteriy and clearly impossible ;Jortt^
evidence such a^H is, if one party MoB^
suocess, they were to send an «"•"/ ^
Sepulchre's diurch door, who ''"^ '"y,^,
another orderly from the o^^V^^'^^i^
hear from Mr. Adams; and so a co«»^
tion was to be made. Was th«w MTj;
importing that those persons weieen^jj^
that time in any operation I Nothu* ■J'jj
Brunt's dedaration, therefore, *f^ fog-
more than this; there is a wreck, ^^g^
meats of which we most sMk to i«v«)
1385]
Jot High Trea$on.
A. D. 182a
[1S86
are anse^ wbicb Mr. Edwards, or tome worthy
person, has hrought, which we must remofe ;-
and part of these wer^ carried back on the
morning after this attack, to the place whither
most especially they ought not to have been
taken, to Fox-court ; Edwards takes the gre-
nades, and they were (in a manner that would
Bot be believed, while there was the Thames
flowing near London, or any place to conceal
them) brought back to the very place where
they had b^n previously deposited, they were
there again deposited, and information given
lor them to be found, to weigh down the case
against this unfortunate prisoner.
These are the prinapal circumstances of
oonfirmatioD which the evidence of this man
receives. As to the circumstance of the watch-
man seeing Davidson watch; as to the cir-
cumstance of the spelling of the word btUton^
and the game of dominos, and so on, which
liave been given in evidence, they are so light
and unimportant, that confirmation of that
Bature will not attach crime either to the most
innocent man, or to men whose guilt up to a
certain point was admitted.
Crentiemen, I may have failed ; and I know
I have foiled : it is impossible I should view
-what has been transacting on former trials,
without knowing that I have failed in directing
r>ur attention to many parts of this evidence.
know you will be told, that for the purposes
of murder, fire-bails were not necessary, and
poles ol^this kind : gentlemen, how mudi viU
rainy may have added to that project which
I conceive to have been originally entertained,
it is not for me to define ; but it is quite as pro-
bable that twenty pikes should be used in kill-
ing fourteen ministers, or in guarding the spot
where that crime was to be perpetrated, as in
overawing the whole of this vast metropolis,
and overpowering the military to be brought
against them. If the probability is to be
weighed in the one scale or the other, I say it
is quite as probable that they should mean to
arm the men attending them on this one ob-
ject, as that they should by means of such
weapons dig a trench to take the metropolis.
I have no doubt that I have omitted many
aabiects ; but I trust to your excellent memory,
and to the summing-up of the court, to inform
your minds and direct your attention ; still I
dio again implore you to consider how tliis case
]« made out, and how it is supported ; to give
tbe best attention you can to all the evidence,
but without too much disposition to believe
liiese informers ; who, if believed, will form a
precedent by which prosecutions may be ex-
tended to the most alarming degree : yoo have it
already in evidence ftat there are other branches
in this conspiracy to which, perhaps, the same
elTorts may be directed, and other persons
jbrought to trial, on the very same testimony
of tfa«se very same men. Von have it as a
declaration, that a gentleman's servant had
•applied money and means to this conspiracy ;
if you believe inforaiersof this kind, some
g^antleiDaD ^|^ in public eitinMrtiro, or sonie
nobleman high in rank and illustrious in con-
nection, may be the next victim at whom this
sort of surreptitious credibility will be aimed.
If they can, by such swearing, take the lives of
the humblest class of victims, it wants but the
vigour which will be derived from repeated
success, to bring home the same conviction to
any individual in the community, who happens
to stand high in rank, reputation, or fortune,
whom it may be thought desirable to destroy,
or convenient to remove.
Juries cannot exercise too much prudence :
we are often told that the policy of verdicts
ought to be remote from the minds of juries ;
and so it ought, when the consequence ends
with the subject before them; but in a case
like this, where the parties present may not be
alone implicated, but where hundreds of whom
we think not, may come to trial on the same
testimony, eked out as this is, not knowing
where such things may stop, it is not too much
to ask of juries to exercise a very vigilant
caution and* consideration. Besides, as this
trial is not an affair of individual felony, but
an affair of state — an affair on which, when
judgment is exercised, opinion is not to be
suspended — which enters into history, and
forms one of the land-marks of the times —
which is to be a precedent for the present and
future days— it is not too much for me to say
to you (and I know, too, you would do it if I
did not say it) watch cautiously, examine at-
tentively, be not too prone to listen to spies,
but give every circumstance your utmost con-
sideration; and particulariy do not, because
you think these men to be bad men— because
yon think them atrociously wicked, proceed on
slight evidence to find them guilty of high
treason; but weigh well, deliberate, and if
your consciences point out a verdict of guilty,
I know you will acquit your consciences ; but
unless you can do so, fur God's sake, for the
sake Of yourselves and posterity, reject and
totally discredit a spy, exercise caution, in
thinking how he might have been supported,
how he has been and how he has not been
supported ; -and then determine whether you
are so free from doubt as to be under the ne*
cessity of pronouncing that verdict to which I
have adverted, or whether you will not feel
yourselves called upon to say that the prisoner
is not guilty.
A Juryman (Mr. Goodchild.)'—'^y lord, there
is one circumstance impressed on our attention
by the learned counsel, which (if my memory
does not fail me) I think is not borne out ;
for we have it not proved on this trial, that
the ammunition was returned to the d^pdt,
as it is termed, on the 24th ; I submit myself
to your lordship to ^rrect me, if I am in error;
my memory may fail me.
lard Owtf Baron, — It was not proved on
this trial, certainly.
Mr, Ado^l>kui, — ^I am sorry I should hav^
fallen into the mistake ; I thought it hid been
otherwise.
1287} 1 GEOB6E IV.
Trial ^JAn IJiamaM Bnmi
(1988
Xord Chirf BamLr^Ajkd then are some
other things which have not been proved on
this trial ; I aliall eDdeavoor to set iheie mat-
ters right in reading iny notes.
Mr. AdcHphaa, — I am sure fhe gentlemen of
the jary will believe I did not mean to mislead
them.
Mr. Goodchild, — ^I am satisfied of that.
Lord Chief Baron.'-li is impossible that any
body who knows Mr. Adolphns, should ima-
gine that to have been his intention.
Mr, GoodcAtZi.— It' is impossible, my lord,
to suppose that Mr. Adolpnus had any such
idea.
Lord Chief Baron. — ^John TTiomas Brunt,
your learned counsel have concluded their very
able addresses to the gentlemen of the jury ; if
you wish to add any thing to what they have
•aid, this is the opportunity for doing so, and
the jury will be very happy to hear you.
fining. — My lord,I have had adefence put into
my hands but a few minutes ago ; I have not
had time to peruse it over yet ; but I shall
make two or three observations respecting the
evidences who have appeared against me, par*
ticularly respecting the evidence of Monument.
It is quite useless for me to attempt to deny being
in the room in Cato-street, I do not intend to
deny any thing of the kind ; but immediately on
the arrival of Monument at the room in Cato*
street, he approached me ; he asked me what
was going to be done, when he saw the arms on
the bench which has beeii described; to which,
my lord, I replied, that I was not aware that
any thing was going to be done, for that
£dwards had not brought so many men by
thirty as he had stated he could bring there ;
and it was much against my intention en-
deavouring to do any thing with so few men,
for I would not be led by any individual.
Accordingly, perceiving, my lord, that Menu*
ment betrayed a great deal of fear, I persuaded
him to go away.
My lord, there has been a considerable stress
laid upon a number of men volunteering to go
to my Lord Harrowby's house ; this, my lord, I
totally deny. I will admit, my lord, that when
Thistlewood, as it has been stated, addressed
himself to the few men in number Tfor he saw the
men would not act when he addressed them)
urging the necessity of going to act, as one of
the witnesses stated, or it would be a Despard's
job, some few men went into the small room,
but they never had come to any agreement or
determination (this I solemnly protest) to go
to the house ; they were endeavouring to see
whether they were able to find fourteen or
fifteen men desperate enough to go to the
square, which they never could have done. I
Bever was so deprived of my reason as to go
to meet instant death.
I wish to call the attention of the jury to
two circumstances that contradict them-
selves. My lord, in the first plac^, Adama
statei to iiopUcate me mora deephr than an
other man except ThistLowqpd, that I deciaie^
were there six men in the room, I mwM, go l»
the house and blow the house about tbeir eaa;
this, my lord, is £Mm* Very soon alter conae
forward Monument, my loid, and be makes a
declaration to you, my lord, and the gentleBMn
here, that I declai«d, I would go Xnf mya^aod
buiy myself in the ruins. Is thi8» my toid,
consistent evidence ; }s this sufficient em^we
for my life to rest on, or to deprive m? of lifii,
my son of a father, and my wile of a hnsband?
My lord, I should wish to adwt to another
circumstance : while a prisoner in Cold-bad^
fields (I was there, I believe, my lotd, for
nearly three days, and scarcely out of the n
even to wash myself) when I ceme doiwa
of my room to the fire, I WW Monument, I (
Strange, I saw Cooper and Bradbom. Mom^
meet, my lord, came to me dosely, sat himsstf
down by me, and whispered in niy ears them
words: ^ What did you my when yo« came
before the privy council V* mys I» '^ I mid I
knew nothmg of the matter.'^ Thia, my lesd,
induced me to ask Monument what be had smd^
says I, "* What did you say ?"--<< I could my
nothing,'' says he, ^ you told me ^tbing ; why
did not you teU me more? yo«i t«3d mt
nothing.'' Says I, " Were it possible for me
to tell you what I did not know myself? yoa
knew very well, when you mw the men caBsd
on, it was declared every one should votnateer
into the small room that would go on eneh a
desperate affur*" Though, gentlemen of Iha
jury, you observed, no doubt, that Adaom has
declared, I was the man that nominaied the
men to go to the house, and him amoBg the
rest; a man whom J knew to be a villain, and
who has constantly oome to my place twice a
day, in company with Sdwards, to deprive me
of my life. But I am no traitor; I was deter-
mine, though I had engaged in tjhis baaeplo^
that my life I would fofint sooner than betisf
an individual ; I would be racked on tbe wheel
sooner than betray a feUow-.creatnre. TIM is
my principle, my lord, and this shows an isH
tention, my lord, of Monument to betray m^
Now, my lord, I should wish to advert to a
circumstance which occurred to me at Cam*
bray, in France, Certainly, my lord, as Jam
placed here, and my life is placed in the heads
of those twelve honest men* it beoomee am te
state any thing that will be of the teaai
to me or beneficial to my {felloir-pi
While I was in France, my len), I
Adams, on the first Sunday whea I ct.
Paris, me and my son» I bad wmked in dm
capacity of a bootHiloser. Adams was e amn
possessed of no judgment in the tmde^ though
ae worked for a number of officen; l£ia asa^
my lord, I assisted in ontting out boots fof te
officers, and learning him what I bad mttaiait
by art in my busipemf The man betaum
jedpns of me, and threatened to take mf Wk i
and dedared to bis wifo, if she did not amk^
an op^n declaration to m«^ thaA if cver^n
spoke to me her life m notesl^ koMaML W
isse]
fat HH Dmsoih
A. D. iiao.
[ifiOO
the doitth oi her; sccordiiigljy I wm oliligid
to leave the bouse, which I did immedialely^
and never worked for him again. I went there,
my lord, to work in the cavalry barracks with
the Coldstream giiards; and I believe, that if
trouble is taken to inquire, they will find
nothing treasonable or any thing disloyal about
me during that time. I could bring, if I had
aa opportunity, a number of men In the Cold-
etream guards who worked in the barracks
with me, particularly one Mr. Marsden who is
in Westminster now; I worked for him a
length of time. After this, my lord, I went
Irom Cambray to lisle, where i worked lor a
epace, I suppose, of about eighteen months ; I
woiked for an English master who then worked
there, a man of the name of Pulsferd, two or
three months, till I obtained a little moae^, and
then came to England. I knew nothing o£
Adams* I settled myself when I came home.
My vrife heard that me and my son were a^
sassinated in France, and she had lost her
eenses, and I found her in St Luke's when I
<wme home ; but, however, as that is not to the
purpose, I shall not proceed with it. My wife,
tbortly after that, came out ; I obtained a seat
of work from a master whom I had worked
§a€ be£^r^ and who, unfortunately for me,
tamed out to be a relation of thii very appren-
tice who has come here to take my lifo* Trade
was very bad, extremely bad indeed. This
Mr. Hale, who lives in Castle<etreet, Holbom,
voriLcd chiefly for fomilies in the West Indies ;
and, my lord, as it has been held op to this
court, that he is such an undeniable and t^
apeetable witness, and that his relations are
master tradesmen, I will advert to some fow
drcnmstances which oome widiin my recollect
tion concerning his fomily. It must be well
recoHected by several gentlemen in this court,
that John Hale (the brother of this very man,
who put this boy an apprentice to me), some
yean ago, under a false name, took a large
trareJioose in Ironmooger4ane, and after tluit
decamped with a ship loed of goods, and
ewindled the merchants of London out of
tO0,000^
Xonf Chief Baron.-^You should not go into
tlie character of persons who are not before
the court ; there is no evidence of this.
Ffuomr, — I beg pardon, my lord, for in-
truding on your inaulgenoe, or that of the
gentlemen of the jury; it is only to prove to
MU of what descendants this boy is; he has
heen a villain to me, which I can bring evi»
deuce in the court to prove, but I will pass
ever that. This relation of bos that I vrarked
{or, I would wish to impress upon your mind,
wished me to take the boy apprentice ; I had the
boy on liking; I wished to avoid taking him, but
X oouhl not without losing my bread, and even
if I should be disd^urged from this place, I do
BOt know where I sImII pet vrork, that is therea-
SOD I took this boy, with a promise of seven
]fears work with him, as he had numbers of
xelaiMiie laasteif ; but shortly after Ihad taken
him, aAeir he tad beeii boiilid a short lime
to me, I was throvm out of work ; this relation
curtailed my v^ages ; I put up with it once ; he
wished to curtail me again, which I could not
put up With any longer. I was obliged, my
lord, to leave my work, and go into another
neighbourhood to live; this landlord vrillcome
forward if it is necessary, but I have not an
opportunity of bringina any one forward, or I
would bring numbers mrward. I* went to live
in the neighbourhood of Foz-couit; before I
lived in Shoe>laoe ; however I was fortunate
enough to obtain pretty well of work, but the
worst of it is, that this boy has lost it for me; he
spoileditforme; positively I can biingmeninto
this court, mastery particularly Mr. Smith of
Southampton*buildingB, who works for Mr.
Bimie, and who has been had up I know, for my
wife told me he hasbeen had up, and he will give
me a good character for work, and every thing
he knows of me* This has caused my apprentice
and me to have frequent dispmes, his spoiling
myworic.
My lord, about eighteen months ago my vrifo
was not very well, and she had a separate
lodging out of town, and this boy went sod
robbed her of a book, which I deteeted in Uff
pocket. I did not poiiish him^ bnt dnly gave
him an admonition ; since that he has been
in the habit of notng abont to take the lives of
such individuals as me; he has been in Ae
habit of going about and thieving, which I oan
Kve to your satisfoction, I com bring two
« into the court now, who lived upon ^e same
spot with me, but they are afhud of implica«
ting themselves ; and my vrife, poor creature,
has never been well since she vras out of her
mind, and is quite out of ability to come here.
He went to a butcher's shop and stole a steel,
and sold it to a master for whom I woiked,
(and who will appear with the steel), to a Mr*
Bacon, in Kirby-<street, Uattoo-gaiden ; this
can be proved, my lord, beyond doubt. Not
content with this, my lord, he was at other
kinds of robbery ; he vras charged in Gray^s^
in»-lane with robbing a gentleman of his watch,
and he was taken into die Gt^ earl of War-
wick publiohoase ; the landlord knew me very
well ; he directed tiie gentleman to take him
there, being an artful Iwy, and I knovnng the
landlord, the landlord persuaded the gentleman
that he must be mistaken for that he knew hie
master well, and he got liberated by that
means. My lord, I do not know that it is
altogether to the present question for me to
name it, but two years and a half ago he had a
brother died under sentence of death here^
in this very prison; this is nothing to hie
credit, but what I have ststed to your lordship*
before, i can prove ; I can bring the people
forward ^ prove it Mv wifo went to the
btttdier's, bat he hesitated, and would not ac-
knowledge to anv thing of the sort, but the
steel oan be produced, and could the bcrys be
promised that they vfould not be punished,
diey would come forward ; aad not only tlns^
hatha if a vittaia to hi» asioci^tes, ier he sold
1S91] 1 GEOSGE IV.
te steel for 3«. 6if. and he told tiie boys lint
he sold it for half a crowoy and robbed them of
a shilling ; this I hope, my lord, the gentlemen
of the jury will weigh.
Then, gentlemen, .as to Hiden, I know
nothing of him; I never saw him in my life to
my knowledge ; that, my lord, is all I wish to
say« except reading a part of this defence which
I have not looked over at present [refen to
4ke wriUten defence], I beg yonr paidon my
lord, I wish to advert to a person af the name
of Bdwardsy who is the first individual who
«verdrew me into this snare; this Mr. Ed-
wards, my lord, I first saw in company with
Thisdewood at the White lion in Wych-street,
Clare-markety or Dniry-lane; it runs into
Dmry4aDe ; this Edwards shortly after called
upon me at my lodgings in Fox-court; I was
▼ery short of work, and he used frequently to
call npon me, twice or three times a day, k>ng
before this room was taken which has been so
much the subject of the present trial; this
voom which was unfortunately a back room on
the same floor as I lived ; this Edwards, even if
I was not at home, would call again ; if I went
to a shop after work, he would even come and
wait.for me till I came out, which I can prove by
Mr. Smith, who sfid ^ I» that a person wait-
ing for yon, why do not yon call him inf*'
This man, my lord, harassed me, and even at
times supplied me with money; he told me,
which I can bring other people to prove, could
they be called in evidence before you, who
have been had up at Bow-street by his sug-
gestion, whom he endeavoured to implicate,
but could not ; he told them, that if he could
get a thousand such persons as me, he knew I
was not a man of disloyalty, and he know-
ing me to be a staunch man, thought me fit to
be made a prey of; he has taken persons with
me to treat them with eatables and drink;
this was his constant practice, my lord, day
after day continually, so I may say, for two
months, if not more, before I was arrested;
this I solemnly declare before God, that he is
the individual who has seduced n&e, and not
Thistlewood ; I shall advert, my lord, as I stated
before, to what passed when I was in Cato-
street; I called that evening and before, I
wiU state nothing but the truth ; my lord, from
the different favours which I had received
from Edwards at different periods, I certainly
had a good opinion of the man ; I will candidly
acknowledge, when the officers came up into
the room in Cato-streel, I made my escape in
the best manner I could, though, my lord, I
do not say I made my escape as a coward,
tiiat I ran off and went to bed, nor as a traitor
deceived my fellow comrades ; I went imme-
diately down to Grosvenoi^square, where I
knew this villain was who probably will be
the means of my being sent into another world
very shortly; I went to that villain, and told
him what had happened, at which he seemed
very much surprised, but left the square with
me ; shortly after, i|p ci^ne. Thistlewood and
another pecson, who was in the room, but
of Join tkmmu Bruid
[itmi
who has not been tdcen, nor he |Mver wiO, I
dare say, my lord; however, we proceeded
from Grosvenor-eqnare ; he took us into several
wine-vaults to drink, merely, I believe, ay
lord, for some persons to identiiy ns, aa I
have thought since ; we went into a boose in
Fritb^treet, and from there we proceeded to
Holbom, ¥^en I proceeded home ; I had not
been long home, before a man came id, as
the apprentice has asserted, and said he had
received a violent blow in the side, but the
apprentice forgot to tell you that Mr. Edwards
was the man who .came on the stairs and told
us to come out, and we went out to Hoibon,
and there we met with Palin by chance in
Holbom, and three other individuals, and
with them I went into Thompeon's wine
vaults, opposite St. Andrew's church ; I drank
a small glass of liquor ^ Edwards came in last,
and I believe if I recollect right, that I paid
for three glasses of liquor, one for Pa^iii, one
for myself, and one for another individaal,
who was with him ; I came out of the shop,
and was followed very quickly by Edwards,
who called -me on one side and told me he
wished to speak to me ; on hearing what he
had to say, he beean to find fault with me
very mnch for drinking with Palin, declared
that he was the man that had bettayed na
all, and that he was unworthy to live; dedared
that he had prevented ten or twelve m^ whom
he dependeaon finom coming to Edgware*
road ; that be had sent Potter to GrosTeaor-
square to watch his movements, and that he
was a villain. On that, my lord, we walked,
I believe, as for as Little Britain^ I tiiink aome-
where thereabouts, I am^'not mudi aoqiiaiated
with that part of the town, but when we caaw
into a dark place, near where as he said Cook
lived, (but I never was at Cook's j^aoe^ be
urged me again respecting Palin, as PidiB was
very much intoxicated, he said to me that die
safest wav will be for us to put Palin oat of
the worid; he urged me, my lord, aeveral
times to assassinate Palin; he told me, says
he, '^you have got nothing I dare say aboet
you," but he put his hand to his pocket, and
pulled out a brass-barrelled loaded pistol, and
offered it to me to assassinate Palin, and he
likewise offered me the swoid stick in his hand,
saying '' if you put him out of the worid, every
thing will be safe;*' he likewise shewed me a
constable's staff; says he, ''I will act in te
same capacity I have been actins in aU the
evening, in Grosvenor-eqnare, and all will be
safe; should there be any alaim given, I will
officiate as an officer, and you may depcmd
upon it there will be no discovery.'' . Finding
him urge me to commit murder, I made him
this reply, ^ If you are convinced th«i Pidia is
a villain, the weapons are in good hamda.*
Finding, my lord, that lie could not prevul os
me to ao the murder, he says to me, ^ I aaest
bid you good night, for I am going to condact
Mr. Thistlewood to some secret place.** At
he had always been, my lord, as it were, pnmed
to the coat tail of ^. ThistlewoM^ I ihoagb^
10931
f» H^h rriMOR. '
A. D. IMD.
C1394
htm a most proper penon certtdDly, and know«
ing I had no evil intentions myself against
any individual, I was detennined not to know
where they went, and consented to bid him good
nighty but not first without an admonition
from him ; he came on one side again, my lord,
and whispered to me, and told me that those
things which had been entmsted to Palin and
Potter, and some of the individuals, they had
done nothing with, and they were taken into the
back room my lord, in the house where I
lodged. This vras a plot to take my life, I
have no doubt ; he asked me if I would be so
good as to tie diose things up in the morning,
and send either my apprentice or my own
boy with a part of them to Palin's, and a
part to Potter^s in the Borough, with an
intent, my lord, as I have conceived since to
take their lives, I have not the smallest doubt of
it ; according^, my lord, I got up in the
morning, and those things which have been
produced here I put in Uiose baskets, as has
Men given in evidence here by mv own ap-
prentice, and tied them up, my lord, but altered
my mind respecting sending them, thinking
that if they wanted them they might fetch
them. This, my lord, is all that I wish to say
respecting what I know of the plot ; this is
all I know ; I know that Edwards is the man
that always found money ; he is the man that
went about at the old iron shops and different
places, buying pistols, swords, and other
things for individuals who could not get money
or aibrd money to buy them ; this I declare
before that God whose awful tribunal I shall
probably be called to attend ; and should I
die in Ihis cause for having been seduced by
the villain who has been employed by sovem-
ment, or he could not get the money, it I die,
I will die not^'unworthy of a descendant of the
ancient Britons ; soMier than I would betray
my fellow men, I wbuld suffer a thousand
deaths; this, my lord, is all I have to say.
BEPLr.
Mr. SolkUar OeneraL — Gentlemen of the
Jury ; I rise for the purpose of making some
observations, not in reply to the case which
has been set up on the part of the prisoner,
because no evidence on his behalf has been
presented to your attention, but in reply to
die observations and arguments which have
been so ably and forcibly urged by the counsel
assigned for his defence. Jaded as my mind
must necessarily be by a continued repetition
of the same &cts, and a recurrence to the same
topics and the same arguments, you will feel
that I have upon this occasion a most iiksome
duty to perform. But we are not assembled
here for the purpose of amusement ; we are
net to discharge one of the most grave and
aolemn duties that can be cast upon any mem-
bers of civilised society, and I trust therefore,
however tedious this inquiry may prove, if I
•bould be compelled to recur to the same ar«
guments already so frequently urged, you will
—for the sake of the public^dr your own
satisfaction and peace of mind, when you may
look back at some future period to the events
of this day — and above all, for the sake of die
prisoner at the bar, give me a patient and at-'
tentive hearing.
It is in consequence of the privilege which
tfie law has given to the prisoners of severing
their challenges, and of Course sepanting their
defences, that it has become necessary to recur
thus frequently to the facts of this case. I am
not complaining of this ; it is a right that the
prisoners have by the law of the countiy, and'
if they conceive that the exercise of it can be
of any benefit to them, I should be one of the
last men to wish to deprive them of such a
privilege. In a case of this description, to
think of our own personal convenience or in-
convenience, would be in the highest degree
selfish and contemptible, and however painful
and distressing may be the sacrifice which we
are called upon to make, I am sure it will be
made with cheerfulness and alacrity.
My learned friend who has just spoken said
nothing on the law of the question, but my learn-
ed fnend who preceded him made many remarks
^-remarks with which I have no disposition to
quarrel— on what he called constructive treason.
But we are not here engage in considering a
case of constructive treason. The charge pre-
ferred against the prisoner is of a very different
character. He is charged, not with constructive,
but with plain and direct treason. Disrobing
the accusation of all technical terms, it is shortly
and plainly this, that the prisoner conspired
with other persons to move an insurrection,
and stir up rebellion in the country ; that he
endeavoured to effect his object by means of a
most extensive plan of assassination which is
not now disputeo by his counsel, which is ad«
mitted by the prisoner himself in the most dis«
tinct terms, and which ^with their ultimate
object) was to be accomplished by those other
means which have been stated in evidence in
the progress of this trial.
Now, gentlemen, with respect to the manner
in which this case is made out against the
prisoner. Mr. Curwood has stated, that before
a charge of this kind can be brought home
against the accused, he must, according to the
language of the statute of Edward, be proveably
attainted. I beg leave to subscribe to that
opinion, to the fofi extent to which the learned
gentleman would press it. I say, unless you
aroi hy the evidence which is laid before you,
cleariy convinced that the case is brought home
to the prisoner at the bar, it is your bounden
duty to acquit him ; he must, according to the
lanffuage of the statute and the commentary of
lord Ck>ke, be proveably convicted. It win
be for you, then, considering the evidence laid
before you unopposed as it has been by any
testimony on the other side, to say whether in
the proper and fair- construction of the terms,
the prisoner is proveably convicted of the of-
fence with which he is accused.
A most ettraordinary course of argument
hu beenporsQied oil theotherstde^ and amosi*
19051 1 GEOBGiB IV.
TrUl <^Jtlk» Thomaa Bnmt
[IW
•xtnofdinaiy assomptioa adopted. The wit*,
Muee lar thle praeeeatioD, have proved to you
that e plan of assaBsination was tormed, whidi
constituted one step towards the aooonplish-
ment of a treasonable project. My learned
friends say we believe your witnesses; we
believe your evidence up to a certain point;
we admit that such a plan of assassiaatioo,
wicked and monstrous as it is, was really
formed ; but we disbelieve all your evidence
beyond that point. This is, indeed, a most
extraordinary goufm of argument^ pressed for
the first time, I believe, to grave and reasonable
men, in a court of justice that up to a certain
point (establishing that which is almost incre-
dible in itself, namely, that these persons had
combined together to assassinate so many
eminent and dignified characters,, with whom
t|iey had had no personal intereouxse, and of
whom they had no personal knowledge) you
will believe the witnesses ; you will give eredii
to their testimony as far as this point, and aU
the rest you will rctject as fiction and faUe.
But in pursuing this inquiry we shall see whe-
t^ my learned friends are entitled to reject
the evidence, so &r as it relates to the ulti*
mate object which these parties had in view.
And when we speak of this being an improba*
ble fiction, to which no reasooable man can
give credit, allow me to ask, vrhetber that which
my learned friends have admitted, and which
llie prisoner at thtf bar has not disputed, is not
infinitely more improbable, standing by itself
i|S the ultimate olycot at which they are sup-
poesd to have ainled, than as forming a step
towards the aeconmjishment of that treason
which they meditated. For, I do declare, in
4ie laojguage (or rather in the spirit, for I can*
Qot imitate the language) of the learned judge
ta whom I allude, that it is infinite^ more
incredible thai the prisoner should have en«
gaged in a conspiracy for the mere assaarination
<^f his m^ieaty's ministers, than that they should
have united m a treasonable design, using the
assassination of his miyesty's ministers as a
atep to promotoi an insunection and rebellion
in the oounti^* I think the assumptipn on the
other side is mfinile)jf more void or probability
than that which we state, and which at Uie
same time is proved by the evidence in the
cause, whereas the oth^ rests upon. mere as-
aertion ; vou are requested to reiect the evi-
dence and to consider all this as nction merely
on the gratuitous statement of the counsel for
l^e prisoner.
Lot us^ then, look at the evidence as it ap-
plies to the case, and see whether, as sober
men, judging upon the testimony given upon
oath before you, and upon those striking facts
which cannot be distorted or denied, this case
is or is not broeght home effectually to ihe
prisoner at the bar* We have called before
you an accomplice ; — Mot but that the case is
made oujL in its general ^haraoter and plan,
vrithout his evidence* X have already; to some,
of the f SNi^^emen I heve now the hoaour of
addre^pipig^ sMued wfaatl ti«kfi to be the jesi
principle by edudi ih» evidenee of tBsecflie>
plice is to be examined. First, I eomider ihi
previous character of the individiiaL Thiiini
has been known to the prisoner ibr a keg
period of time. The prisoner is new, ishi
defence, casting imputatioas on his cosdad:
but is there any evidence to impeach llieck»
ricter of Adams f The name of Adnsi m
in the list of vritnesses delivoed te the primer
upwards of four weeks firom this tiiae; «i^
nesses might have been called fw the ]iaipott
of discrediting him, and of saying thitkefW
not a man to be believed upon bu oath. N^
thing of that kind, however, has bees attenj^
ed; but it is said that he has been a disbe*
liever in the Christian religion, tad his knag
renoenoed thoee errors at a late period is up*
posed to throw a doubt upon his eridssct
That observation, if my letmed fnced viD
give me leave to say so, shews a dephnUe
ignorance of human nature and of Ifae disneier
of the human mind. That this msneaiM
astray from hb foitb by the pemidosswrilogf
of Paine he admitted, the moment the qne^
was put to him. But we all know tfastvtei
principles of religion are earljmlifeiaphild
m the mind they never can be enliraly cadi*
cated. In moments of distress ^-viNBtki
illusions of life are vrithdrawn— iHiea mAm
calamity, and particolariy when the dssftfe
death stares men in the fiMc^— theait i* ^
they fall back agam to the eoesoktidMof
religion ;—4hea it is that they see the wf
of the errors which they have mmMr
then it is that they ding again to m
faith vfhich is man's best hope ssd*><"|7
in the season of diMreis and soirov. h s
unnatural, therefore, that Adsiiis,-^v *
new designated by my learned ftia^ ^ *
first time as a spy (but of wfaieb tbert^"^
the slightest evidence in 4he tnm\ «h» s
suppceed to have been emplo^ hygow^
ment, for the^purpose of ettendiag t^^*^"^
ings (but of which there is not sir^ proo^ ^
the slightest foundation in fiKSt; n>r be «ni
not a|x>rebeBided tiU the Friday, sor ^»
name known to the goveraaseDt ti&hevs*
apprehended)— Is it at all ■"^pii'i^^J!^
a man, when he was apprehended, «S*°!^
he Imsaw the eoaseqaences of the ^'^^''T^
in which he was involved, shoeld 1>***JT
ceived the error of his wsys, tw^ *■* Sc!
and repenUnee should have foU^ved^. ^J^
my learned fnend, thercfiiw, "^*^ ^
diange as inconsistent and Jsip*****;^
ridicules that which a moment^HJtoyjjJ;
have suggested as the nataial «^**^^ig
the prisoner's sitnation ; aadhedieiMm^
this respect at leest, he is wmpMi^^
the wcAuni of the human mind. ,^^.^
Again, as to Adams, whst is 1« ui^
the cause) Amandoesnotcomews^^
of justice le commit v^tjvtft "^ !^
some melive of anierest wsm^^^^
his mind. Bed and degraded ss a 0»"^^
will not coounit pcrpuylor the ^^^^
ensue ; and stitt less villhs deM «>^
^
1397]
for H^k Treaion*
A. D. 18Sa
[1398
lead to oonsequencec of such a nature as would
follow upon the present occasion. He is ap*
prehended, he is conscious of his guilt ; he is
told he may be a witness for the Crown ; terms
are not made with him, because that is never
done ; he is merely informed, that he may be
a witness for the Crown. Of course he ex-
pects his pardon ; but it is upon one condition
only : That he falsifies the fact? that he states
that which is untrue ? that he aggravates the
charffe asainst his associates and himself? no :
but Uiat he states with truth all that he knows.
What motive then has he to come forward for
the purpose of stating that which is untrue ?
He blackens his own character in the same
proportion in which he criminates his asso-
ciates. He was one of the willing partners of
their crime ; why then should he state the of-
fence to be of a different nature from that
which was really committed ? I can under-
•tand that he may have a motive in lessening
the atrocity of the crime ; but I cannot under-
stand any motive operating on his mind which
would induce him to represent it as of a blacker
and more infamous cnaracter, than it really
deserved.
Again, when you are considering the evi-
dence of a man in the situation of Adams, you
will inquire, could he, if he has spoken false,
be contradicted? Over and over again that
challenge has been thrown out to my learned
friends ; they might have called witness after
witness for the purpose of contradicting him if
the stoiy he has told were untrue. There is a
witness of the name of Hall now within their
reach who attended all these meetings ; there
are other witnesses who have been named,
whom he has stated to have been present at
many of those meetings, and who might have
been called either for the purpose of dis-
S roving this fact, or of proving, if they really
Id attend the meetings, that the object of the
meetings, and that what took placie at them,
were different from what Adams has represent-
ed. Why, then, are not those witnesses put into
the box ?. If the story told by Adams is false,
why does not the prisoner at the bar call his
own associates for the purpose of showing,
that he is not guilty of the charge imputed to
him, and that the account given by Adams, of
what passed at the meetings, is false ?
But let us look to another part of the case,
to the confirmation of the stoiy which he has
told. When you are desirous of knowing,
whether an accomplice is speaking the lan-
guage of truth, you examine his evidence by
this test; you sav, ''if the account be true, it
may be confirmed in such and such particulars.
It cannot be confirmed in all, because there
are circumstances to which the witness and the
pfisoner, could alone be parties." Let us then
see, whether he is confirmed in those things
in which his evidence admits of confirmation.
Tr^ his evidence by that test, and you will see
it IS confirmed, not in trivial particulars, but in
those which constitute the Tery essence of the
crime imputed to the prisoner at the bar,
VOL. XXXIIL
Gentlemen, I am desirous of sparing you— I
am desirous also of sparing myself — the fati^e
of going through this detail. We have ad«
verted again and again to these facts, and I
shall touch as lightly upon them as possible,
knowing that the eridence will be summed up,
and that you, from the attention you have
given to it, will apply the general observations
to the facts as they arise, and see how they are
borne out by the evidence in the cause.
A witness has been called of the name of
Hale who was unassailed until you heard what
fell from the prisoner at the bar ; to whom not
a question was put on cross-examination, and
who told his story in a manner calculated to
raise no suspicion as to his veracity. But
when the examination is over, and the witness
has left the court, the prisoner at the bar,
relying upon his own assertion only, states
that the witness upon some former occasion
had disgraced himself, and that he is not
worthy of credit, nay, more with an injustice '
peculiar to this case, endeavoured to load him
with the supposed guilt of his relations and
his friends. But if the imputations attempted
to be cast upon him were well founded, why
were not those imputations communicated to
my learned friends, that the questions might
have been fairly propounded to him, and
that he might have had an opportunity of
denying or admitting the correctness of the
charges made against him ? I am sure that
the assertions of the prisoner, made at this
late moment, will not in the slightest degree
detract from that attention which I am sure
you will be disposed to pay to the evidence of
Hale. You observed the mode in which he
gave his evidence ; was there any thing in it
to lead you to suppose that he was influenced
by any malicious feeling towards his master?
Did he not give it in the most becoming and
proper manner ? And may I not repeat again,
that no man, attending to that evidence, could
entertain a particle of doubt as to its truth?
Then, how does that evidence confirm the
testimony of Adams? It appears, that the
room was taken — that the parties assembled
there for a period of five weeks — that the per^
sons so assembling were correctly described
by Adams. Adams states, that it was pro-
posed that a more numerous meeting than
usual should beheld on the Sunday, 'to ar-
range some plan, in consequence of the sus-
pension of the cabinet dinners. Hale con-
firms this. He says, that a meeting, more
numerously attended than usual, did take
place on the Sunday, and though he was not
admitted into the room to be able to explain
what passed at this meeting, is it p ossible yo
should not consider this as confirming in tne
strongest manner the testimony of Adams?
How could Adams, when he told his story,
know that the facts stated 'by Hale would
afterwards come out in corroboration of the
trutli of it? He has had no communication
with the witness Hale — ^he has been in custody.
Uale of course has been at large. Adams
40
129&] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of John Thmat Bnpii
[law
therefore could not have invented the facts
which he has stated^ with a view to create a
correspondence with the evidence of Hale,
sinco he could have no knowledge of what that
evidence was to be.
There is another circumstance to which I
beg vour attention. Adams states, that on
^ the afternoon of the day when the blow was to
be struck, some persons came into the room
of the prisoner, in order to prepare their arms.
Hale states that he was in the room at the time,
and he describes all the particulais, exactly in
the same manner in which the^ had been pre-
viously stated to you by the prisoner, Adams.
Now, gentlemen, give me leave to direct
your attention to that remarkable fiact to
which my learned friend, Mr. Curwood, has
adverted, namely, the proclamation; and I
.direct your attention particularly to this, be-
cause It is of such infinite importance in the
. cause. There were no materials prepared for
writing the proclamation. Application was
made by Thistlewood to Brunt, and Brunt was
desired to procure cartridge paper for the
purpose. Adams says. Brunt went out of the
room, and in a short time the paper was brouii^ht
in, and the proclamations were written. The
apprentice tells you precisely the same story ;
it is true he was not in the room to know
how the paper was to be applied^ but he got
the paper at tlie desire of his master, and it
was carried into the room. Thistle wood wrote
the proclamations. They are in these terms :
" Your tyrants are destroyed. The friends of
liberty are called upon to come forward. The
provisional government is now sitting.^ The
prisoners were not taken by surprise as to this
proof. Notice was given to them to produce
the proclamations, but they in answer suggest
that no such proclamations ever existed. Let
me recall to your attention the particular facts,
and see how decisive they are with respect to
this part of the case. First of all, observe the
manner of Thistle wood. Wliile he is in motion,
and in a state of excitement, he betrays no
want of firmness. He fixes his attention to
write the proclamations, and after, he finishes
three of them his spirits subside, from the
nature of the employment in which he was
engaged. Now mark the effect. Adams never
could have invented it; it was the natural
result of the situation in which this unhappy
man was placed. He became all at once
extremely agitated, so much so that he could
not complete what he had undertaken. No
nan could have invented a circumstance of
this nature, tliough, when it is stated by the
witness, it appears so natural and obvious,
that it at once carries conviction to the mind
as to the reality of the story. It speaks
volumes upon the subject. In consequence of
this uneasiness, what did Thistlewood do?
Hall stood by ; he desired Hall to take the
pen, and Hall refused. Is this story true^ or a
fabrication by Adams? If it be false. Hall
might have been called for the purpose of con-
tradicting it. I ask you, Hall not being called
by the prisoner at the bar, wheflier pi en
entertain a doubt that the stioiy told by Mm
is in this particular true. My leaned fiind
says, Hall would be in jeopardy if he nm
called. That is incorrect ; he would be opesri
to no risk. If he was not at the meeting, k
would contradict Adams ; if he was presest,
the question being asked him, whether soehi
proclamation was written, he would ufwcr
no, if in point of fact it was not wnttea. If
any question were asked tending to crinittle
himself, he might refuse to answer it ; b« if ii
reality such a proclamation wss not vrittts,
he might have so stated, and in so dflia|
could run no possible risk, by qaestiouftoo
the counsel either for the Crown, or theprijoner,
Is this or is it not then confinnatioaofllR
most convincing nature, with respect to iftd
decisive of the case spoken to by Adim,
confirmed by the apprentice, and notdispiwed
by Hall, as it might have been if it ^««
untrue.
Let us go further. The parties proceed fc
the meeting in Cato-street ; Brunt eftcts te
escape, Adams is not taken by the officers. T«
prisoner at the bar confirms this by to oti
statement in the course of bis defence, ntj,
he does more, he confirms also the aceort
given by Hale. He tells you that he lert
out, and returned at nine o'clock in Jj*
manner Hale has d escribed, covered wifliB",
and that another person came to him. W
gentlemen, as to the preparations in Bnsn
lodging. On that very evening and on »
following morning are found materials, «*
for the execution of the plot in Grosrwof-
square, for every thing to be made «« *■
Grosvenor-square had been removed to W^
street ; but in Brunt's lodgings are foood *•■
balls— in Brunes lodgings are found caftndg
for the cannon^in Brunt's lodgings aitWM
grenades, none of which were to be used «
Grosvenor-square, but all of which ««
evidently intended for some other opetiMJ.
The officer who finds these proceeds imiBifflj
ately afterwards to the d^p6t atTidd'^»»
there he sees what puts an end, as ft »PI*2
to me, to every doubt as to the wtwe fl»
extent of the design. You may duheW«
Adams, you may disbelieve Monoment, w«
youcannot escape the inference to ^y^
from these preparations. ^P'^'^ ^
rounds of ball-cartridges are prodoccd tojw-
It is said that there was a cwj»P"*SL "
assassinate his majesty's mimstersr
speaks so strongly, that it is impossible wj
these 1,200 rounds of baU-cartridges pi«P^
for that purpose f res ipsa loquitur, the "^
speaks so strongly, that it is »J»P?*™*j^.
man can entertain a doubt upon the saPP*
But it is said this is so extravagant a proj*^
th^t it is utterly incredible. B^^ "]^
prisoner consider it to be a ▼J^^^^^Tf^
I am sure you have not foigotten w»
passing in the mind of TWstlewoodJ^
told Monument that the people were ejg^
where desirous of a change.. ^^JJ^. ,w
wards said by Tidd to the piisooer Bm"^
mi]
Jitr HtjgA TVeonm.
A.D. 1820.
[1301% .
i{ they could but throw things mto confusion
for ^ day or two the measure would become
general. The precise expression I do not at
this moment recollect, but he said it would
become general. Xliey did not rely, therefore,
upon their own strength, upon their own
resources, upon their own numbers for the
purpose of accomplishing the ultimate object
they bad in view; but they looked to that
feeling and disposition which they believed to
exist among the labouring classes in this
metropolis. In this I believe in my conscience
they were mistaken ; but they imagined that if
they struck this great blow, that if they ex-
cited a momentary confusion, and suspended
for a short time the functions of government,
a general rising would be the result, and
disorder would be everywhere prevalent ; and
the^ hoped that they might ^ride on the
-whirlwind, and direct the storm.''. I have no
doubt that was the object which these parties
had in view;; and we are ourselves feeble
reasoners, we are visionary men, if we
estimate the nature and character of their plan
solely by the extent of their own numbers, and
the immediate means they had prepared for
the accomplishment of their object.
When we are raising an argument founded
i;pon the visionary character of this project.
Hire cannot look to what has been passing,
-within these few weeks in our own country,
-without perceiving how utterly unsound such
reasoning must appear. If we look to the
xiorth of this islana, and to the events which
have recently occurred there, or if we only
call back to our minds what took place in the
county of Derby, in the year 1817. where a plan
-was fornied infinitely more wild than the
present, but the reality of which was distinctly
proved by the most unequivocal and satis-
factory evidence, we cannot say that it
lumishes any argument against the truth of
the evidence, that to prudent calm and
reflecting minds the ultimate purpose of this
scheme must appear wild and visionaiy.
If in the course I am pursuing, I should
fiitigue your attention, you will consider the
infinite importance of the question to every
one of us, and in particular to the prisoner at
the ^ar. I beg tnen to iadveit agai^ to the
evidence pf Monument; I do it for. Uie sake
€kt Moniuxient himself. Admirable is the
mtitiition of trial by jury ; the witnesses are
T^on exaipQined in a corner ; they give evidence
IP the presence of the prisoner, and in the face
of tnose who are to decide upon the credit due
to their testimony. I asK you, Uien, to
recpilect tlie manner in which that witness
gaye his testimony ; I ask you, whether you
can doubt for a moment from the manner in
ifv^ioh he gave his evidence, the truth of the
stpzy which he told : he told you that when
HusU^wood called, he mentioned to him that
IpreAt events were at Hajid, that the people
-wece dissatisfied with the existing order of
thio^^s^ and that every thing portended change.
Wheiiy therefore, my learaed friends say that
all that these parties had in view was the
assassination of his majesty's ministers, or that
the further object was merely plunder, is not
this directly negatived by the evidence? That
every body was desirous for a change 1 a change
in what \ evidently a change in the constitu-
tion and laws of the country. Gentlemen, he
tells you, that he vras induced to attend this
meeting in Cato-street; he tells you what
passed at that meeting, and in so doing, he
confirms in every respect, as far as he had an
opportunity of observing, the testimony of
Adams.
There is another fact which my learned
friends have treated as a very light circum-'
stance, but on which I would say a few words;
for it is from circumstances which arise
accidentally in the progress of a case of this
kind, and which are accidentally confirmed,
that the firmest support is given to the
evidence they are intended to maintain. You
recollect it was a mere accidental circumstance
occasioned by something which Adams had
stated at the meeting, that the watch veas
appointed at lord Harrowby's. It was no
part of the original plan. He stated who the
parties were that first composed that watch,
and by whom they were afterwards relieved,
and you find this confirmed by the watchman,
and by what took place at the public-house,
where the lad played at dominos with the
prisoner. Every step that we take in this case
tends to confirm the story told by Adams.
Did he invent this tale ? If so, we should have
found him contradicted throughout; but the
more we sift and search and examine, the
more completely and fully we find him sup-
ported and confirmed.
I pass over a great deal, because I will not
fatigue your attention. My learned friend
reminds me of Monument*s brother. He
confirms Adams, and he also confirms the
testimony of his brother. He tells you that
Brunt called at his lodgings. Now mark the
conversation, for this is a most material cir-
cumstance. '' Our plans,'' the prisoner said,
" have been suspended, in consequence of the
death of the king ;'' have they had any com-
munication vrith Adams ? none whatever. But
Adams tells you the same fact, that the plan
of general assassination had been interrupted
by the circumstance of the death of the king,
which had suspended the cabinet dinners.
Thus, every tlihig as it happens accidentally
to occur tends to confirm the testimony of
Adams.
Then, we come to the evidence of Hid en.
My learned friend would persuade you that
Hiden was an accomplice; one of the most
extraordinary and unfounded assertions t ever
heard made. On what ground does he assert
that Hiden is an accomplice? Because he
attended two meetings of a shoe-makers' club
in Round-court. I will admit, that those
meetings were held for the purpose of reform.
He went with a man of tlie name of Clarke,
and invited a man of the name of Bencett,
1303] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial ^John Thouat Brunt
[1004
and if my friend pleases, I will admit tiiat he
told Bennett something was to be done for
the good of the country. Hiden might be a
friend to reform. Is that to be a subject of
reproach ? Through what means was it to be
accomplished f Does it appear that there was
any thing criminal to be transacted at the
club ? There is not the slightest proof to that
effect, and yet if any thing had been done or
intended in which Hiden was implicated, my
learned friends were in possession of abundant
evidence to establish it. God forbid that a
man should be considered as an enemy to his
country because he is a friend to reform — ^to
reform to be effected by lawful means. But a
communication was made to Hiden, and why
was that communication made ? because Wil-
ton had known him for some time* He had
intelligence no doubt that Hiden had attended
those meetings, and conceiving he was a friend
to reform, conceiving there was some dis-
position lurkine in his mind adverse to the
institutions of his countiy, when the plan is
just ripe for execution, and when he conceives
there can be but little danger in the commu-
nication, he acquaints him with the scheme.
How does Hiden conduct himself? Does he
bury the secret in his own bosom ? does he
adopt it ? he tells Wilson indeed, that he will
be one of them. But why ? because, knowing
the desperate character of the individuals con-
cerned m the enterprise, he knew he should
have been exposed to personal risk and dan-
ger if he had refused. He therefore assented
to it; but to shew by what spirit he was
actuated, he immediately wrote the letter to
lord Castlereagh, and made that communi-
cation to lord Harrowby, to which his lordship
has spoken, and yet aner all this he is to b«
stigmatized as an accomplice, and as such
undeserving of credit. He is desired by
lord Harrowby to meet him on the follow*
jng day. Such was the alarm and terror
created in his mind, that he was afraid of
meeting him. It was proposed therefore that
he should attend in a retired and sequestered
part of the park, and there he renews the com-
munication, and details the particulars of the
plan. He afterwards sees Wilson at about
four or five o'clock, and Wilson then lets him
further into the project. He enumerates some
of the circumstances to you. He telU you
there were to be four divisions ; that the can-
non in the Artillery-ground were to be seized ;
that the cannon in Gray's-inn-lane were to be
taken ; that the parties were to proceed to the
Hansion-house ; and he relates all the leading
particulars of the plot. If this be a fisible, it is
one of the most extraordinary coincidencies
that ever existed. Had Hiden ever seen
Adams ? had he ever had any communication
with him ? Adams tells you the story which,
as it turns out, corresponds precisely with the
story communicated by Wilson.
Now, gentlemen, reflect upon this strong
body of confirmatory evidence. Do you or
do you not believe the truth of the story? do
you or do yon not believe the erideDce of
these witnesses ? Look to wliat took place is
Cato-street; look to the prepantioas at tint
place ; they were directed to the acoompliA-
ment of a part of the object; look to the pre-
parations in other ooarters; they were directed
to the execution of the further objects of tiie
conspiracy. Look to the conduct of the par-
ties in Cato-street, and to the resistance they
made. Do you or do you not hdieve tke
story ? •* Yes, sav my learned fneods, «
believe the story, out we believe it ooljatto
the plot of aissassination. The prisoaer at tke
bar, and about twenty of his associates, eop*
bined together for the pur{)ose of moidering
his majesty's ministers, withoat any finto
object, without any assignable motire, ait
knowing the greater proportion of the iadt*
viduals who were to be the victims of their
treachery and cruelty." Can you belie?e oA
a thing? I can easily believe, whea isGnaie
pursuing criminal purposes in the way of re-
solution, that human life becomes conpin'
ti?ely unimportant ; that they do not aito»
such sacrifices to be any impediment to Ae
execution of their designs; the eiui atvbn
they are aiming, in their view, sanclite^
means by which it is to be accompli^
But I cannot bring myself to believe, tbit &
number of men could unite together, toatf-
der in cold blood, for no object that can eva
be suggested, but f^om malignapt fe^
alone, such a body of distinguished indindnv-
As a means to accomplish refolutiooaiyM*
signs, lean understand it ; ^^^^^J*?*
mind capable of understanding how son>
conspiracy for the purpose of mmder awe,
could possibly have been fonned. Wejsf<
been told of their feelings of ^i^^^
venge, against whom? asainst the BoUeatt
whom you saw giving evidence yesterday.
what way had he given offence to the pnso*
at the bar and his associates? ^7^^^?^?
only by name. If they had inquired faw
they would have heard only of the wtB»"J
talents by which he is adorned. My i^
friend, the Attomey-geneial, mentiooed »
name of the distinguished indiTidoal at v
head of his majesty's govenunent, ^J^
by common consent, has been J"*J"J
spared amidst ail the bitterness and raa^
of party and faction. Again, f!^^^^
illustrious commander, who had so «*l^
led our armies to victory— he ^ be in oig»
of enmity and revenge to Englishmen, he ^
had so raised and exalted the name m^
racter of our countty, who bad throwiuw°
shade the glorious deeds of P"? *^JJr
realized whatever of gloiy our ^"[^^JJiod
fancies had conceived ; that P"^** °^ rf
revenge should have influenced the m«^
the prisoners to such a deed, I shoaic ^
supposed it impossible even ^^J^^^
presence of men of sense and '*'*5I; «f-
less could I have supposed that w^L "JSi
gestion could have been made witaow
the semMaace of pioof, to support it.
1305]
Jor High IVmiom.
A. D. 18S0.
[1606
But again it is iiKed (and that is a new
supposition) that all Uiis was for purposes of
J blunder: were such preparations ever made
or such an object? But let me ask, what is
there in the character of the men engaged in
this afiair, that should lead you to suppose
plunder was the object. Let me recall your
recollection for a moment, to that unhappy
man the leader of the whole desi^, Arthur
Thistlewood. Is there any thing in his cha-
racter to induce you to suppose, that he in-
tended merely a scheme of plunder? Is he
not only to be couTicted as a traitor, but is he
to be stiffmatized as a felon and a thief?
Fallen as be is, let us not sink him still lower;
we know the feelings by which he was influ-
enced, that he was inflamed by strong political
passions, and we know therefore, that he
might have headed a band of menwith a view to
revolutionary objects ; but there is nothing in
his dmracter or conduct, to lead you to sup-
Kse that he would have become a leader of
nditti for the mere purposes of general
plunder.
Gentlemen, I beg your pardon, for having
detained you so long by my remarks upon the
evidence in this case ; but it is a case of in-
finite importance, for though the inquiry into
this conspiracy has been pursued t¥nce before,
yet the prisoner at the Mr is not to be pre-
judiced or affected by the result of former
rerdicts. He must be tried bv the evidence
which you have yourselves heard in this cause,
Hnd i» entitled to the benefit of those observa-
lions which you have heard so eloquently
urged by my learned friend. His fate must
depend upon the impression made upon your
minds by that evidence, without reference to
what you before knew or may have heard upon
the subject ; and it is for this reason that I
have gone through this case at some length ;
it was my duty so to do ; I have been heard
with patient attention ; and as far as we are
concerned, our duty is at an end. A part, an
important p&rt of yours is still to be peitormed.
You stand between the prisoner on the one
side/ and the Crown, the prosecutor, on the
other. Sworn to administer justice impar-
tially between them, sworn to do justice to
the prisoner, sworn to do justice on the other
hand to the public, I have no doubt whatever
tiiat,you will do so, and whatever may be the
issue of your verdict, I for one shall be
content.
SUHHING-UP.
Lard CAwf Airoii.*-Gentlemen of the Jury;
—It now becomes my duty to request vour
patient attention ; and I proceed to address
you in the perfect confidence that you will
discard from your minds every impression that
has not been made in the course of the present
triaL By the indictment the prisoner is
charged with the crime of high treason. Gen-
tlemen, you find four counts ; I shall take the
liberty of drawing your attention to only two
mi them. The first is that the prisoner, with
others, eompassed, imagined, invented, devised
and intended to deprive and depose our lord
the king of and from the style, honour, and
kingly name of the imperial crown of this
realm. The other to which I shall beg leave
to call your attention is the third count, that
tlie prisoner, with others, compassed, imagined,
invented, devised and intended to levy war
against our lord the king in his realm, in order,
by force and constraint, to compel him to
change his measures and counsels.
The crime of high treason imputed by these
counts, consists in the imagination and inten-
tion, and that intention is to be proved by
what are called overt acts, which are stated in
the indictment ; and if those overt acts or any
material parts of them are proved to your
satisfaction, there is no doubt but that they
support the charge of high treason in each of
those counts.
I am happy to relieve you from the notion
that was attempted to be thrown in your way,
that there is in this case any question of con-
structive treason ;— there certainly is none-^
the question here is merely whether these ima«
ginations and intentions, which are in them*
selves treason, are proved by the evidence;
and I think I may go further and say now, that
the question before you is entirely free from
any legal perplexity, and that it depends
entirely upon whether you believe the evidence
or not.
Tliat there has been a conspiracy Is not only
indisputably^ clear from the evidence, but it is
admitted distinctly by the learned counsel for
the prisoner, and by the prisoner himself— it is
admitted, and it is also proved, to have been a
conspiracy formed for a most nefarious purpose
— it is admitted that it was a conspiracy rounded
in the diaboUcal intention to destroy his majesty's
cabinet council ; — fifteen of those persons who
transacted the principal affairs of government,
and who, in their individual characters, are
perhaps some of the most honourable and
most amiable of his majesty's subjects, against
whom there had been no personal indignation
on the part of any body. If, however, this
terrible purpose was the onl^ purpose which
this conspiracy embraced, there is no high
treason in it, because the otiject is confined to
the destruction only of those fifteen noble
lords and gentlemen ; but it is contended that
this particular purpose formed one of the steps
to the general scheme of subverting the con*
stitution ; and, gentlemen, in the consideration
of the evidence, you will have to decide to
which side that evidence is to be applied.
I will now proceed as carefully as I can
to read to you all the material parts of the evi-
dence. I shall begin, of course, with Robert
Adams, and proceed with the witoesses in the
order in which they were presented to you.
But before I read - the evidence of Robert
Adams, I will detain nyou for a few moments
upon tiie subject of lus particular character,
lie is, beyond all doubt, an accomplice con-
taminated by the crime, whatever it may b^
1307] 1 GEOAGE IV.
Trial cfjolm Thomt BruiU
[lao^
of which th« prisoner at the bar was guiUy;
for the prisoner at the bar admits that he was
guilty of a crime, but not of high treason ; the
accomplice being a partaker of that guilt,
whatever it may be, ought to be looked at with
that care and jealousv, which are necessarily
excited by a person of that description ; but,
in point of law, he is so adraissiole witness.
Whether he is to be believed is another ques-
tion, and will depend upon other circumstances.
I shall first state the testimony which he has
given. Slid then in proceeding with the other
witnesses, you will see how far you will ba
of opinion that credit is due to him. At pre-
sent, however, we must consider his evidence
with great attention ; because, if it be believed,
it is of very great importance indeed in this
very important case.
Robert Adams says, he is a shoemaker, that
he is at this time a prisoner in custody, that
he lived before he was taken prisoner, at No.
4, Hol&-in-die-wall passage, next house to
Tidd's ; that he was in the army eighteen yean
ago, in a regiment of horse-guards; that he
knows the prisoner Brunts he is a boot-closer,
he became first acquainted with him at Cam-
bcay in France, in the year 1816, at that time
Brant went by the name of Thomas Morton ;
they wove both at the head quarters of the
British army, and there the witness followed
his business of a shoemaker, serving our army ;
that early in the present year, he called at
Brunt's lodgings in f'oz-court^ Gray's-ina-lane ;
Brunt and logs on the 13th of January, in-
troduced the witness to Thistlewood. Thistle-
wood lived in Stanhopeatreet, Clare-market ;
on entering the room when Brunt and lags in-
troduced him, ''Brunt' said to Thistlewood,
here is the man I spoke to you about; then
Thistlewood said to me, you belonged formerly
to the Life-guards, did you not ?. I said, no, to
the Oxford-blues ; he said, no doubt you are a
good soldier ? I said, I was once ; he said, you
can use your sword well 7 I said, I knew how
to use a sword formerlv, but for want of practice
I cannot use it so well now, but I can use a
fiiord sufficiently to defend myself. Thistle-
wood then turned his discourse upon the shop-
keepers of London ; he observed, they weie
a set of aristocrats altogether, they worked
under one ^stem of government, and he should
gory to see the day when they should have all
eir shops shut up and well plundered ; then
)ie turneo his discoune towards Mr. Hunt; he
aaid he was not a friend to the people, aad he
Md BO doub^ that oould he enter Whitehall
and (werlook the government books, he should
£nd Hunt* s name as a spy of goyi^romeni ; find
.then he spoke of Cobbett, that he with all bis
writii^ was no friend of the people ; and he
jMid, I have no doubt, if I could see the same
book^ I should find he was a ^ py as well as
Hunt; then Brunt said, he had .a coup^ of
other men to call upon^ tovmrds CarnaJby'-
narket, aad asked Mr. Thistlewood whether
.he would walk mih him to aee the men;
Tbiytlawoodyhowfiverf ^id^npt.go; .ther^ WiM
a word or two between Bniat and ThiiUewoodi
about attending a rajffle for a bluaderbms vitk
a brass barrel. I do not recollect that Mr.
Thistlewood said he should go, but I and
Brunt and Ings leCt the roo■^ leatisg Tbinle-
wood behind, I was soon aflerwards Uken
to prison for debt^ I staid in piison until the
30tn of January, which was the Sund^, the
day afier the latekiog^ dealh; the sezt daj,
Monday, I saw Brunt at the White Uvi,
which is kept by a man of the name of HobU ;
in the evemng I saw him again, ia the house ia
which he lodsedyin the badi roonuptwo-piic
of stairs on the same floor with hisowurooiDip
he occupies twoj one of which he works iuiod
another he lives in ; I had heard him nj, tbt
he had taken that back room for lugs; I air
tended several meetings in that rooo), down to
the 3ard of February, from the time 1 lefttlie
prison ; the meetings were held there geoerally
twice a day ; those who usually attended ika
were Thistlewood, Brunt, Ings, Hall, Harris
who had been in the life-guards, aod Davidsoa
a man of colour, and also Wilson, Edwaris
and Tidd, who lived in the next house to mi.
Tidd was also a shoemaker; Palin alteaded
sometimesy but not regularly ; I bare aees
Potter there also ; Hall was a tailor Iw ttade.
When I came out of prison, I attended tje
first meeting on the evening of Monday, IM
31st of January, that was in this hack ropB.
" On the Wednesday night following, I wal
again to a meeting in thi» back-room ;Tbisue*
wood, Brunt, Wilson, Davidsoo, HamsBB,
Edwards, and Bradbum attended; I nwwn
in the room a number of pike-staves; there
was no furniture in the room of any ^^jj*?'
except a fixed stove; when we wanted chtfs
they were brought from Brunt's room, «» "
same floor; the staves I saw there were W
and green, as if they had just been cut, mJ
just come from the oountiy ; Bradbum w
cutting the ends of the sUves off, and j>ulM|
on ferrules ; after they. were aH ^o®^f^?^
was considered that the end of the pi''®'^*?
would not be strong enough to wpportwj
pike heads ; then they cut the endsoffasecoaj
time, and Brant got some larger ferruH »J
they were put on ; I saw them afterwaiw P»
on. A *hort time before the king's funenM
was there, and I saw TWstlewood, Hw™^
Davidson, and Wilson there ; HarmonW*
ThisUewood that he had seen a Ufe-g«»f7j
and heard from him ttat aU the &^J^
could be mounted would be at wwdfjr »
the king's funeral, and that as many ^ ^
fool-guwds and police-ofl&cew W »«*» JJ
spared) would be tnei^ also ; and Hsrwon
he thought it would be as favourable w T
portunity as could be to kick up » ^^
Udon, as he th(mgjit the •oldies an^
would be out of London, and there wow»^
scarcely any body in London ^^'.P'^j^i-
This he mentioned to XhisUewood, wft».
came into the room. Thistlcwoc^ jmTJ
upon it in this way ; he prop?*^ ^iistt
{MAoe9 of gai>fio% wjii* wew ia wj^^
1^091
fiir High Trettion.
A. D. isaa
ri9u>
tone, and six other oaniion in the Artiilery-
ground should be taken on the same night."
Gentlemen, you know tiie question is, whether
this was a particular purpose of destroying the
ministers, or a more general pnrpose. The
cannon could hardly be wanted %o destroy
gentlemen in the house at dinner ; if, indeed,
you believe the evidence conoeming the can-
non. The witness prdceeds to atata that
^Thistlewood said, ttiat 'after this siionld be
done, he thought it would be necessaiy to
-send to Hyde-park-comer, to nierrent any u^
telligenoe being sent by an orderly from Lon-
don to Windsor, to connnunioaite what was
•going on in London. At the aame time he
proposed that the telegraph on the other side
of the water should be taken to prevent a
communication to Woolwich of what was pass-
ing in London; and Thistlewood said, he
thought it would be necessary, at the same
4ime, to cut trenches across the road to pre-
vent cannon being brought from Woolwich,
and he said that the soldiers at Windsor would
be so knocked up and fatigued that they would
not be able to come from Windsor to London ;
or if they did come they would be unable
to do any thing. Thistlewood proposed that
an offer should be made to the soldiers in
-order to bring them over to us ; or if they were
determined to act i^^nst us, Harrison, who
was an old soldier, should employ the hand-
grenades to destroy the soldiers. Thistlewood
then proposed to send to the difibrent sea-ports,
Dover, Margate, Brighton, and I think other
ports, with an express order, that if any person
was permitted to leave the country, without an
order from the provisional govemmeot, those
towns should be blown down over their heads;
that as soon as they could collect force enough,
which he had no doubt they should, they should
vend a very strong force down to Brighton, in
•case the new king should be there after the
riot was kicked up) which he did not suppose
he would, in consequence of his indisposition ;
that they should send this force down in order
to plunder Brighton, and as to the new king
being crowned as king, Thistlewood said it
was all nonsense, for he did not intend that
that should ever be. After this Ings and Brunt
came into the room, and Thistlewood coramu-
•nicated to them all that had passed, and Ings
and Brunt both expressed themselves, that
nothing short of the assassination of the king*s
ministers would satisfy them." The witness
then said, ^'On the 2nd of January, before I
was introduced to Thistlewood, as we were
walking down the street. Brunt spoke to me
about assassinating the ministers. ' Then he
says, *f When we began to talk of the assassi-
nation of ministers, Ings said, he had been in
the park to assassinate ue prince regent before
his majesty's death ; he pulled a pistol from
his pocket, and saud, that was the pistol that
he had taken ; he pulled the pistol from his
left pocket, and held it out, saving, damn my
mortal eyes this is the pistol ; ne said it was
the time when the prince regent went to open
the paiMameiit. When BnM jpeke to ue
about the asssfssinatioo, he said, that it was 40
be dose the first time that the ministers assem-
bled at a cabinet dinner.
<< On the 19th February, the Saturday, thei«
was another meeting, at which were preseal»
Thistlewood, Bnmt, Hanison, Wilson and
ings; this was between dearen and twelve
joV^lock in tlie morning. I oaonot be sure
whether Davidson was there or not; on any
^iag iiAo the room, I found those persons £
ha^ named, except Davidson, as to mkfim I
do not taiow whetner he was diere or not ; I
fovad tbem ntting witli. their heads together in
oonsaHation. 1 soon &nnd what they mmat
coasultiog about, iot ibey got up akogethec^
and ThisUewood said, it ie agreed ; if nothing
transpiros betwnen this and Wednesday night,
we will ^o to ^mk, as we are aH so poor we
cannot wait any longer ; and then Thistlewood
proposed that a committee should sit on Son«
day morning to diomr up a plan to act upon ;
this was also agreed to. Then Thistlewood
told Brunt to tell the men that were to come
nnder his ease to come armed ; here firunt said,
it is a parcel of nonsense, that if any ofiieer
x»me there, he would execute him iathesoom,
or nsurder him ; he expressed ihimself in a sort
of language not proper to be used, battfw
purport of it was, that they should be muidered
if theydidoome ;, Brunt adding, I will take care
that it never -shall be found out, ^r to^hat
effect." Then jdie witness says, that he Uth
them all in the room and went iwwf, ^Dben
he says, ^'before the Saturday, I had seen in
the room a sword and Aome.hand«gvea!Rles,
some of which had^been made up in. the room.;
and I had seen pistols pulled fern thei^ differ-
ent pockets ; the things were removed to Tidd's
lodgings f'm Hole-4ii-the-waU msage, iwbich
they called t^e d^t. Thisdenro^ wished
them to be femo^d to that d6p6t to eonoeal
them from any person who might come into
the room, and Brunt carried the principal part
of the hand-grenades to Tidd's; I followed
him into the room at Tidd's ; I saw him place
them upon the floor, and Tidd's daughter put
them into a box under the ^ndow.
'* On Sunday morning the 20th, Thistle-
wood, Ings, ilall, Brunt, Harrison, Davidson,
Bradbum, Edwards, Cook, and three other
persons, strangers to me, came to thi»baok
room ; there were twelve of them in all. Be-
tween eleven and twelve on that day, Thistle-
wood looking about and seeing there were
twelve men of us, said, there are twelve of us,
that is enough to make a committee, and Tidd,
was desired to take the chair ; he took thechair ac-
cordingly, with apike in his hand . Thistlewood ,
vrho stood on Tidd's right hand, said, gentle-
men as we have all met here, we have no occa-
sion (turning his head to the door) to mention
any names ; I suppose you all know what you are
met for, and as we have all waited so long with
an expectation of the ministers dining together,
finding there is no likelihood of their coming
together ; we tire resolved; i( they do not meet
131 1 j 1 GEORGE I\r.
Trial ^John TImHU Brunt
cms
before Wedaesday-night to take them sepa-
rately. He then proposed this plan ; he called
Ahe project to assassinate^ the Wai-emd job.
He saidy that the two pieces of cannon in'
€rrayVinn-lane, and the six pieces of cannon
at the Ardlleiy-gTOund, should be taken ; and
that Palin should take the command of another
party to set fire to different buildings of the
town ; Cook was to take the lead in taking
the cannon in the Artillery-ground ; as to the
timey Thistlewood said he could not then ion
the precise time, but there would be oppor«
tunity enough to fix before Wednesday-night;
that he thought forty men would be (|uite
enough for the West-end job," that was the
•assassination of miniiterSy *^ if we* can get so
many ; and as to further prooeedings on the
Slan, it should be settled another time, for that
(runt was to come forward irith a project
about the assassination^ and to state now it
could be done. Brunt then stepped forward."
This, gentlemen, is given to you m the way in
which the man states it ; he stated it with great
particularity^ but it is material only as shewing
how the business was carried on, and how they
conducted th«nseWes in the room. The
witness says, ''Brunt then stepjped forward;
but Thistlewood stopped him before he spoke,
and said his own motion should be put first
from the chair; that if any body wished to speak
to it he wished them to speak ; the question was
Sit, and Thistle wood's motion carried. Then
runt came forward, and proposed his plan,
which was this — ^As no signs of getting the
ministers all together appear to us, we must
take them separately, ana it shall be done in
this way; our men must be divided into
parties, according to the number of ministers
to be murdered. The men were to be lotted,
and he proposed, that a man from each lot
should be drawn out for the purpose of assas-
sinating the particular minister, and if the man
to be drawn out did not execute his duty from
any signs of cowardice, he should be run
through the body on the spot." On this, the
witness Adams says, he got up and asked
whether a man might not fail in the attempt,
and if so, whether he was to be run through
on the spot } ** Brunt said, certainly not,
unless there is proof of the man's Ming a
coward ;" then Adams says, he himself sat
down. ''The question upon Brunt's propo*
sition was put from the chair, and agreed to,
in the same manner as Thistlewood 's motion
was. Directly after this, three other men
came in, namely, Palin, Potter, and Strange ;
what had passed before they came in, was
communicated to them; then Palin got up,
and asked bow the things were to be done, as
they had so many objects talked of at the same
time ; sayinff, I belieye, provided they could
be all carried, they would be a great acquisi-
tion to what we have in view ; but this is what
I want to know, you talk, of taking forty men
for the West-end job ; you talk of taking the
two pieces of cannon in Gra/s-inn-lane, and
six at the Artillery-gtound ; and you propose |
me with a few men to set file tpthedilfoeit
buildings ; but you ought to know better thu
myself what men you can commaDd; I, Ibr
my own part, cannot aatisfy you what nifi I
can bring forward, unless I am intnisted by tUs
committee to state to them what has passed
in this room this morning; if I can have tk
power to tell my men what they are goioe
about, and when they will be wanted, I doB
better know how to act with them. Ita
Thistlewood, BruntandTidd said, they thoogk
no harm would arise in giviog Palin that ifr
thority which he proposed, if he had iimq is
whom he could place confidence ; on this Palii
sat down, and nothing particular paned afteN
wards whilst Tidd was in the chair. Wlien
Tidd left the chair, Thistlewood tuned nod
on asudden, and said, Brunt, as Palin is ho^
you can take him to the place close by,aDl
let Palin see whether that place is practicable
to do or not ; Brunt and Palin then went cot
together, and returned in about ten Dintn.
Palin said it was a very easy job, and w»m
make a ff ood fire. This, " Adams sa]fs, '^
FumivalVinn-buildings; Brunt had Bieotioae|
this at a previous meeting, as a buiidiag to m
set fire to ; the building was at that tine o^
finished ; Fox-court is very near; the peo*
began to separate, saying th^ bad nea to w
upon. After this ThisUewood still remasf,
he said to Brunt, I think that betweejiiM
and the time we go to work, we had bet»
collect the men together and give tbemaM
but I do not know how this is to be wj^
we are all of us so verr poor. Bn»
turned round and .said, Damn ay^
though I have done little or no woit mh^
have got a one pound note, which I »^
reserved for the purpose of treating ay ?«J
and I wiU do it. ThisUewood said, be didM^
know where we could take them to; *'?f?T
we can have the room up stairs at nw»>
Brunt said, he did not like to go ^^^
sequence of what had been ^«^PP^^
my mouth, of what had been said l^ ^^'
then Brunt said, never mind, as time g* »
near, I do not see what we hare to »«*!' ^
any officers come into the room, ^^^"^
care of them; shortly afterwards J^JK
rated." Gentlemen, you know what HobKi*
told Adams and Adams had told tbeja^
that officers had been to his house saspec<^
a radical meeting to be there ; this was ob
Sunday. ^ j^
The witness proceeds to stote that vi^
was another meeting held on theMondj»
another on the Tuesday morning ^^^^
o'clock. Brunt was at this meeting, »^
Thistlewood, Tidd, Ings, Hall, the ij*»^
Adams, Wilson, Harrison, Edwards, Bradji«J
venor-square, for he had ^^^.^\f?. he
news-paper. Thistlewood doubted tj^
said, he bad not seen it in ihesOT^
Id 191
Jbr High Tmuon.
A.D. 1820.
[13U
he rea^ » he proposed to send for a newspaper.
Hall fetched it; U was the New Times; it
turned out that Edwards had given them true
information ; Thistle wood read the paragraph
alond ; then it was proposed by Thistlewood
to have another committee to alter the plan ;
Harrison and Davidson came into the room in
the interval of the paper being fetched.
When Harrison and Davidson came in,
Davidson brought a bag of balls, and Harrison
some powder ; before the newspaper came in,
Ings pulled out three daggers ; these daggers
he said he had prepared with the sole inten-
tion of a separate assassination, and he shewed
by his action how he intended to cut the heads
of the ministers off, using some very coarse
expression* After the paper was brought and
read, from which it appeared that the ministers
were to meetontbeWednesday,Brunt exclaimed,
Damn my eyes, now I believe there is a God,
in calling those thieves together ; it has often
been my prayer that they would all meet
together, now God has answered my prayer ;
Thistlewood then proposed there should be a
committee^ 9^4 that I should take the chair;
I did so; upon Thistlewood coming forward
to explain his plan, I called him' to order, and
said, before you begin, I hope you have given
due considen^tion to what I communicated to
vou yesterday momipg ;" that was what Hobbs
had said to him, namely, that there had been
two officers there, saying there was something
wrong going on in liis house. ''On my saving
this, Palin took it up, and said he wished for
some explanation, and that before the business
proceeded any further. Upon this, Brunt got
up, saying you shall have an explanation,
and then he stated what had been said before
about Hobbs's information; then Brunt, to
obviate any risk, proposed that a watch
sbonld be set to ooserve lord Harrowby's
hoas0, the watch to begip at six o'clock that
$9 me night; two to go at six and stay
till nine, then to be relieved by two others
U> 4tay til^ twelve, and to commence again
the next morning at four, and the watch to
continue until the pext evening, when it was
proposed we should go to work; those men
were to watch whether soldiers or police
C»fficefs went into the house at any time, and
if $0% they were to give notice to the rest ; if
■ot, Bnmt said the work ^ould be done the
following night (Wednesday night). Brunt
^eked out the men to watch, Davidson was
ime of the first; he was to watch from six to.
Dioe, and Brunt and Tidd to watch from nine to
^W^lve. On this, Thistlewood came forwards
15 to what fell from Brunt's mouth, and said,
f ao soldiers or police officers enter the house^
[ shall propose a plan to take them all together ;
i& proved to go himself to lord Harrowby's
loor with a note^ to deliver to a servant, say-
M$g \ie vmst have aii answer, and on his being
idmitlAd into the nouse to wait for an answer,
16 was to be followed by the odieis, who were
^ rush in dlreetly afterw^^rds ; Ibey w^re to
leize upon the sextants, to present pistols
vol.. XXXIII.
to tliem, and threaten them with instant death
if they made any resistance ; at the same time,
four were to take the command of the stairs ;
two men to take care of the stairs that went
to the upper rooms, and two to take care
of the stairs that went to the lower rooms^
and each of those four men was to have a
hand-gprenade in bis hand, and a pistol and
cutlass ; if any attempt was made from the
upper part of the house, a hand-grenade was.-
to be thrown amongst them, and in the lowec
part of the house also, if any resistance was
made ; two men were to be placed in the area,.-
one with a blunderbuss, and the other with
a hand-grenade; after this was done, the
others were to rush into the dining room ; Ings
J>ropo8ed to enter the room first ; he was to be
ollowed by two swordsmen, who were to be
Harrison, and Adams ; then Ings said he
would say this. Now, my lords, I have as
good men here as the Manchester yeomanry,
enter citizens and do your duty. On this word
of command, they were to rush into the room
to be followed by Ings with his broad knife,
and he swore that he would cut off their heads
as fast as he could get at them. The heads
<^ lord Castlereagh and lord Sidmouth he
was determined to bring away with him. in
his bags and he also was determined to have
one of lord Castlereagh's hands which he in-
tended to pickle ; this hand, he said, would be
thought much of on a future day. Ings had
said before this, he would exhibit the heads
of lord Castlereagh and lord Sidmouth upon a
pole in the streets. Thistlewood improved
upon this plan, and said, bethought it would be
better to put them on a pike, place them behind
the cannon, and carry them along the streetsy
and that they would more terrify the people;
On this Bradbum said, that after they were
exhibited in this town sufficiently, he would
enclose their heads in a box and send them to
Ireland* After the business was done at lord
Harrowby's, they were to go to the Horse*
barracks in King-street, and set fire to the shed
with a ball or balls prepared for that purpose.
Wilson was to go and support Harrison in that
project; from thence they were to proceed to
Gray's-inn-lane to the City Light-horse-bar-
racks, to talce two cannon from thence ; and
there was to be somebody there waiting to
assist the^; they were then to proceed^to the
Artillery-ground, imless something oceurred
to the contrary, and to meet Cook at the
Artillery-ground; they were to take the six
cannon from thence, and after they hadgot them «
they were to load them and bring them into
the street loaded ; and if Cook found himself
sufficiently strong by the accession of people,
or otherwise, he was to advance to the Man-
siourhouse, which was to be taken and to bef •
made the seat of the provisional government.
The cannon were to be placed, ^ree on one
side and tiiree on the otner side of the Man-
sion-house ; and if the inhabitants of the house
refused to give up the Mansion-house, they
were to force their way in, aiid to make it tb<
4P
13151 I GEORGE IV,
Trial (fj^n fhmat Bnad
[1316
teat of the provisional goverament. Then they
agreed that the Bank of £ngland was to he
taken and plundered, but Thistlewood said, he
meant not to destroy the books but secure the
books, in order that we may be able to see
some of the proceedings of goTemment that
we are not now in possession of. Thistlewood
and Cook agreed between themselves, that if
he, Cook, found himself so situated as to be
able to go to the Mansion-house, he was to
send an orderly man forward to stand against
the door of St. Sepulchre's church, to wait the
arrival of an orderly to be sent by him (This-
tlewood), and these two men were to return to
their respective parties with the information
they were to give the one to the other ; then
Harrison said, there should be a counter-sign ;
the woid should be hutUm; one man should
say 6, 11, ty and if he addressed his friend, that
friend should say <, o, n, ; there was to be a
man fixed at the end of Oxford-street; one
man should say 6, u, f, another <, o, n, and then
they would each shew themselves to be of the
same party. Harrison said, he would secure
a place for the men to go somewhere about
the end of Oxford-street. In the afternoon I
went to Fox-court again ; as I was going up, I
perceived a strange smell ; on going into the
room I saw Ings, Hall, and Edwards ; Edwards
was making fuses for the hand-grenades ; Ings
was putting the ingredients for the fire-balls
into an iroapot, and Hall vras laying paper on
the floor in order to receive those balls, after
they had been dipped in the pot, to prevent
their dirtying the floor. I called again in the
evening, and found Thistlewood and two per-
sons who were strangers to me there. In the
course of the evening the party were pretty
well all there ; Davidson went to watch at six,
and Brunt and Tidd started about nine o'clock
to relieve him ; as they were going, I under-
stood Tidd was detained by some other cir-
cumstance, and Brunt returned ; and as Tidd
could not go to lord Harrowby's house, he
took me with him in Tidd's stead ; we found
Davidson on the watch, and relieved him. I
went about nine o'clock ; whilst we were upon
the watch. Brunt and I went to a public-house
to take some refreshment at the comer of the
Mews, directly at the back of lord Harrowby's
house. I do not know the name of the sign ;
Brunt and I went about twenty minutes past
nine, and staid there about an hour and a half.
Brunt played at dominos with a young man
there." You will see, gentlemen, the materi-
ality of this evidence presently. ^ About
eleven we returned to our watch, and left the
place on the turn of twelve ; I went out of the
public-house once or twice occasionally. On
Wednesday I went again to Fox-court about
two o'clock in the afternoon ; I first went into
prunt's own room. Strange one of the pri-'
soners came in first, then two or three whom
I did not know> I then saw pistols in Brunt's
private room ; they began to try to put flints
into them; when' the strangers came. Brunt
proposed we should go into the other room^
and he and I went there with Strange and the
strangers ; I saw pistols, cutlasses and Uob-
derbusses there ; just after we came in Tliii.
tl^wood came, and after him logs andM;
when Thistlewood came in, he looked rooiid
and said, now my lads this looks somelfaios
like ; it looks as if we were going to do solB^
thing ; he clapped his hand upon my shoolk,
and said, how do you do Mr. Adams; laid,
I am not well, I am low spirited ; not on k-
count of what we are going about, stjsTbis-
tlewood. [ said, I wanted some refreshment;
and Brunt, by Thistlewood's ordeis, sentfcr
some gin and beer ; and Thistlewood said, W
wanted some paper to draw out some Uils,
large posting bills, sudi as the paper on vhicb
newspapers were printed, but he did not knot
the name. I proposed cartridge paper; I toU
him that would answer the purpose; vpoDtlu^
Thistlewood gave Brunt some monev to fetdi
this paper ; Brunt sent for it, and itni
brought ; then a cha\r and table werebnafK
in from Brunt's room, and ThisUewood fA
down to write on this paper so brought; he
wrote three bills ; he read what be had wriiia»
and the words were these : Your tyranto^
destroyed. The friends of liberty are oW
upon to come forward, as the provisional Jo-
vemment is now sitting. Signed, James ingr
secretary, February 23, 1820. TTustkwMjr
after writing these, expressed himself liw»
and seemed to be rather agiuUed; the bulvis
written in largish letters; they were »»
placed and posted up against the diBaert
buildings which should be on fire, or ajj
them, in order to inform the pnblic "^^^
come to the fires what had been done ; hetua
asked Hall to take the pen and wrHe m
bills, which he refused; a stranger i« »»
asked ; he refbsed at first, but afte^^'rj
it ; afterwards Ings accoutred himself, he w
put a black belt round his loios ; aftff t»|
he hung another over his ^^'^^^^'"JS
round his loins was to contain a ^5? £
tola ; the one over his shoulder was w "r*
lass; he put a couple of bags over his shoow^
in the shape of soldiers, haversadcs ; on vm
himself, after he had thus dressed ^^^
said he thought himself not complete «it«»
his steel ; he then produced a "i^W^
with a very broad blade, and ^w^-^^ST^
round the handle ; he said the wax-esj ^^
keep his hand firom slipping; this kJ«JJ
said, is to cut off the heads of lords CasUW
and Sidmouth ; all the rest took sa «*J r
in preparing themselves with pistols anfl «j;
lasses, and other things. Then P*lmca»« >»'
Thistlewood and Brunt left the room • "^
before five ; Palin said, he hoped ^^
sons knew what they had met there op««^
hoped if they did, that they had V^^r^
deration to what they were going to w,
wished diem to inform *emselTe8,^|J|^
the assassination of minivers wM IW^
of service. to their country, and "*r*i^
wbuid oome over to them; ^"^.JTIjbe
you ought to determine with yoBne»'»
1317]
Jbr High IVeatoN.
A.D. 1820.
11318
irue to one another ; if it should be prored
that any one of you is in danger from the op«
posite party, others of us should immediately
go to his assistance, and if any man flinches,
he ought to be run through; he was here
interrupted by a tall man whom I do not know,
nrho said, you speak as if all the men in the
room knew what they were going to do, but
that is what I wish to know myself, and some
others ; I myself am not afraid of my life, and
no man who turns out on such a thing ought
to be afraid of his life. Palin was going to
speak, but Brunt came io, and seeing, as I
thought, some alteration in the countenances,
in consequence of what this tall man and
Palin had said, he told him, that he and the
others wanted to know what they were going
to do. Brunt said, this is not the proper place
where you ought to know it ; but if you go to
a room in the Edgware road, there you shall
know all ; Brunt added, all those who went
with him should have something to drink to
put them in spirits; the tall man said, he
Doped that no man going on such a piece of
business as this, would get drunk ; the man
who does so puts himself in the hands of his
enemy, and is of no use to any body.'' Then
Adams proceeds, and says, ** there was a cup-
board in the room, in which I have seen a
vword, and tar and pitch, and oakum, which
ire materials for fire-balls, and hand-grenades
were kept there till they were removed ; I went
iown stairs alone^ and was followed by a
stranger; I went to Cato-street that evening;
I took a blunderbuss, and a broomstick pre-
pared to receive a bayonet ; I met Thlstlewood
and Brunt in £dgware-road, they took me to
the stable in Cato-street ; in going through the
stable, I saw Davidson and Wilson ; Davidson
sitting down, and Wilson standing up."
Brunts — ^My lord, I beg pardon, but as
Ihere are several evidences in the court, and
it may operate to the prejudice of my fellow
prisoners, I tnsh to know whether they may
not .withdraw?
Lord Chief Boron.— Oh, yes, certainly.
Mr, Crumey, — My lord, they are the
persons who the counsel for the prisoners
consented should remain ; they are the officers
in custody of the arms.
Lord Chief Bortm.— Your counsel know the
persons very well.
Mr, Baron Garrow. — It has been made
matter of express consent, or they would have
retired as^the other witnesses have done.
Lord Chief Baron, — Adams then says ; "1
went up into the loft, I found several men
there ; the stable is the first building in Cato-
street ; Cato-street is a little street running out
of John-street; you enter it under an archway,
and when you get through that archway you
turn to your right, and directly into the
stable. At the further end of the stiible there
was a ladder, by which I got up into the loft ;
in the loft there was a carpenter's bench, and
upon it I saw pistols and cutlasses, and there
was also a candle on the bench. When I
went first, Thistlewood, on looking about,
said, there were eighteen in the room, and two
below stairs. I laid my blunderbuss on the
bench ; there were present then, Thistlewood,
Brunt, Ings,HaU, Bradburn, Davidson, Wilson,
Harrison, Strange, Cooper and Tidd. They
were all the persons whom I knew by name ;
there were otner persons there ; they were all
preparing themselves with their different arms.
After I came, Ibistlewood went down stairs,
and I afterwards went down stairs myself, and
found Thistlewood, Brunt, Davidson, Harrison
and Wilson in the stable. When I went down,
they turned themselves round and expressed
themselves all on a sudden, what good news
we have; there are six or seven carriages
already come to lord Harrowby's house ; and
Brunt said, what a rare haul we shall have to
night. Tidd had not arrived at that time. We
went up into the loft again ; but Brunt pro-
posed before we went up again, that tnere
should be a double sentiy at the stable-door,
and that no one should be admitted unless he
would give the counter-sign. When we went
to the loft, somebody expressed a fear that
Tidd would not come ; Brunt said, there is no
occasion at all for any fear upon that subject ;
I will pledge my life that he will come. Ings
behaved like a madman, and said he would
either hang himself, or cut his own throat, if we
did not go through with the plan. Thistle-
wood said he hoped they would not drop the
concern; if they did, it would be another
Despard's job. Just after that, Tidd came in.
After some little conversation with Tidd, This-
tlewood came to the table, and said, suppose
lord Harrowby to have sixteen servants in the
house, they will not be prepared, and we shall
be ; and Thistlewood proposed fourteen i6 be
picked out of the twenty men to go into the
room. Thistlewood and Brunt then began to
pick them out. On this being done. Brunt
introduced a gin bottle ; he offered me a glass,
and he called me out among the fourteen.
Some time before this, on Brunt finding the
men rather apprehensive that they had not
sufficient strength, Brunt came up to the table,
and addressed them in a few words ; he al-
luded to those who were in the room, that
they did not know exactly the preparations
they had got. He said, we have got things
here that will blow the house down over their
heads ; so bent am I on doing the job, that if
there were only eight or nine, I am determined
on going in and doing it ; then, he added, if
there were only five or six that will go, I will
be one that will do it, and if we find any
danger, we will take those things with us, and
destroy the house, and perish all together with
it. Just at that time, as the gin was going
round, after the men were picked out, I beard
some noise below; some body came to the
bottom of the ladder, and cried, holloa, show
a light ! Upon tliis^ Thistlewood took a can-
13191 1 GfiORGEIV.
Trial ^Jckm lUmat Brunt
[im
die from the bench, and looked down the
stairs, turned round, and put down the candle
on the bench again, and seemed rather con-
fused. Then some officer ascended the ladder,
and came into the room ; the first word he
spoke, to the best of my recollection, was, here
is a pretty nest of Jrou gentlemen ; we hare got
a warrant to apprehend you all, and as such I
hope you will go peaceably. At this time two
officers had entered, and another officer was
behind them on the ladder ; he cried, let me
come up ; he came up, and came forward on
one side of the room. Those that were on
that side of the room sidled off into a little
room that there was on the left. I did not
observe the officer advance into the room ; I
went into this little room, and I saw Thistle-
*wood among the men in the little room. On
this officer coming into the room, the other
rushed towards the door-way. At that mo-
taient I saw an arm in the act of rushing for-
ward, and a pistol was fired off directly. I
tannot sav that I saw the officer fall; the
moment the pistol was fired, the candle was
out; a great deal of confusion followed; I got
down the ladder into the stable, and got away ;
I went off to my lodging directly ; I was taken
up on Friday, the day but one after this
happened. Af^er I left Cato-street I went
home, and never went out afterwards till I was
taken ; I have been in custody ever since."
He is cross-examined ; he says, '' the first
lime I was here, I said when I got home I
repented of my iniquities, it was so, I did
repent of my iniquities, and before that, I was
convinced 1 was wrong ; when I saw the error
of my ways, I embraced Christianity again ; I
had been a Christian down to the time when I
read tlie infernal work of Thomas Paine, which
was given to me by Tidd ; he was examined
further, and at last he got a little warm, and he
said * Brunt contributed to destroy my belief
as a Christian ; his plan was to destroy the
pillars of religion.' " Then he adds " I found a
satisfaction in making an atonement to my
Maker, for my errors ;" then he goes on, and
states, " I never intended to commit murder;
I thank my Maker I did not commit any ; I
never thought it morally right to murder any
man. On the 2nd of February I heard of a
conspiracy to murder the ministers, and on
the 12th of February I was introduced to
Thistlewood, and joined him to aid in the plot
\vhich was communicated to me on the 2nd ;
it was done through the insinuation of Brunt ;
but on Tuesday morning before the Wednes-
day, I went to the meeting, with three others
to stop the business, but as soon as I mention-
ed it by way of throwing any objection in the
way, they were all like a set of mad men
against me, except those three I had got with
)ne, and though 1 disapproved of their plan, I
did not wish to bring any of them to punish-
mem**
He is re-examiaed, and says, "Paine's Age
of Reason and Carlile's publications perverted
iny mind;*' thai, gentlemen, is a disclosure in
such a transaction as this, whidi ought to uke
very great impression.
Such is the evidence of this man ; the qae*
tSon will be, whether you can give him credit;
he is, as I said before, an accomplice; be is t»
be listened to with great jealouvjr; hot asm
is not supposed always to tell an untrath opoB
his oath because he happens to have been n a^
complice in a most nemrioiis transaction; ht
you will expect to find a good reason forsettii{
up Ihs credit, standing as he does in the onidi*
Stances of a participator of that guilt wUebii
imputed to the prisoner. We wul wm^ gei*
tlemen, proeeed to see what the other evideiiee
is; I believe there is no great difficdtjio
saying, that if this evidence be tnie, it pram,
as far as one witness can prove, the Gkai|0
made against the prisoner by the indicODat
now under your consideration.
The next witnes is Eleanor Walker; she b
the niece and servant of Mrs. Rogers, in Fa-
court, at the house where Biunt lodged ^
his wife and child and apprentice, and iavindl
the back two-pair Of stairs room we ban bnm
of was; "Brunt," she says, ** lodged iwrij*
twelvemonth in our house; he occupied tht
two front rooms in the two-pair of stain tloor;
he lived in one, and woikea m the otber; tie
back room two-pair of stairs was takea bf
Ings f I did not know the man's name at tbe tiai
Brunt introduced him ; the room ir» ^
unfurnished." This is what the otfier wittj
Adams, told us; ^* he said, perhaps be nip
bring his eoods in a week or better, bet be
never did bring any goods there; myBS*'
keeps a shop; the other lodgers enter ia«J
the side door, and they go up and downW
stairs without our knowing any thiog of tw'
motions.''
Mary Rogers is the landlady, and ft* «J*
and mistress of Eleanor Walker ; sbe sapi *
did not know Ings's name when be tookoj'
lodgings ; he paid roe for four or fin|^
I do not exactly know which, at 3j. per ••*{
but observe, Ings took the room at 3i.«**j
certainlv not to live in. " One cveniug, »*•
I was about putting my children to bed,lft^
three men go up stairs, the middle one I P^'
ceived was a black man ;" who that maa «J
she was left to conjecture; **I ^^^frl
Brunt what Ings was ; Brunt told tsa, w**'
nothing of him, except that he saw hw »
a public-house, and heard him i"^^^J*^j
lodging ; he said that he ^^ndcntooa be^
butcher by trade;" these lodging»» ""^ "J
were taken, were never slept in by I°P»
he never had an article of furniture » ti*J
except that there was a stove, whicb •»
property of the landlord ; so far, yw JJ^
IS an agreement between Adams aw_
two persons with respect to these lodgmP-^ j
Joseph Hale is next called; ^^^^
was an apprentice to Brunt, and "^*w
him in Fox-^urt; he had two ^^^^
one was his work-shop, the ^^. JJtwo-
I remember Ings coming and **^*'?\!iqj|
pair back room. Brunt went with b*'"
13211
Jbr High Treoion.
A. D. 1820.
[1332
M it, and when he hail teen it. Brunt told Ings
it would do, and said^ go down and ^ve them
tt shilling/' that was to hind the hargain, I sup-
pose. ** I had known Ings ahout a fortni^t
before that day, I bad seen him withThistlewood
in Brunt's room f so that it appears here, that
Bnint and Ings were acquainted ihoot a fort-
night before Brunt told Mrs. Rogers that he
Icnew noUiing of him, except seeing him at
the ale-house on the morning of the day when
he took the room. ** Ings came, and asked
Mrs. Brunt for the key ; she gave him the key.
Hall was with him in Uie course of the evening;
I heard other persons go into that room. From
that time, until my master was apprehended,
divers meetings were held in that room. I
have seen there Thistlewood, Ings, Tidd, Hall,
Davidson, Bradbum, Strange, Edwards, Pot-
ter, and Adams and others ; they were at dif-
ferent times in this room, and coming up and
down ; my master was generally with them.
"When I hare passed, I have seen the room
door open, ana, by that means, have seen
aome long poles, like th^ brandies of trees,
vough cut ; I saw about twenty of them ; the
meetings were mostly in the evening. I have
heard hammering and sawing in the room ; I
heard it more than once ; they went by their
names ; Thistlewood was called sometimes T.,
and sometimes Jrihtar; then, he says; on the
Sunday evening before Brunt was tSkaa, there
Was a meeting rather larger than usual ; all Uie
persons I have named were there, and went
away one or two at a time ; Brunt was with
them. When the meeting was over I saw
Strange with Brunt, in Brunt's own room.
There were meetings also on the Monday, and
en the Tuesday," as Adams had said ; *^ on
the afternoon of Wednesday several people
came ; some of them came m the front room.
Thistlewood came, Ings came, and Strange
was there also about two o'clock ; thev went
first into Brunt's room where he lived, and
then came into his work-shop ; their employ-
ment was flinting Uie pistols. I did not know
tome of them; Uiey were strangers ; they had
five or six pistols, which they were flinting ;
they did not finish th^m ; one of the men said,
the people were overlooking them from the
opposite house ; Brunt told them to go into
the back room, which they did. In the course
tif the afternoon Thistlewood came out of the
i>ack room, and asked me if I could get him a
jriece of writing paper f I gave him some, and
fie took it into the back room ; after that Brunt
came out, and told me to get six sheets of car-
tridge-paper, and gave me money.- I brought
it and gave it to him, and he took it into
the back room ;** this idso Adams had told us
before ; ** about six o'clock Brunt left the back
loom, and came into his own room for the last
time, with a stranger, and then they went out
together. I heara others go down stairs.
After Brunt went, my mistress had oocainon to
make her tea ; her table was in the back room ;**
and Adams told us the same ; *' she told me
to go and get i^ I went to the door and
knocked ; a man of the name of Potter opened
it, and gave me tlie table ; when the door was
opened, I observed four or five more people in
the room, and thev had a fire ; in the course
of the evening Tldd called, and came to the
front room ; Mrs. Brunt took him to the cup-
board and showed him a pike-h^ul and a
sword, and asked him, what she could do with
them P And he said, give them to me, I will
take them away ; he took them into the bade
room. After tlds I heard some persons go
down from the back room; this was after seven,
and I believe near eight ; after this a person
came and told Mrs. Brunt, if any person comes
here, and inquires for any of us, send them to
the White Hart Shortly after some persons
came; Uiey did not know their vray to the
White Hart, and I vrent with them to show
them the house. On my return from the White
Hart, after I had been at the door a few mi-
nutes, some other persons came, and they
were told to go to tne White Hart; I did not
go with them, as they appeared to know the
way. Brunt came home about nine o'clock in
the evening ; his dress was disordered, and his
great coat and his boots were veiy muddy ; he
seemed rather confused ; he told his wife that,
where he was, a lot of officers had been ; he
said it was all up, or words to that effect.^
There is no doubt he was^n Cato-street, thlt
is not only proved by the witness, but admitted
by himself. ** He said, that he had saved his
life, and that was all. Directly after this,
another man came in, who was a stranger to
me. Brunt shook hands with him, and aoked
if he knew who had informed ; this man an-
swered, he did not know. The stranger said,
that he had had a dreadful blow on the side,
and had been knocked down ; and from the
manner of speaking to each other, they ap-
peared to have been in the same place. Brunt
said, there is something to be done yet, upon
this the^ both went out again together; then,
after this, he says, Mrs. Brunt and I went to-
gether into tne back room ; we found in the
cupboard several rolls of brown paper, vrith
tar in them, which I have since understood
were hand-grenades; also an iron pot that
belonged to Brunt;" this is also stated by
Adams; ^ there were some bags there made of
flannel, two of them were fou of something ;
in the room there was a long pole also ; Mrs.
Brunt and I left them there. Brunt came
home about eleven o'clock; he told me to get
up early, and clean his boots, which I did ; he
asked me, whether I knew the borough? I
told him, yes ; he then asked me if I knew
Snovr's-field's ? I told him. no; he directed
me to go to Kirby-street, snoVs-fields, to k
person of the name of Potter ; he said there
were some things in the back room ; we went
together into the back room ; w« took each a
rush basket ; he told me to put the things that
were in the cupboard into a basket, which 1
did ; one of the baskets was tied up in abln^
apron, belonging to Mrs. Brunt, whicn had beeh
made use of as a curtain to the window of (hat
1323] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial ^Jakn T%ma$ Brmd
11334
room; the other was not tied up^ we went
into firaot'fl own room to look for somethiog
to tie that up, and two officers came ia and
took Brunt 7*^
Thomas Smart is a watchman of St. George's,
Hanover-square; he sajs, in taking his walk
on that nighty the 22nd of February, he saw a
person of colour, and three other persons, in
^rosvenor-square, they looked suspicious ;.this
is with a view to lead to the opinion that
Davidson was there, according to what Adams
had said of the direction given to him lo go
there.
Charles Bissix is also a watchman ; he says,
lie saw two men taking particular notice of the
houses in Grosvenor-square, about half-past
eight or a quarter before nine, on the 22na of
February last ; one was a man of colour ; they
took particular notice of lord Harrowby's house.
Henry Gillan is a young man, a servant of
an apothecary, living in that neighbourhood;
he says, ^ I know the Rising Sun public-house
at the comer of Adams -mews, in Charles-
•treet, Grosvenor-square ; I was there on the
22nd of February last;" he describes it as
Adams had done; he says, ** Brunt and Adams
came in, they had porter and bread and
cheese;'' Adams said they had refreshment
there. ** Brunt challenged roe to play at
dominos; I stayed there and played two
games, and left them both there at ten o'clock;"
so that this is confirmation of the hci stated
by Adams.
Edward Simpson is a corporal-major of the
2nd regiment of Life-guards ; hie speaks of the
barracks in King-street; he says that Harrison
knew them perfectly well ; that he had been a
soldier connected with them, and that there
were some windows, which have been since
shut ; that the barracks would have been very
easily burnt by any fire-balls thrown in at
those windows, which would have reached the
hay and straw deposited there. That is to
show something of a coincidence between
Adams's account of the proposed burning of
the barracks with the evidence that tbey might
easily have been burnt.
John Hector Morison is a journeyman to
Mr. Underwood, a cutler of Drary-lane ; he
says, '' I remember the prisoner Ings coming
with a sword to be ground, about last Christ-
mas ;" here it is — a small one ; " he directed
me to grind it sharp fro m the heel to the point,
and likewise the back of the point to be ground;
the prisoner Tngs called for it about three days
after he left it, he approved of the manner
in which it was ground, and in about a fort-
night afterwards he brought me a very long
one ; he said the first one was ground to his
likiug, and I was to grind that in the same
manner; he gave me his name, as I understood
him, Eames, the first time.'* Morison has
looked at it, and says, that was the sword
which he so ground by the direction of Ings.
James Aldous is a pawnbroker ; he says ** I
know the prisoner Davidson ; he pawned with j
me a brass-barrelled blunderbuss in January,
and redeemed it on the 23rd of Fehnnij;*' lie
says, that be has seen it since, that Mr. Bvft-
ven showed it to him, and that he believes it to
be the same that was pledged and redeemed.
John Monument comes next; his erideoee
requires great attention ; he is a prisoner is
the Tower i^** I am by trade a sbcMemaker; I
lived, before I was a prisoner, at No. 8, Ge-
den-street, Baldwin's-gaidens, which is oar
Brook's-market ; I saw Thi^ewood at the
house of a man of the name of Foid, three
months before I was apprehended ; afbtwirds
Thistlewood called upoo me in a^ot a fort-
night, he came with Brunt ; my mother and
brother were with me ; my brother's Dane in
Thomas; after Thistlewood and Brant bd
been, in the room some time, Thistlewood nid
he wished to speak to me ; 1 went with bin,
leaving l^nt with my brother. Thisdewood
said, great events are at hand ; peof^ were
every where anxious for a change; I havs
been promised support by a great Domber of
men, who have deceived me, but now I hare
got men who will stand by me. He tha
asked me if I had any arms ; I said no; he
said, every man ought to have arms ; all of o
have got arms, some a pistol, some a pike,
and some a sabre ; you can huy a pistol for
about four or five shillings. I told him I bad
no money to buy pistols ; he then said I viH
see vrhat I can do. We returned agaiointo
the room, and found Brunt there; and tha
Thistlewood and he went away together. On
Tuesday, the 22nd of February, Bmnt caflrf
upon me in comoany with Tidd ; my biothff
Thomas was with me at that time. I twd
Brunt I thought I had lost him ; he said, the
king's death has made an alteration lo m
plans ; I asked, what plans ; he said there •«
to be a meeting the following evening, up »
Tyburn-turnpike, where I should hear afl the
particulars. Be then turned to Tidd, «n<^^
whether he should give me the name; ind
said yes, he supposed there was no dangff;
he then told me that if I came to thepUce,
and found any people about, I was to ay
6. «. t, and that if they were fn«"^5 J^
would answer t o, n ; he said he should be »
our house again in the morning, to tell oe
more about it, and when the thing was torn
place ; he did not call the next day tiU aha«
half-past four ; he then came alone ; my ^
ther was vrith me ; he called me down ^'J
and told me I must go with him in »«» *°
hour ; I told him I could not go so 8ooo«
that; he asked why ; I said I had gotJojK
work to do, that must be done; he «»f r
at what time it would be done, and I toW »»
about six o'clock ; he said he could not jw^
so long, and that I must go with Tidd, ww»
he had brought with him the day befort; J^
he told me where Tidd lived, which was BOf
in-the-wall-passage, leading to Don"Y»
street; in consequence of that, I ▼«" ,
Tidd's about half-past six o'clock, and ftj"
him at home ; he said he had waited for ^
more people; that he should not wa» . *
1325]
Jot High TreasM,
A. D. 182a
[13219
peTen o'clock ; and that if no one else came
before seven, we should go together ; no one
else came ; and at seven o'clock, he went to
the comer of the room, and took out a pistol,
which he put in a belt that be had got round
his body under his great coat ; he took about
six or seven pike heads wrapped up in brown
paper, and a staff about four feet long, with a
hole in one end of it adapted to receive a pike
head ; then we went down into BrookVstreet
and up to Oxford-street ; when we came to
Holborn, he gave me the pike-staff to carry ;
as we were going along Oxford-street, I think
it was, I asked him to tell me where we were
going, he said I should know when I got to
the place ; I had asked him before we came out
of the room, what place it was up at Tybum-
tumpike we were going to, and he answered
at a mews up by Edgware-road ; I • asked
him, whether we were going to the House of
Commons ? he said no, there were too many
soldiers there ; I asked him again where we
were going, he said, to Grosvenor-square ; I
asked him whether any one in particular lived
there ; he said there was to be a cabinet din-
ner there ; no other conversation passed be-
tween us that I remember, till we got to Cato-
street ; we went under an archway ; there were
two persons under the archway ; there were
some few virords. passed between them and
Tidd, which I could not understand ; he was
before me; the stable is directly close to the
archway, you turn to the right hand ; we went
into the stable ; I saw in the stable three or
lour men, whether they were armed I cannot
say; there was a light below; I went up a
ladder at the further end, on the left hand into
the loft, and found the people up stairs, I
suppose about twenty-two or twenty-three;
somebody asked Thisdewood how many there
were, and he said there was no occasion to
count them there were five-and-twenty ; there'
was a carpenter's bench there, and on Uie
bench a quantity of swords and pistols ; there
was only one light that I observed, and that
was on the bench ; there was one man in a
brown great coat, who spoke of the impro-
prie^ of going to lord Harrowby's, with so
amall a number as five-and-twenty men ; that
was the first time of my hearing lord Har-
towby's mentioned as thie house to which we
were to go; Thistlewood said, that number
was quite sufficient, for he only wanted four-
teen men to go into the room, and supposing
that lord Harrowby had sixteen servants that
liumber would be quite sufficient ; the other
man said, when we come out, there will of
course be a crowd of people about the door, how
shall we make our escape ? Thistlewood said,
you know that the largest party were already
gone ; Davidson then told him not to throw cold
water upon the proceedings, but if he was
afraid ot his life, he might go away, they could
do without him ; and Srunt said, sooner than
they should go from the business the^ were
about, he would go into the house by himself,
and blow them all up, «ven if he ]aerished.with
them ; yon know we have got that says Brunt,
that we can do it with ; after that, the man in
the brown great coat said, though I do not
like to go with so small a number^ yet as you
are all for it, I will not be against it; he then
proposed they should all put themselves under
the orders of Mr. Thistlewood. Thistewood
then said, every one who engages with me
will have equal honour with myself; and he
proposed that the fourteen men who wre to
go into the room, should volunteer from the
pers6ns thatweretbereassembled; about twelve
or thirteen men immediately afterwards volun-
teered, and among them were Tidd, Brunt the
prisoner, Davidson and Wilson. About this
time, Thistlewood stepped down stairs, and he
came up again, and said he had received
intelligence that the dnke of Wellington and
also lord Sidmouth had just arrived at lord
Harrowby's ; I do not recollect any thing more
that passed till the officers came up; they
came up into the room, and told them to siir«
render ; that they were officers, and that there
was a guard of soldiers below; I was taken
into custody up stairs." This, gentlemen, is
the evidence of an accomplice; but if it is
believed, it supports the case proved by
Adams.
Then upon his cross-examination, he savs,
'' T have read Paine's Age of Reason, and I
have also read the bishop of Llandafi^s answer
to it ; Paine*8 certainly affected my mind, but
the bishop's answer prevented its whole effect ;
I never saw Brunt till Thistlewood brought
him to me ; I went there first without knowing
what they were going about ; I saw Tidd arm
himself; I followed him; I thought they were
S}ing to attack the members of the House of
ommons ; still I went with him, having rea«
son to believe something was to be done, biit
not knowing what was to be done till I got to
Cato*street ; when he told me there was to be
a cabinet dinner, I was convinced that their
object was, to destroy the persons there ; but
though I was a Christian as I profess to be, I
was to6 much afraid to retreat after I had been
engaged in this plan.^
Thomas Monument is produced to shew,
that that which his brother swears is correct,
so far as it is within his knowledge ; he states,
^ I remember Thistlewood coming to my bro*
ther's house one evening, in company with
Brunt the prisoner; Thistlewood asked to
speak to my brother ; in consequence of that
they both went out; Brunt staid behind in^
the room ; they were out about two or three
minutes, and after they tetnmed, Brunt and
Thistlewood went away together ; and again
on the 22nd of February^ the Tuesday, Brunt
and Tidd called on my brother ; when Brunt
came in, my brother said, I thought I had lost
you ; there was something pa^ed concerning
the king's death ; that his death had made an
alteration in the plans ; mv brother asked him
what plans ; he said they had different objects
in view ; I recollect Brunt asking Tidd whether
he should give us the outlina of a plan ; whethev
13S7] 1 GEORGE f V.
Trial qfJakn Tkmas Bnmt
[I33»
Tidd made my answer or not, I do not know ;
bttt Brunt told us the pass-word ;*' and he gives
the same account of that as the brother had
done before. ''On the Wednesday, Brunt
called again on my brother between four and
five o'docfc ; my brother could not go just
then ; Brunt asked him if he was ready to go ;
we were bosv at woik^ and my brother told
him he could not go then ; Brunt told him»
when he was ready to go, he was to call in
Hole-ii^th^wall passage on Iidd, and he
would take him ; Brunt then went away ; my
brother went out about seven o'dock, as nearly
as I can recollect ; I did not go myself; I had
never seen my brother from that time till he
was in custody.*' Now, gentlemen, this young
man swears positively to every thing which his
brother John has sworn to, except the parts
whioh his brother only was present at; the
question iS| whether, when a narrative is made
in several parts of which another person agrees,
you do not believe the accomplice in the oUier
parts ; the two agreeing in the principal part,
vou will ask yourselves whether you do not
believe him in tbf other things iJso.
John Monumept is called again; he tayi,
^ I was taken in custody to Whitehall; I can-
not exactly say whether I was handcuffed to
any person ; I know I was put ipto a room by
myself, but on the last day pf examination
some conversation passed between me aod
Thistlewood; Brunt and the other prisonen
were there ; we were then all put into a room
together. Thistlewood told me, when I came
to be examined before tbe Privy council, to
tell them that Edwards brought me into tlu»
meeting,^-that it wgs through Edwards J came
there. I said, how can I tell that falsehood,
when I have never seen Edwards. He said,
that is of no eonsequenoe at all ; you must
describe him as a man not much taller then
yourself of a sallow complexion, and that be
wore a brown great eoat. We were sittiog
found the Uble, and Thistlewoood told m«
that Edwards had betrayed us ; and he bade
me send that round to the other prisoners. I
did not like to do it ; I told him X should be
noticed ; he then leaned over, and desired
somebody else.*'
Then, gentlemen, Thomas Hiden is called ;
I shall not make any apology for reading the
whole of the evidence. I feel that I am tre^
passing very much on your time, but tlie oc-
easion is so important, that I am sure you will
n^t feel k to be too long. Thomas Hiden
says; ^ I have carried on business as acow^
keepev and daiiyman in Manchestowmews; I
have now the misfortune to be in prison for debt ;
I was taken in exeoutionlastSaturdav se'nnight,
I know Wilson very welU A few days belbre
the 23fd of February he asked me to be of a
pwnr to destroy all his owjeetv^s miniaters at
» cabinet dinner; that he and the party had
all things ready, and were waiting for a cabinet
dinner, and that they had each things as I had
never sefn---large round thingSi, made of taiw
fnnlia and eords, and filled full of nails and
iron and other things, and that their stiea^
was very ffreat ; he said if they were lifted,
they would heave up one of the mWi of tie
houses on the other side of the street; he aid
they were waiting for a cabinet dinner, nd
then thev meant to set some houses on iin,
and, bv keepifis the town in confusion for sone
days, U would become general ;" diet is tot
the particular mischief of setting fire to the
houses, Init that would become general ; ^^tlme
things were to be put into the room vben the
gentlemen were at dinner; that they mentis
set fire to lord Harrowby's house. He nil'
that all who escaped the explosion wen to die
by the edge of the sword or some othervn*
pon. The houses he named were those of tke
duke of Wellington, lord Hanowhy, lord Sid-
mouth, lord Castlereagh, the bishop of Loodai,
and one other house that I do not recollect;
he said that they would depend upon wj
making one; I told him I would; bdbietke
23rd," he does not remember Uie time, ba
that time is made up by another mtom, ''I
wrote a letter to lord CJasdereagh; I tried to
see him, but I could not get access to Urn; I
went to watch lord Harrowby's going oot d
his house to Hyde park; I went tvoortkiw
times to lord Harrowby's ; at last I saw a gn-
tleman by his house mount a horM. I did ifl|
know the eail of Hanowby then; I kXkm
him into the pari( ; I met him, anddeUmed
to him the letter I had vrritten to lord CMt)^
reagh." He looks at the letUr, and nj>y
<< that is the letter.'* It cannot he in erid«KX>
because it passed between two penoo% tke
prisoner not being there. ^'The neitdift
between four and five o'clock, Wilson net a^
and said, you are the man I want to ne; v
said there was to be a cabinet dinner ttft
night at lord Harrowby's, inGiosfenoHqaiA
I asked him where they were going tooNii;
he told me I was to go up into JobiKen^
and to the public-house at the comer of Cato-
street, the sign of the Horse and Groom ; vA
there ( was in stop in the public-honsef <* "
stop aft the oomer of the pest '»^^2|
showed into a stable oleee oy. I ''^^{^
wheq they were to meet; he said ^Si^
before ei at six o'clock ^ if y wi do not •«
hasle» ha said the grand tlung will be «w
befose yon eoma« I asked bim bo^ *^
men were to meet; he said between tw
and thirty; J asked if that was sU ^f^
that was in Cato^street, and be mid "^i***
miolh^ party in Gray's-inn^ane, anotherfj^
in the Borough, and another in Gfe's^^
the city, I do not know which. H^ toM^
had no occasion to be alarmed, *ll^T^
was in it »*-they are most of Ibam Iw» »■»
court. Wilson told me the Irish were tfJJJ
but that tbey would not begio ^ the Mim
bmin first; the English had behsvid imn
a^ disappointed them no ofifo, th^ th^^
deurmined not to begin tiU tbe ^^!^
begun; be said one P*«r wf «? go » «^
Hanowby*s, and do the grand ^Jf!^
all the parties were to letiw^ a»a»e«*^
la^l
fw High Trmuan*
vlierc about the neighbonrliood of' the Man-
lioii-house.'' That is consistent with what
kdams said. ^ He said there were two pieces
»f cannon in Grav's-inn-lane, which would be
'ery easily taken by knocking in a small door;
bur pieces more at some Artillery-gronnd, he
loes not know where, whidi were to be got
lasily by killing the sentry. I then left him,
ind went to John-street that evening, between
nxand seven o'clock. I beliete it to have
>^en near seven when T got there. When I
^t near the gate-way I met Wilson and Da-
ridson, the man of colour, standing near the
x»t. Wilson said, you are come; I said,
res, I am come, but I am behind my time ; I
old him I had to fetch some cream, which I
vas obligated to do. Davidson asked me if T
iras going in, and said, Thistlewood was in ;
L asked him what time they would go away
torn thence, as I must go and get some cream ;
md he told me they meant to leave that place
tbout eight o'clock, and if they were gone
>efoTe I came back, I must follow them to
^rosvenor-square, and I should find them at
ord Harrowby*s house," describing the place
irbere it was.
He is cross-examined ; and he says, ** I went
0 a club, called the shoemakers* club, twice ; I
vent first on a Sunday night; I was induced
>y a friend of mine to go ; I went another time
m a Sunday, but I never went once to a pri-
Rate meeting; I know Bennett; I asked nim
f he would go with me and my friend Clarke,
vho was the person who invited me to go. I
■ever persuacled him to go ; I asked him if he
vould go to the shoemakers' club ¥rith Clarke
ind me ; I did not know till between four and
Ive, that the meeting was to be held in Cato*
rtreet. I wrote the letter myself."
Then the earl of Harrowby is called ; he is
1 privy councillor, and one of his majestv's
ninislers ; he says, ** it was usual to have £abi«
let dinners, but the dinners were ruspended
n consequence of the king's death. I deter-
nined to have a cabinet dinner on the 23rd of
February last ; on the Friday or Saturday pre-
ledittg, cards of invitation were issued for
that purpose. I saw the last witness Hiden in
lie park, near Grosvenoi^-gate, on Tuesday the
12nd of February," His lordship is not quite
positive, but thinks it was between two and
three o'clock he saw him ; he gave his lordship
I; letter, aiid upon the letter being shown to
trim, he said, ** that is the letter " his lordship
khen says, ^'I had some conversation with
Hiden ; I asked him if he had given his name
ind' Address in the letter ; I desired to have his
name and address, and he gave it me ; on his
sirpressing a wish to have some further com-
■luliftcation with me, I saw him again by ap-
Siintment the next morning in the ring m
yde«nark ; I appointed to meet him, as he
leemed to be afraid of continuing the conver*
lAion with me ; I went to Hyde-park, and met
btm at Grosvenor-gate; I told him to go on to
^ ring, and I went on among the plantations
in or^er to avoid hit being seep. Tbe dinner
VOL. xxxni.
A. D. !«2a nigO
did not take place ; but I had' given directions
to the servants to provide it as if it was to take
place ; a little before eight I was dining at the
earl of Liverpool's, and I sent a note to inform
my principal servant that the dinner would not
take place, and the dinner was of course put
aside."
John Baker, his lordship's principal servant,
says, at a little after eight o'clock, ne received
information, that' his lordship and the privy
council would not dine there ; he says, ** op to
that period every preparation for the dinner
was going on ; nobody had an idea to the con-
trary ; I believe there was a party that night at
the archbishop of York's, whose house is next
door ; as I saw carriages stopping at the door,
I thought there was to be a ainner there diat
day, and that some gentlemen had come there ;
it was rather sooner than lord Harrowby's
dinner hour; it was between sir and seven
o'clock."
Richard Monday says , he lives at No. 8, in
Cato-streel. He says, *^ I know the stable in
Cato-street; on the 23rd of February last I saw
persons go into that stable ; the first was about
three o'clock in the afternoon ; I saw Harrison*
in the stable. I came home from work about
twenty minutes or half an hour after four, and
I saw Davidson walking up and down the
archway that leads to the stable ; I went, into
my house, and I saw Davidson again about six
o'clock, with two lighted candles in his hand."
It is said that one candle was in the stable
and another up stairs ; it is very probable that
tliev had but two candles; however that is of
little consequence. ** I saw two going in and'
three coming out, and moving backwards and
forwards ;" that does not appear to be very
material, for there is na douot that they were
there, and he saw them hovering about and
going in and out.
Then George Cay lock says, he saw Harrison
go into the stable ; Harrison told him that he
bad taken two chambers and was cleaningthem ;-
he saw five-and-twenty people go into the stable
that evening.
Then George Thomas Joseph Ruthven is
called ; he gives you a description of what pas-
sed in Cato-street. I do not know that it is
necessary forme to trouble you with an account
of the transactions there ; he found them in
the place ; he and Ellis went up first ; the other
poor man, Smithers, full of courage, pushed
himself forwards and was killed by Thistlewood.
With respect to the arms and ammunition, I
will state to you presently of what they consist.
A very serious remark, no doubt, arises on the
circumstance of their being all found there
and the outrageous resistance which was made ^
-^the bloody resistance which was made, and
which was attempted to be made a great deal
more bloody than it turned out — ^wbether that '
is evidence of a purpose beyond the destruo*
tipn of ministers (the mere conception of which
is not a capital crime, though a very great
offence in a moral point of view) you will coik
aider.^
4Q
1831] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial qfJokn Ttomoi Bruid
\m
Then James Ellis sajfs, tliat the momem
Ibat he saw Smithers stabbed, he fired his
pistol; the pistol did not taJce effect, bat
missed the man, the candles were then ex-
tiDguished ; the flash of his pistol was the last
light that he saw. Ruthven says there were
several candles. Adams says there were only
two ; and when jrou consider that the only fire
be saw after that, was the flash of his pistol, it
should seem that there were Dot many candles
in the room ; however, as to that contradiction
between Ruthven and Adams, it is of little
consequence. Ruthven said there were four
or five on the bench, and two or three in the
Uttle room. It appears that there was great
confusion; and, perhaps, that may account
for a good deal of inaccuracy. Ellis says
tiiere were two or three ; one says there were
certain words spoken from below ; and another
says there were other words to the same pur-
port. You will see, whether that is such a
contradiction as afi^ts, in your minds, the
credit to which the other parts of the case may
entitle Adams.
Westcoatt, Wright, and Champion, who are
also oflieers, are called to prove fttcts of the
same nature.
Then Lieutenant Fitxdarence gave his evi-
dence in the way in which you saw and heard ;
his conduct, and that of his men, was most
gallant; he states what they found on these
persons.
Samuel Hercules Taunton is then called ; he
states that be went to Brunt's lodgings the
following morning, and found those things
.which he produces*
Then Ruthven is called again, and he enume-
rates the thin^ and states where thev were
found ; if it is necessary that I should read
them to you, I will do it with great oleasure ;
but the great object is, to show that mere was
an assembly of these men armed with a great
number of arms, and that they made a most
Uoody and outrageous resistance. You must,
of course, draw your own inferences from the
nature of that resistance, as it can be applied
10 the case of high treason.
Tbe quantity of things found seems to be a
considemble ingredient in the evidence. You
see the defence is this ; we intended to assassi-
nate the ministers, and to commit plunder
afterwards. With respect to the plunder, there
is no evidence of that ; with respect to the kil-
ling his majesty's ministers, the prisoner^ as
well as his counsel, admits the intention, and
the evidence proves it; in the loft they found
tbirty-eight ball-cartridges, a fire-lock and
bayonet, one powder-flask, three pistols, ooe
sword, six bi^onet spikes and doth belt, one
blunderbuss, one pistol, fourteen bs^onet
spikes, and three pointCMi files, one bayonet,
another bayonet spike and one swonl scabbard,
ojie carbine and bayonet, two swocd^ one bul-
let, ten hand-grenades, two fire-balls, one laige
grenade and bayonet, one rope li^der, one
sivord'Stick, forty ball-cartridges, one bayonet,'
and three loose balls. They found, in the
sUUe, ia tbe pocket of BradbniQ, lix brit
cartridges, three balls, and vome string nt
round him to act asabdt; the fistd that 1U
fifed, the pistol that Wilson attempted tofiR^
a blunderbuss, sword, belt, and Ksbbuda
the stable, a pistol in the stable, SDOIhei ft
tol in the staole, a sword in the staUe, ties
large sticks with ferrules; in the pocket fl{
Tidd they found twobaIl-caitiidge9,uidnaA
him a leather belt; two ball -cartridges &di|
the stable, and ten ditto in NswabiiflMtRet]
one muflket cut down, and ooe iword fi«s
Davidson; one haversack, cross-belts, a|
pricker, baTonet, scebbard, cartouch-box, v
abelt round the body of Daridsoo; twohra*
sacks, one belt, and* tin powder^^iei AM
Ings; four pistol balk^ one pistol key, a^i
knife-case from Ings ; one haversacki coiliii'
ing seventeen ball-caitridges, thies Ub, ok
pistol flint, one pricker; one worm {»dn«a|
cartridges, one knife, and a tom-scfes; *|
stick cut to receive a banronet, left ia m
publio4)ouse ; Uiese were fonad ia^^i'**
and the loft above, except the slid leftH"
public house,
I will now read, gentlemen, whit waifcw^
Brunt's house :^<*Inanish basket, niMffps^
with rope-yam, tar and other isgrewi
some steel filings in a paper, abost m^
ounce." TTie serieant told us the «e « «
filings which I did not know befcwj*
another rush basket were fousd fo«rgM>"'R
three papers of rope-yaro, tar and other sf»
dients ; two bags of powder, ooe pow«Vj
each ; five flannel bags, empty, ooe psptf "
powder, one leathern bag oontaiuogij^
three balls, one iron pot, ooe p&e bttd^
These were left at that house; tbej'^Jf
wanted, certainly, for the aasassi»att» * "
king's ministers, because they ^•'•."•'T
them. Then, at Tidd's, which yoskfj*
been described as the d^pdt, they foonii *!
haveraack, 434 balls, ITl ball-cartnfl|*"
of powder, ooe pound each, ^**"'^^
into which powder might have ^*' fjL
small bag, with tin powder-tok ^^JT
powder, sixty-eigbt IniUs, fear fl*"^?^^
seven fHke-liandles ; also a boi, cosMdm^
ball-cartridges.'' . -^
' Serjeant Hanson is then called; M ¥^
one of those hand-grenades ftr yoef ^^
tion, and you see, from the inipectioa
its nature and Uie terrible yniagy^^^
might arise from such an ia^msMBt*^^
He says, that the flannel bi«s, «f "^f^
in them> aro in imitation of caitn^g^ Tg
pounder, so that something was af*^,
may be supposed, besides the •fl"fc3i
cannon weie haidly to he ei^^cted «• «rj
to lord Hanjo why's din«owto«' frji
sut^a, '* ) examined them; ^|^^f7^ ^
aictly.a pound of veiy good P^^T^ir' ^
not 006 flannel, bat seig«» ^ ^l!Sh. I
this would ansvMr Om fW^^'^^
13333
J&r High TreatoH,
A.D. 1890;
tl334
tave examined ttie fire-balls; there is a dif-
erence in some of theniy bat they are generally
omposed of oakam, tar, and resin, and g^ne-
ally brimstone ; but I found one without brini-
tone ; the steel filings would be part of the
oraposition of the priming oi the fuse, the
ire-palls would set any wood on fire, and
rould bum three or four minutes, according
o their size ; if thrown into barracks, with hay
md straw, tliey certainly would occasion a
ionilagratioo. He says, the grenade! in the
ttmy are covered with iron; these grenades
lo not seem as if they had been made by a
oilitaiy roan ; but tliey would effect a great
leal of mischief." Then, he says, '' the more
lard they are bound, the greater will be the
tzplosion." Then be took the fuse out of
»ne of the hand-grenades, and poured the
K>wder out ; he says, *^ those he weighed con-
ained three ounces and a half of powder, and
his appeared to be the same; that quantity
ras more than Would be sufficient for a nine-
nch shell, and quite siiffitlent to explode th^
^enade in which it was. In this grenade
here were 26 pieces of iron ; they would fly
ound the room like so many shot, and were
luita sufficient to destroy or rdaifti fifteen
persons in a room ; they explode within half a
oinute after their being a-light.''
Gentlemen, this is the evidence for the
>rosecution : for the prisoners, you heard the
wo eloquent speeches of the learned counsel ;
rou have heard also the prisoner state his
»wn case. I em sure you paid all the atten-
lon which was due to it, and perhaps it did
lot make the impression upon you which you
vished the prisoner's speech to make upon
four minds ; but you are to deal with it, gen-
lemen, as you feel to be proper ; you heand it,
ind will consider it. There is no evidence offer-
d ibr the prisoner ; the case lies entirely upon
be evidence for the Crown, and the arguments
m both sides, which arguments you had the
goodness to attend to, and I am sure they
Dade the impression upon you which they
Night. With respect to comment, I see very
attle to trouble you with ; indeed, hardly a
ivord. As 1 said before, there is here proved
md admitted a conspiracy to do a roost nefa-
ious act : it is broadly stated to us, that the
>bject of the piiaoner and his associates were
o destroy fifteen of the king's roinist'ers as (hey
lat at dinner, in the unsuspecting hour of
fteerfiilness, by a degree of violence, and in
die prosecution of a plan which one cannot
ihink of without ahuddertiig ; that is admitted.
b thu all the pMir^ese? If that is all the
miiose of these men, the prisoner is not
fiiilty of high treaeon ; but yon are to ask
H>Qrselves^ gentlenetiy whenher that could be
lie sole purpose : why afe the fifteen princiMl
■jaisten of the king to be destroyed in this
nav f If you attend to the evidence of Adams,
md many of' the otheri, thete is no question at
dl that there was an ulterior plan and inten-
!bn, and that ulterior plan and intention proves
lirectiy, if you believe the evidence, the trea*
r
ton charged against the prisoner at the bar
It is stated, that it was an absurd project; s6
absurd, thai it is not only improbable, but im-
possible, that it should be ascribed to any
reasonable being : it has been said, very truly,
that the attempt or the project to destroy the
king's ministers is such, that one knows not
bow te deal with the supposition of it, but it is
proved — ^it is true ; the prisoner has stated it.
and his counsel are obliged, by the force of
evidence, to admit it. But then they contend,
that they entertained no other project : you will
judge whether that is the case. The question
is, not whether these people were likely to
succeed in their atrocious plans, but whethefr
they entered into them? Did they compass^
or imagine or intend those crimes with which
the indi<itment charges the prisoner at the bar ?
Does the evidence prove it ? if not, there is
no question, aentlemen, how the verdict ou^ht
to be given. If vritli all the great attention with
which I have observed you consider tlie evi^r
dence and the addresses of the prisoner*s coun-
sel and the prisoner himself— if, 1 say, you have
a reaiKniable doubtupon the subject, you ought,
as in all criminal tnals, to give the prisoner
the benefit of that doubt ; but if, giving :|rour
attention gravely to this important subject,
you are satisfied that the charge is proved, I
need not tell you, gentlemen, that it is your
duty to find him guilty. You will now con-
sider, and give your verdict. I am sure yott
will give it according to the best of your judg-
toent, and according to the necessary inference
to be drawn from the evidence you have heard.
A Juryman (Mr. GooefcWWJ-— My lord, 1
have a doubt in my mind on a point of law.
I conceive, as a juror, I am bound to receive
the law from your lordship. Your lordship
has called our particular attention to the first
and third counts ; I am sure your lordship has
most conscientiously done it ; but at the same
time, I wish to ask the opinion of your lord-
ship, whether should the evidence bear the
construction, that an actual arming had taken
place, that a resistance has been made to the
civil authority, that in law constitutes a
•levying of war f
Lord Ckirf Baron.'^l wish clearly to under-
stand you; have the goodness to state the
question again.
Mr. GoocfcWa.— Whether, if the evidence
should bear out the opinion that an actual
arming had taken place, and that a resistance
had been rosfde to the civil authority, that
actual arming, and that resistance, constitute
the crime of levying war ?
Lord (M^ &roii^— Not resistance merely to
the civil power, unless you are of opinion it is
an arming vrith the view stated in the indict-
ment.
Mr. GoM2cAi2i.— The question is intended td
include that, it being an arming with a view
to oblige his majesty to change his measures
t^ force of arms.
13351 I GEORGE IV.
TrM of John Tkomoi Bnad
tiaM
Lord Chief Barm,--Tkkt is a conspicing to
.kvy war.
Mr. Gooddttld.^1 do not, my lord, ask
whether that is a conspiring to levy war, bat
whether that beoomes a levying of war under
the fourth count.
Lord Chief Banm,^l thought it best to sub-
mit to your consideration the first and third
counts, because I think there is less difficulty
upon those subjecu than any others ; the first
and third counts, beyond all question, charge
high treason under the act of his late majesty.
Mr. GooddU&L— At the same time I should
feel it my duty, as a juror, to gite a Terdict on
tiie whole indictment if I may ask your lord-
ship's opinion upon the law.
Lord GUef Boron.— I shall be very happy to
^▼e you any assistance in my power ; it there
is, in your opinion, evidence of a levying of
war, it will be under that count; do I make
myself understood ?
Mr. GoMicfttU.— Perfectly, my lord.
[The jury retired at twenty minutes before
four, and returned into court in twenty
minutes, with a verdict, finding the pri-
soner Guilty on the third and fourth
counts.]
Mr. Attomev GCTfra/.— My lord, I yester-
day * called the attention of the Court to a
publication of the trial of Arthur Thistlewood
m a Sunday newspaper, called The Observer,
in violation of the order which had been made
by the Court previously to that trial. I was
not then in a situation to bring this matter
formally before your lordship, not having been
furnished with the documents necessary to
bring the matter in such a shape before the
Court as that they might be enabled to deal
with it. I have now an affidavit, stating the
purchase of one of the Observer newspapers,
at the shop of the prdfrietor, Mr. Clement, in
the county of Middlesex, on Monday the 24th
of April. I am also furnished with a certificate
from the Stamp-office, accompanying a copy of
the ori^al affidavit filed at that office by Mr.
Clement, in which he states that he is the pub-
lisher and sole proprietor of that paper. I
apprehend, therefore, that your lordships have
evidence now before you, not only that Mr.
Clement is the proprietor and publisher of the
paper in question, but that he actually sold
this paper ; and (if it were necessary)' that he
sold it with a full knowledge of the injunction
of the Court, for I have only to call your lord-
ship's attention to a passage in the newspaper
itself, to satisfy you that he has done it with a
fill knowledge of the order made previously
to the trial, for he states, that after the jury
were sworn, the lord chief justice then present
thus delivered himself i—*^ As there are seve-
ral persons chaiged with the offence of high
treason by this indictment, whose trials are
likely to be taken one after the other, 1 thak
it is necessaiy, in funheiance of ja8tioe,itiNiIf
to prohibit the publication of the praceedags
of this or any otner day until the wIk^ of tk
trials shall be brought to a cobcIusiod; hi
highly necessary to the purposes of justice ila
the public mind, or the jurymea who are ^
af^er to serve, should not he infloeoced by (k
publication of any of the proceedings yM
may take place until the whole of those pro-
ceedings shall be finished ; it is expected tbt
all persons therefore will attend to this ad-
monition."
I deem this to be a mostJagiant, wflHaiJ
daring violation of the ordEw of the Coyn;aH
considering the benevolent motive wbid »>
tuated the minds of your lordskipe upon tbt
occasion, I think it would he unbeconuDg ia
me, having this feet bronght to ay notice, sol
to bring it under the consideration of iheOwl,
that they may deal with this person as th^
their wisdom shall think fit IshaUtheiefcn
move that these affidavits be wcei'*^». ?J
that your lordships may proceed to ponisktw
Sinon for his contempt m such nimienstfct
ourt may thii& proper.
Lord CUrf Bamnv— Let the affidtfils br
read.
The affidavit of George HoblHck,JJ
Yeat's-court, Carey-street, »w«Mn»J
Elijah Litchfield, of lincohiVim^UJ-
man, was read; George HoWitA^
that he had on the 24th ii»««^ PJ^^
the newspaper in question, at the rtjj
Wittiam InneU Clement, No. 1«9, S«
■*•-•
f See the commencement of the present trial.
the person whose name is subicnWw
certificate annexed sign the same.
The certificate annexed was reaj^
taining a copy of the affidavit of wu^
Innell Clement (sworn at theSttoP*^
on the 22nd of January 1816) diathen|
the printer, publisher, and sole projne^
a certain newspaper ; that the pn«^ ^^
paper was proposed to 1» P""Si,A,
office at his dwelUng-hoosc, No IW^^^
Strand, and that it was intttnledW"'
server. «
Mx. Justice mcAarAo».-*rr. AttorD^^J
ral, have you looked at the wl « P^
to see that the copy of the affidawt, socs"^
is evidence in all cases t
Mr. JUom^ Oeund^lm^^^
lofd; the 9th section of the ^^^^
cap. 78 diiecU that the affidaij *«»«
and certified copies diall in «U V''^^^
civil and criminal, ioadiinimj^^
and so on, be received and ^^^sL^
dusive evidence ; we add to ^^p^
actual sale of the pq>er at thedio?««"^»^
son against whom I apply*
Ut, Justice JMrnAo^r^^T^''^
diitiiictjnoUtti^
13371
Jw l%A TfMfoa.
Mr. ilHonwy GoMvtrf.— That b« may b«
IMinished for bis contempt in ludi way as the
Court may thiok right
Mr. Jitftice J{tcAartboii.<-It win be proper to
direct the attendaoce of the party, that we may
see whether he has any excuse to offer.
Mr, Attorney QeneraL — ^I will apply in the
first instance lor a rule to shew canscy if your
lordship pleases.
Lsrrd Ckkf Boron.— This is undoubtedly
ateiy grave accusation ; the order was certainly
A. n. laso. tjsSB
made after gnat eonsideractioa by the Conrt.
with a view to prevent michief and injustice ;
nothing can be more prejudicial to justice than
to publish proceedings of this description in the
course of an inquiry. The person must ba
ordered to attend here on Friday mornings al^
the sitting of the court* * '
*See .the farther proceedings upon this
subject on Friday April the 28lh at the cod*
chunon of the trial ot William Davidson, ani
Richard Tidd, iii/rii.
mmmtt
705i The whole Proceedings on the Trial of William Davidson
and Richard Tidd, for High Treason^ before the Court
holden under a Special Commission^ for the Trial of certain
Offences therein mentioned, on the 26th and 97th days of.
April : 1 Geo. IV. a. d. 1820.*
SESSIONS HOUS^ OLD BAILEY,
WfiDKsaPAYy ApaiL 26th| 1820.
jihe Hon* nf r* Soton Gorrow^
The Hon. Mr. Jtutke Beti.
The Common Seneantf
And others, his Majesty's Jnstibes, Sec
Mr. Borvfi Oorrom, — Gentlemen of the Jury,
it may peihaps have surprised you that^me
are sittmg and voa are in Court, J^tf^^
not have proceeaed to business. 'S^Court
are so anxious to show that we attendwith the
ffreatest solicitude to your cooTenience, thai I
dunk it proper to state, thai tiie pause is at the
solicitation of the learned counsel for the pri^
soner. I am sure that you will feel it proper,
that we should wait a few moments to give
eifect to diat solicitation.
Mr. CHnoomi.—- My lord, the prisoner
Davidson, has no objection to uniting in his
ekallenges with the prisoner Tidd, whose trial
the Attorney-general had proposed to take nezt«
Mr. BarDfi&amw^-*-4Cjentlemen,Ihavenow
to communicate that to you to which it would
have been improper to advert before. The
learned counsel for the prisoners (whose exer-
tions have been witnessed more than once)
have thought it necessaiy to communicate with
ihem, whnber it would be necessary to pursue
the course of severing their challen^pos, or
whether two of them would take their trial
\j the same jury. We have in effect gained
time by the pause, for he has communicated
to me, that the two next prisoners are content
not to sever their challenges, but to be tried
together.
* See the preceding trials of Thistlewood,
IpgSi an4.BnmU
[Richard Tldd and William Davidson wei^
set to the Bar.]
The Junr Panel was called over, commeiio*
ing with no. 145.
JBAoord ChtnUf ttonemaaon, diallenged t>y ilio
prisoner.
Jom Majfotf gentleman, challenged by thd
prisoner.
DaM Pom, esquire^ challenged by the pn»
soner. *
Bkhard IVc&er, dieesemonger, challenged by
the prisoner.
I%omai BeaclUm^ farmer, challenged by tha
prisoner.
Bobert Cedtjff rigger, duUenged by the pri-
soner.
TkomoM Tagg^ psaniy and coadb-mtter, chaU
lenaad by die Crown.
Jlin(<£no £ri(olber, vintner, excused onaocovnt
of iUness.
Honanwi WaUon^ gentleman, challenged by
the prisoner.
Ooorp Birroiof, silversmith challenged by the
pnsoner.
Eanard JEBk, gentleman and stock^broker,
cluillenged by the prisoner.
Bawmm Bfyti, organ-builder, challenged by
the prisoner.
miiiom Clmtf feether-dresaer, cfailleDgaa by
the prisoner.
Mm Jackmmf glast-cutter, diallenged bytiie
prisoner.
JiAn Beckj gentleman and seedsman,
lenged by the prisoner.
Felix Booih^ esquire and distiller, diallenged.
by the prisc^^.
Chatki Benham^ maiketrgardener, diallenged.
by the Cro!
Samvel LUi^jf^ baker^ excuaad on acoottn^
of illness.
ISSOl 1 GEORGB IV.
Trial ofWUiktm Davidson
[U4a
SVnmi iMiw, siltcninithy cHftHi^fegcd by th« tictilur rfeasom may oecuiMi in tAJwiioQ to a
Crown. partieolv individBAl, bat f cannot take it it
FhUtdi DotUl, esq.^chall^it^ by tke prisoner, granted that on a future trial yon migjituot be
WUikm Fercif^ olasterer, awom. ■ called upon to serve with a ready usent m
JMii Gtsrte Hounden^ fuse-cutter, swoni« ■ both sLdas^ therefore I cannot dispense lilb
ArckiMdEitcheyf stone-mason, cbaHengedby your attendance on this occauon; I wish I
the Crown.
John J^ifVy gentleman, sworn.
Ckarla ElUm Prttcott, esqnire, sworn.
StrApihH Rogfrfy ftimier, sworn.
Itkkatd Lapeodcy-e^wt andcow^keeper, diak
lenged by the prisoner.
George Fox, sawyer, challenged by the Crown.'
Wiliitom Acockf plumber, diallenged by the
Crown.
Edward Cudf carpenter, challenged by the
Crown.
Qeor^ Goidingy surveyor, sworn.
RoSert RoberU, oilman/ challenged by the
Crown.
William Bound^ fbtnder, dudlenged by (he
Crown*
Charla Pogty e^uire and merchant, sworn.
WiOiam &k, farmer, challenged by flia pri-
soner.
John Leukf watch-maker, challenged by the
Crown.
Edipord Flowefy Mquire and schoolmaster,
challenged by the prisoner.
JoAa BtLny gentleman and talloW'Cbandler,
challenged by the Crown.
John Taungy gentleman and scale-malter, sworn.
StMnrd Prkc. gentleman and currier, chaU
ranged by tne prisoner.
Jamu CarVy joiner, challenged by the prisoner.
WUliam Edgecombe, joif^er, ckafleng«d by (be
prisoner.
Kkhard Etnerr^ cooper, challenged by (Ire
Crown.
Sl^hth Gmad, bricklayer, challenge by tlie
Crown.
Thomm Btm/ntf mason,' challenged by the
Crown.
WUliam Butlety baker, sworn.
WUliam Benn^ farmer, challenged by ^e
Crown.
Jokn Bapety gentleman, challenged by the
CroWn.
fFiUiam Norton^ sawyer, challenged by fhc
prisoner.
William BloMtotiy gentleman, challenged by ^c
Crown.
ThomoM LaUr, bookseller, challenged by fhe
Crown.
Mr. Letter.—JAy lord, as this is the thhd
time that I have been challenged, *may I
teqatSi (o be dismissed.
Mr. Baron Garrow,'^! can onlv assure yCu,
iti the language of the lord chief baron, that
though the objection has obtained the name
cf challenging the juror, it ought not to be
considered as giving any offence to him. Par-
* He had been challenged in the previous
cascjr of Arthur ThiStlewood, aad John Thomas
Brunt.
could.
Mr. Attonuy'Genend.^'Then are sefcni
centtemen .sworn on the present jafj, who
have been challenged on one side or the otber,
dn preceding trials.
Mr. Baron ^omw.— From circnntflilicci
of a private nature I have not been able to
attena in the eariy part of die praoeediop
bere, but that whiji I stated as the remit d
prwrtkal ezperieiicft is eocenplified on tM
present occasion ; for gentlemen who hivt
Dten cbiilengei en fotmer trials, are sworn te
try the prisoners now at the bar : if tbey vm
out of any .supposed incapadty or party i»iB-
ciple, those objections would contiDiie; foN
ther information may induce those, protedioK
the interesiB of the public, or of theaocssed,
to do in other instances that ^hich they «^
pear to have done in several instances abea^*
Jooqdi Sheffield, esquire and ironmoDger,s#oiBi
Jo$q^ ifyieif bhddayer, challefiged b/ da
Crown.
Roberi Stephemon, anchorsmitb,diaIleiigadl9
the Crown.
Biehai^ Bbmi, gendeman, chadlengd by tti
prisoner.
Laac Grimit, baicer, chaRenged by the Crows.
WUUam Churddll, gentleotfatf and ^ine aer-
chant, swom.
Tkmai Wdkintohy femef, Chrflenged by fti
priSotMf.
Samvel Ekh, tobacconist, diiffleoged bf v
prisoner. ^
Edmimd ComngHdgef wafet-glfder, chalfcsiefl
by the Crown.
Wikak S^ore, ikrmer, ehaSeUkged by w
CSrotTn, _ ^
Jo$iah Bartholomew, vnttcMMker, didksF
by tbe prisonei^.
JohnJona, carpenter^ dnllenged by the Ci««2*
Tkemm Bristow, cosohmaker, cfaalleoged 17
the prisoner.
THE JURT.
William Per^, Charles Page,
John George Holmden, JohnYdong,
John King, WiUiam BaUer,
Charles Elton Prescott, Joseph Sheffield,
Benjamin RoKecs, Wilham ChuRhiU,
George Oolding. Samuel Gxaoger.
Mr. Sft<f/lf)H.— Oite- of the Juiynwc i« <^.
by the name of GoMtegj I am loM h& nttie
is Goldring.
Mr. CWiwod.— We have no objectioa to
him.
Mr. Otmey.— Nor the Oowa.
Mr. iStotoit^Tben I may proceed.
rieill a»td
Mr. Qitmtjf^-^Ytif.
The Jnnr were charged with the prisoner in
the usual form.
J. HE Indictment was opened by Mr. Bolland*
Daoidton. — Will yoar lordship be pleased
io grant OS a 9eat ?
Mr. Boron Oarrow, — ^Yes, certainly.
Mr. CfttrfMy.-«-Gentlemen of the Jury;«^It
is my doty to lay before you, Yery shortly, a
statement of the oircumstances which wiU be
adduced in OYidence on the part of the Crown»
in support of this indictment You will have
observed that the charge which is made by it
against the two prisoners now at the bar,
'William Davidson and Richard Tidd, is not
of any private natnre ; it does not impute to
them any acts affecting the interests of private
ipdividiials, but it accuses them of the highest
crima known to the law, of that which strikes
at the existence of the govemmenty and aims
at its entire subversion— to substitute, in its
place, some provisional government^ whose
pledges for good government were to be
slaughter and conflagration.
It will not be necessary for me to state to
you the indictment more particularly than that
in the first count it charges a compassing and
imagining (that is im intent) to depose the king,
and in another a compassing to levy vrar
r' ist the king, in order to compel him to
ge his measures. The evidence which we
shall la^ before yovi will most completely
substantiate both of those changes.
, The law has vrisely made the intention to
commit these crimes high treason, so as that
intention be manilested by overt Tor open)
acts ; the acts done in furtherance or thi^ in*
tention are charged in the indictment, and will
be proved by the witnesses.
. The indictment comprehends several per-
sons, Arthur Thistlewood, James Ings, and
John nomas Brunt (whose trials have taken
place), the two prisoners at the bar, Davidson
and Tidd, upon whose &te vou are to pro-
nounce (and six other persons) of the names of
Wilson, Harrison, Braabum, Strange, Gilchrist
and Cooper, all of whom, and many others
irill necessarily be introduced to you in the
course of this inquiry.
. Of these persons the first, named Arthur
Thistlewood, was undoubtedly the leader; he
bftd sustained the rank of a gentleman ; and it
is a striking feature in this case, that a person
ia that -rank should be found associated as he
1ms been vrith the other persons named in th«
indictment, most, if not all, of whom are
working mechanics.
When this plan wba first conceived, it may
iiot be in our power to demonstrate; ^yt you
win find, that so iar back as the month of
January, it had arrived at considerabla
i»aturity; that the plan (which was afterwards
ag^tad upon) had then, been formed- to assas-
sinate nil majssty's ministers at a cabinet
TUdJbr H/gA Treason, 4LI B< 109&*
fl84«
dinner; and it was thenboped, whan all the
persons intrusted hy his majesty with the
direction of public a&irs should have been cut
off at one blow, that by following that up by
conflagrations in different parts of the metro*
polis,andby armed men acting in various direct
tions, the reins of government might be seized
by these conspirators and the government
itself overthrown.
To perfect this plan, and enlist into its
execution as many persons as possible, meet-
ings were held in various places : we shall pot
have occasion to follow those meetings into
different parts of the town but we shall confine
our evideuce principsliy to meetings which
took place first in a bade room at a public-
house called the White Hart, and wera
afterwards removed, for greater security, to
a two-pair of stairs back room in a honse,
in which .the prisoner Brunt (who has beea
tried) actually, lodged in^ Fox^-court, Gray's-^
inn-lane. It was contrived, that Ings should
take the lodging ; that he should profess aa
intention to bring his furniture in; but na
furniture was ever brought in : the key of the
room was kept by Brunt ; . and in this room,
sometimes once May and sometimes twice a*
day, the n^eetings of these conspirators wrere
held, for the purpose of maturing the pla^ that
had been conceived, and of devising all the
means of its execution.
The death of his late majesty (which took
place on the 29th of January) for some time
disconcerted their plan of operations. Until
after his late majesty's funeral, of coiirse
cabinet dinners were suspended ; the conspi-
rators became impatient of the delay which
occurred, and that impatience gave birth to
other projects for carrying the same object into
effect. At one time it was proposed to divide
their force into several parties, to attack the
ministers separately at their respective houses;
and it was thought that by this means, though
it was not likely all should take effect, they
might be able to take off four or five whom
^ey particularly marked for destruction ; at
another time, another project was entertained,
to break out on the night of his late ma-
jestjr's funeral, at which time the cabinet
ministers would necessarily be. at Windsor,
and the guards wonUl be at Windsor ; when,
therefore, there would be neither Iba head
to direct, nor the arm to execute the resistance,
to the measures which they projected ; and it
was thought, in the absence of all those means
of resistance, they might cany their plan into
execution. Tbis, however, was on consideration
abandoned, and they looked forward with
eagerness to the next cabinet dinner that
should take plaoe, which by bringing all his
majesty's ministers into, one house^ and into
one rootn, would give them the means^ at
om blow of efibcting their destruction.
These cabinet dinners take place daring the
sitting of Parliaiaeai; at the houses of the mam-
bert W'tbe cabiifcet altemal«ly,usually I believe,
00 a Wednesday ; h\fi though no notice had
134^3 1 Gfidttoe It.
Trid tf H^^iam Damdioinmd
[1344
hwa giTCOr of any dinner, they wtte'oeitainlr
locAung forward to that Wednesday to which
yon will particulaiiy direct yoar attention (the
i3rd of r ebruary) for the accomplishment of
their pupoie; and, as the time drew near,
every exertion was made to complete their
preparations ; pikes were provided and pike-
handles, coapoa^ of rough sticks cut from
trees seven or eight feet long, fermled at
the end, with holes bored for the admission of
pike-heads ; pike-heads were procured, some
old bayonets, others old files filed to a point
to operate as a bayonet or pike4ieul ; pistols,
blunderbusses, swords, hand-grenades and
fire-balls. Ine hand-grenades which were
constructed were not such as are made by
military men, but, for the purposes of destruc-
tion, perhaps scarcely leas eflective ; about
three ounces and a half of gunpowder put into
a tin case or chamber rather smaller than this,
which I hold in my hand [koldrng 9^ to the
jury an tnfc-iteiMt), a tin fuse braud into it,
containing a powder prepared for priming,
which communicated with the gunpowder in
the tin case or chamber, then stewing or cloth
cemented round the tin case; a number of
nails or other pieces of iron inserted round that;
then more oloth cemented; and the whole
bound round very tight by tarred string, so
as clo^Iy and completely to pompress it ; and,
as you, very well know, it requires no
military skill to be aware that if fire be com-
municated to the fuse, and so to the powder
in the chamber, that would explode, and those
pieces of iron would be scattered round like
io many ballots. The greatest destruction
would be thereby effected. It was proposed
that these hand-grenades should be one means
of the destruction of his majesty's ministers, by
being tlirown into the room where they were
assembled ; but ouiny more were constructed
than were requisite or could be used for that
purpose, these were intended to effect the
otlker and ulterior objects of their guilty plan.
Besides these, there were fire-balk, com-
posed of pitch, tar, oakum, brimstone, and
resin, which had been all made up into balls
to be set on fire ; these thrown into the windows
of buildings would infallibly set those build-
ings on fire ; a ootiaiderable number of these
were provided. Besides these there vras a
large number of cartridges for muskets and
pMtob, and not a few cartridges for cannon.
Many of these instruments vrere prepared at'
Fox-oourtt many in other places, and the prin-
cipal d^t for them was in the house of the'
prisoner Tidd ; and you will find, that though
Arthur Thistlewood was looked up to by these
conspiraton as their leader, the two prisoners,
Tidd and Davidson/ were not inconsiderable
or inactive coadjutois,' that they entered into
the oonspiraey heartUy and zealously, that they
forwarded it to die utmost of their pow«r, and'
that they were amongst the most eager for its
oomplete and perfect execution.
On the Sunday preceding the Wednesday
which I have mtmioned, these contpiTators
held a larger meeting than -usaol tb' eooeeit
their measures : they met again on ihe Mood^;
they met again on the Tuesday, <m irhidi
morning they received intelligeDce thit i
newspaper announced a cabinet dioner for the
next day at the earl of Harrowby's, in Gro-
venor-square. The news was at first doobted ;
but the newspaper being sent for, it wu foood
correct. Thu excited Uie greatest degree of
exultation, expressed by some in the mostn-
vage and fefocious terms, by another in lerss
of shocking impiety ; but it was receired liyaD
as gopd news that now all their enemies were
to be brought together within one room, fl
within the means of destruction ; and tbejr
lost no time in proceeding to consider and ts
develope all the means by which they ahotdd
effect their guilty purpose. Thistlewood de-
tailed those means to tne meeting in amaoner
which showed that they had been all well coo-
atdered; the detail was received with l^
quiescence and approbation, and a detemiBir
tion that the plan should be carried ipto exe*
cution. The course of proceeding whidiThiS'
Uewood proposed was this: That theyM^
proceed in a body to the house of the eiri of
Harrowby ; that Thistlewood should kaod^at
the door, and offer to the porter a letter; tha
the body should instantly rash into the hoese;
that two, armed with swords pistols and haod-
grenades, should guard the staircase wbidikd
to the upper part of &e house ; that twoetoy
similarly armed, should guard the sUukmJ
leading to the lower part of the house ;oid
that two others, with the same i^eapoos, sImdM
be left to guard the area; and that tbenfoff-
teen shoidd enter the noble earrs diniog-W
armed with swords, pistols and hand«greMdqf
and should massacre every one they n<n^
there. They were then to go to <^^^^
where other parties were to act— for J*^
parties were to be assembled in different pan*
of London ; one to set fire to the l^^^^jf
King-street, by throwing one of those firej"
into the hay4oft, which had a window lootaOT
into a mews ; others to proceed to Gray s-o»-
lane, to seize two pieces of artilleiy thatwj
there; others to proceed to theArtJileyP^
to seize four pieces of aitiUeiy wWdi «»
there ; to marA from thence to the »**^
house, to plant the cannon so as to hatterwyP
case those within should refuse to saiRDiterf
to take possesaion of the Mansion-hdffl^w
establish therein a provisional j[Wbb»«»»
then to take the Bank, and to,giv« ^^^^
pillage. '*
This most atrocious plan, as I ^>™^ Jf^
was approved of, and they all 'W<^^JS
upon It; and every degree of necessaiyacnw
seemed to be infused into eveiy mind, |^
ready for the perpetration of the cnme. w
parted, to enable IbisUewood t^ ^^^jZ
to visit some meetings hi another ptrt<*
town (one known by the name of the surj^
bone Union) and it was settled ^^
meet there the next day. The »«* "i3«.
did meet there ; all things sstfaid ^'
13451
Richard TUd/or High TreatM.
A. D. 1820.
C1346
Thistle wood was pleased to find them so for-
ward in their preparations ; the pistols were
flinted, pikes were got ready, sent off to their
associates in other parts of the town, and the
men who were tliere armed and accoutred
themselves^ and in different parties proceeded
from Fox-court. It had been thought that that
room was not a fit place of rendezvous from
which to issue forth to the accomplishment of
their purpose in Grosvenor-square, and another
place had been selected and engaged by
them, which seems to have been admirably
adapted for their purpose : it was so on ac-
count of its proximity to Grosvenor^uare ; it
was so also on account of the obscurity of its
situation, which was not likely to attract public
observation : it was a stable and cart-house
with a loft and two rooms over them, in a very
obscure street called Cato-street, one end of
which comes into John-street, in the Edgware-
load, but enters only by a gateway, which
looks like the gateway of the yard of a public-
house ; the other end is almost equally obscure.
Just as you enter this street from John-street,
and turn to the right, you will come to the
stable in question. This had been vacant for
some time, and it was taken for this purpose.
Some of the conspirators began to assemble
early in the afternoon ; weapons were carried
there in the course of the afternoon, and then,
for the purpose of excluding observation, a
cloth was nailed against the window, in oider
that those who lived opposite might not see
what should pass therem. They were within
a little more than ten minutes walk of Gros-
venor-square; they would have to go down the
£dgware-road and Park-lane, and would ar-
rive there almost immediately; and it was
thought (and certainly not without reason) that
they had chosen a convenient nlace of rendez-
vous, and that they were not likely to be dis-
covered.
In this lofl and io this stable there were
assembled, in the course of the evening, all
the persons named in this indictment, and as
many more as amounted to about five-and-
twenty, all armed for the purpose. To guard
against surprise, they placed sentries in the
stable ; one of those sentries was the prisoner
Davidson ; he was armed with a sword and a
carbine. At first some little apprehension was
betrayed that their force was insufficient, and
aome alarm was excited on account of the non-
attendance of the prisoner Tidd, who was looked
up to as a person of importance in the execu-
tion of the plan. Their alarm was however
removed by the appearance of Tidd. The
time approached for the accomplishment of
their purpose* and Thistlewood had just called
Out/the fourteen who were to eater the diaing-
Toom at the earl of Harrowby's, when they
were surprised by the officers of Bow-street,
followed by a party of the guards, who had
been ordered to alteod them. When the
officers entered tlie stable^ they firand Davidson
and IngS) the two sentries. The officers who
were foremost, leaving them tQ be secured by
VOL. XXXIIL
their followers, ascended by a ladder into the
loft, and they found there above twenty per-
sons, with that magazine of arms which will be
exhibited to you. They announced that they
were officers, and called upon them to sur-
render ; instead of surrendering, the persons
there, conscious of the nefarious purpose for
which they were assembled, desperate from the
knowledge that they had forfeited their lives
by what they had already done, made a most
determined resistance, and Thistlewood their
leader stabbed one of the officers, Skailbers,
who fell on the floor a lifeless coipsel The
lights were extinguished ; the cry was ^lo kill
the officers ;*' in the confusion the officers were
pushed down the ladder ; they were followed
by several of the persons there, some of whom
entirely escaped, but those who are included
in this indictment (with the exception of This-*
tie wood and Brunt) were taken. These des-
perate men were not content with taking the
life of Smithers, but Thistlewood fired at ano-
ther officer and made a cut at him with his
sword. The prisoner Davidson was pursued ;
he resisted ; with his sword he cut at one, and
he fired his carbine at another. Ings, another
of the prisoners who has been tried, fired at ano-
ther officer, and expressed a savage regret that he
had not killed him. The prisoner Tidd resisted
to the utmost of his power ; he fired a pistol
at lieutenant Fitzclaience, and was taken only
by the superior force of those with whom he
was in conflict.
I have before stated that Thistlewood es-
caped ; he was apprehended the next morning,
not at his own residence, but at another part
of the town, where he had taken refuge.
Brunt also escaped; he was taken the next
morning. The other prisoners were appre-
hended either in the loft in the stable, or in
escaping from the stable In. that left were
found guns, bayonets, pikes, hand-grenades,
fire-balls and cartridges. This was the maga^
zine intended for that party which was to
execute the first and most important part of
their guilty project — the assassination of his
majesty's ministers.
Gentlemen, this is the conspiracy which is
charged upon the prisoners, — this is the high
treason waich is imputed to them by this
indictment. It will be proved to you by evi-
dence which you cannot dpubt.
To give you those details which can be
given by no other persons, it will be necessary
to call before you accomplices in their crime.
Traitorous conspirators do not sound a trum-
pet in the market-place to invite honest men to
their coundls ; they adroit none to their coun-
cils but those who partake in their guilty plans.
For what passed, therefore, in their private
councils, we must resort to the evidence of
accomplices. A great and signal benefit t<»
the community arises from that circumstance,
in the prevention of very many crimes ; it sows
the seeds of distrust among men who meditate
those crimes which cannot be committed by a
single hand, but require the cooperation of
4R-
1347] 1 GEORGE IV.
numbers; each man feels and fears that he
who shares his councils may at some luture day
be a witness to brin^ him to justice. This
consideration deters many from the commission
of offences ; but if accomplices could not be
received as witnesses in a coutI of justice,
offenders would be emboldened by the cei^
tainty that the arm of justice would be too
short to reach and too weak to punish them.
We do not however on the part of the Crown
present to you accomplices as witnesses who
are to be received without jealousy and caution.
They who acknowledge that they participated
in the crime which is charged upon the pti-
sonersy are not to be received on the same
footing with honest and loyal men of untainted
character. You will look at their evidence ;
you will watch their demeanour; you will
observe whether, in the relation of their story,
they present means of contradiction^ because,
if men are fabricating a story, they will take
care to give no means of contradiction— thev
will lay the scene as between themselves and
the persons accused alone, and thus deprive
Ibe accused of the means of defence which
might arise from the contradiction of their
evidence. But, above all, you will look to the
confirmation which they shall receive from
ether sources. — Confirmation as to what took
place in their consultation-rooms it is abso-
lutely impossible they should receive, for none
but accomplices can know what passes there ;
but if you find that in every instance in which
they can, it will be impossible for you to doubt
that they are speaking truth in tiiose parts in
which they do not receive confirmation, only
because in the nature of things they cannot
leceive it.
The confirmation of the accomplices that
will be given to you by the witnesses which
we shall call, will be the most complete and
the most perfect that, in a long experience in
the profession, I remember ever to nave heard.
The principal accomplice, Adams, will be
confirmed as to the meetings in Fox-court, hj
the apprentice of Brunt, who lived with his
master, who saw those meetings, who saw the
persons who attended there, who saw them
go out on Wednesday the 23rd, who saw his
master return in a dirty condition which
showed h^ had been engaged in some con*
ilict, who heard him divulge to his wife that it
was ^* all up,** that the officers had come in
npon them, and that he had escaped only
with his life.
The accomplice will receive confirmation
in another point, which I omitted iik the course
of my relation to state to you ; for on the last
day on which they were assembled, it was
considered that some proclamations would be
necessary to be issued to the multitude during
their operations in the night; it was suggested,
that cartridge paper would be convenient paper
ler the purpose. Brunt sent his apprentice to
purchase six sheets of cartridge paper; on
them Thistlewood wrote his proclamations in
these words, << Your tyrants are destroyed.
ofWimmIkfM$mkma'
\ym
The friends of liberty are dcsiied to cone
forward, as the provisional govermaent is mv
sitling.y It will be proved to yea hy tbe a^
prentice,-i-not that the proclamation was viit-
ten, not that it was read, for he was net inibe
room,-— but that he was sent for the papa,
that he purchased the paper, that be gave it t»
his master Brunt, and HbsX Brant carried it
into the room in which Thislkwood andtiir
other persons were assembled.
Another confirmation occum from thiscir*^
Constance ; some alarm bad been excited, Am
an incident that was coma^unicated to tlwiB,
that their meetings were suspected by pyvcn-
ment, and that information had reacbed tiis
office of lord SidnMuth, who you loiow is
secretary of state for the hone depsrtaent;
and it was resolved, therefore^ that KDtiiei
should be phiced in Orosvenor«squatt,toiildi
the house of lord Harrowby, to see ^etkr
police officers or soldiers were introdncediBle
It ; concluding, that if that were not the oify
they might proceed safoly, because they night
suppose that no information wbaterer m>
been given. Sentries were apeordiogly pheed p
the prisoner Davidson was sentry on tb<9TB»>
day-evening, from six o'clock till nine; va
we will prove to you by the watchmaa, tbatbe
was there sauntering abouU Brant aad Adaitf
went from nine till twelve ; daring a part v
the time they went to take refresbnent ins
public-house ; and we will call a peisos vb»
saw them there, and who played at domiw*
for some time with Brunt in that pabk-bonff.
These are important confimatioDSof tbea^
count which will be given you by the aceon-
plice.
Another and very important confinntios
arises from disclosures made to a person of tK
name of Hiden ; he was solicited to take a part
in this guilty plan ; it wa» divulged to ta»
very distinctly by one of the prisonen; ^
appeared to listen to il, for he ^^^J^.
posed that the pereen who was so coofided i^
and who should at once rqect it, *^""Jv*
very safe; indeed, he was given eotousd*
stand, but he showed that it was»othi«»-
tention to parUke in it, \ff iiwwdtt«»r
writing a letter to lord Castleresgb, to «»«-
municate it to him, by endeavooring toj^
access to lord Castlmagh— not getlipg«tfj
to him, by going to the house of l«rf ^^
by— by following him to the park, viApm
to him the letter, and aflerwanis \^T
pointment with lord Harrowby, ^^•''Xx j!
the next morning (Wednesday the W»
Hyde-park, and making fonber «in»8«2J
tions to him. This, gentlemen, i« «>!"P^
confirmation, for the plan in it* "^^
given to him, and as the tiaae ^W^J^^
nearer (namely, on the afternoon of ^eo^
day) he saw some of the c<>d*P****^5Ld'
spot, and among them the pn«^°*''. . ?^'
and the Ume was appointed for ^rJ^
those who were then assembled in wfJ'Li
Further confirmation arises fr<>"***JlJJIiI
of the badt room in Foxrceart, the aeS"*^
isml
^SkAarS TUtifat High THa»n.
A. D. 1690.
[1359
Itagy wben Bnint was apptehended, whin thftre
were found a pike-staff, gunpowder^ gunpow-
der in flannel bags as cartridges for cannon,
bandvgretiades^ and fire balls^ whi^h Brant ^as
packing up for the purpose of sending to the
■oosc of another oi his associates, where he
thought they might be deposited with more
iafety than in his o#n«'
Further confirmation arises from the search
on that same morning in the house of the pri-
soner Tidd, where were found more hand-
grenades, more fire-balls, a number of pike-
staves, ft quantity of gunpowder, many of
those cartridges for cannon, and an immense
number of musket-cartridges made up in par-
cels of fives. This lodging of Xidd's I stated
to you had been used as the d^pot, wherb
their ammunition was placed.— -The finding
this quantity there, is considerable confirmation
of the eviden<fe of the accomplice.
. Bvt if all these confirmations were blotted
out, if no one of them eiisted, it appears to
ape that Cato-street itself is confirmation above
all confirmations ; that alone proVes that the
accomplices are speaking truth. There are
found assembled in a hay-loft, a man in the
rank of a gentlemani with five-and-twenty
mechanics, with this vast store of arms for
different purposes ; when they are found they
make that desperatie resistance which is toever
made but by persons who know that when
they are taken their lives are forfeited to the
law; the finding them assembled there, the
magazine of arms with which they were pro*
i^ided, and their conduct when> surprised, all
combine to demonstrate their purpose ; and if
any thing more were necessajy, the prisoner
Davidson, when he was taken^ exclaimed
^damn him who will not die in liberty's
tsause/' Thus do assassins and traitors pro^
lane the name of liberty. It has been tneir
cant in all timesi These mei) have conspired
fo destroy the government under which we
live, and to substitute a government of their
own. To deprive as of the rights and the
laws whieh we inherit from oor' ancestors, and
to give us in exchange their own rule and
dominion, eommencing in ahd to be eemented
by the most atrocious Crimes.
In answer to this case, What defence is to
be made ? It will be said, perhaps, ^ true it
is there was a plot to assassinate his majesty's
ministers, but the assassination of his majest/s
ministers is not of itself high treason." Un-
doubtedly it is not ; the assassination of all the
Privy councU, aye and all the members of both
Houses of Parliament, singly and individually,
apd with no other object (if such a thing were
possible), is not of itself high treason ; but for
tfhatbuta treasonable purpose could such a
•bhicfc and guihy design enter into the heart
-ev«n of the most depmved and abandoned of
'lAankind ? These miserable men had never
come in contact with :his majesty's ministers,
so as to harbour private malice or private re-
venge against them ; they had no hatred or
4Mtice against- lord iiarrowhyf it wa^ against
the president of the council ; none against the
earl of Liverpool, it was against the first lord
of the Treasury ; none against the hero of fifty
victories, but the master general of the Ord-
nance. The private characters of the ministers
are above all reproach ; their personal virtues
have secured them the esteem not less of those
who politically differ from them, than of those
who are their professed friends and supporters.
To say that ministers have not given satisfac^
tion to all, is to say that they are but men, and
that we are but men. Whatever political dif<4
ferences exist^ no man can doubt but that they
must wish to identify themselves with the
greatness and the glory of their country. They
have condneted the affairs of the state iti
arduous and critical times. If, afler the ex-
haustion of a long and expensive war, the
people are now suffering some of its conse-
quences, let it be recollected that the country
stands 6n a proud and eommanding eminence^
and that it has acquired and maintained a cha^
racter not Unworthy of its ancient renown.
Political differences among Englishmen have
never led to a crime so black and atrocious ai
assassination; and for nOne other than the
treasonable purpose imputed could these mem
have ever entertained such a design. That
assassination was to be the commencement of
those operations which they vainly hoped
would end in the substitution of themselves in
the plaOes of those whom they were to assassi-
nate, and in the establishment of that pro-
visional government which could be establish-
ed only by the deposition of the king.
It may next be said that the project was
weak, that their means were totally inadequate
to their end, that their numbers were unequal
to the accomplishment of their purpose.
There never yet stood at the bar of this or any
other tribunal men accused of a treasonable
conspiracy of whom that observation might not
be made, and of most of them t^ith infinitely
more truth than in the present case. History
is foil of weak plans, of ill-contrived plots and
abortive conspiracies: but are we on that ac-
count to reject all history? Nay, our own
times have furnished us with instances of con-
spiracies more weak, with means more inade-
quate, conceived by men of higher intellect
and for better means of information. Colonel
Despard was an officer of great military skill
and experienee ;^bb plan, compared with the
plan of these conspirators, was weal^ and
iwerile.
In the cool consideration of detjiQ)^ and
defeated projects we are apt to reject that as
impracticable and visionary which political
enthusiasts have contemplated as easy of ex-
ecution. These guilty men — ^founding their
hopes on the existence of popular discontent
(which discontent had been excited and' fo-
mented for some months before by speeches
and writings of the most flagitious charactei)
which they supposed to have spread further
and wider than it had, heating each othei^s
miuds by seditious and treasonable discourse,
13511
J GEORGE IV.
Trid of WUIimn DoMitm and
[1353
till they persuaded theraseWes that all men
thought and felt as they did, that they wished
for a change, and were ready to enlist under
their standanl,— imagined that if they could
but strike some gr^^ ^^^ frightful blow, if
they could but destroy those who were in*
trusted with the suprenne administration of
affain, and introduce confusio^, and inspire
terror into the metropolis by means of con«
flagrations, that they could then carry on their
further operations by the armed men whom
they had provided, and that they mi^t count
on such an increase of force from malcontents
as might enable them to subvert tliat govem-
ment which was the object of their hatred. Al-
though the design was impracticable, I admit,
with respect to ultimate success, yet as to tem-
porary suspension of the functions of govern-
ment, and temporary confusion and anarchy,
I am afraid that, however the design is to ^
branded as wicked and atrocious, it does not
be&r the character of weakness and of folly.
This is the case which we shaU lay before
you ; you will hear and you will attend to the
evidence according to which you are sworn to
decide, and you will follow that evidence im-
plicitly, whether it lead to a verdict of convio*
tion or of acquittal,
Mr. Boron Oorroto.— Is it wished that the
other prisoners should be put to the bar.
Mr. Attorney General. — ^If your lordship
pleases.
Mr. Baron (Torroio.— Perhaps I ought to
address myself to the counsel for the prisoners
as well as the counsel for the Crown. It is
merely to enable the witnesses to speak to
their identity; but if it is understood that
when they speak of A. they are speaking
of the prisoner A, and that when they speak
of B. they are speaking of the prisoner B, it
may not be necessary.
Mr. Adolpfms. — I have no wish at all, my
lord, upon the subject.
Mr. Baron Garrow. — ^It is better, perhaps,
that they should come, to prevent any mistake
of their persons ; it is for the prisoners' benefit
that they should be there certainly when they
are spoken of.
Jamet Wiiliam Wlieon, John HarrUon,
Bichard Bradhumy John Shaw Strange,
James GiUMet^ and Charlee Cooper were
jbioed at the bar behind the priionert on
EVIDENCE FOR THE CROWV.
JHobert Adamt sworn. — Examined by
Mr^ SolicUor General,
What are you by trade ?— A shoemaker.
Where did you live before you were in con-
finement ?— No. 4, Holfr-in^the-wall passaffe.
BrookVmarket ^^^
You are now come up in custody ?— Yes.
Ware yon ever in the army J—Yes,
In what regiment F — The royal re^ment of
Hoffse-guards.
The Blues?— Yes.
When did you leave the aimyP^Aboit
eighteen years ago.
Do you know the prisoner, John Tbonu
Brunt ?— Yes.
Where did you first become acquisted
with him ?— 'At Cambray, in France.
How long is that ago? — ^In 1816.
Was the English army at that time at
Cambray P— Yes, the head-quarters were.
What were you doing at that time at Cam-
bray ? — Following my trade.
With the army ?— Yes.
Do you remember seeing Bront carij ia
the present year at his lodgings ?— Yes.
Where were his lodgings P— In Fox*ooiirt|
Gray's-inn-lane.
What was Brunt by trade ?— A boot-ekiser.
Did he make any proposal ahoatintrododDg
you to Thistlewood f — ^Yes.
Did you, in consequence of that, accompesy
him to Thistlewood's lodgings?— I did.
When was that as neany as you can tvA»
lect P-— The 12th of January, a Wednesday.
Did you go aioDe with him, or was thoe
any other person in company ?— Bnmt aad
Inn.
Tellus what passed at Thistlewood's k^dfiags
when you went with Brant and lD2S?-0a
Brunt introducing me to Thistlewood, Bnol
said to Tbistlewood « this was the bwJ
was speaking to you about." Tliistlevood
said,) ••you were in the life-guaids ?" I|«J
him « No, I belonged formerly to the (Wj
blues ;" he says, " I presume you arc a g«oj
soldier ?'' and after that, that he soppoaed m
I was a good swordsman ; I told him I oo^
was, and that I could use the sword oovu it
were required to defend myself, but it ««* *
long time since I had used a sword or anas oi
any description ; he turned- the disconiie opj*
thedifferentshopkeeper8ofIxmdoDparttatia|7i
sajrine they were a set of aristocxats altogtlMry
and that they were all woiking under one s^
tem of government, and he should g^ J'J'J!
the day that the shops were shut up, and «<»
plundered ; he turned his discourse apoB v*
Hunt, saying Mr. Hunt was a cowaid, «n ao
friend to the people ; that he had do dm
could he get into Whitehall, and oterlook w
books, he should find his name ^^^.*Z
to the government ; he next t'>™*^^""'i2r
course upon Mr. Cobbett, that Mr. CobW
with all his writings, he did not c^^
as any friend to the people, and be bad w
doubt upon his mind that Cobbett was a«w
equally the same. ,r^
Did any thing further pass at that neemj
that you lecoUect ?--Mr. Bront •Wo^J? JJV:
men that he had to call upon in C^^
market; and asked Mr. A»dewoodJiJ
would walk with him ; ThisUewood i^
this, saying he had somewhere to ctU|JJ"7
we left the room, Brunt told 'H^WewoaJ'^
spectiog of a bltinderbttss that was
tobei*^
1363]
m^ard Tiddfor High TreoMn.
A.D. 1890.
[1354
for, and asked fahn if he would be Ihere;
Thittlewood, to the best of my xeeollectioDy
told him that he would.
Did you then leave Thistlewood } — On this,
I believe we left ; I do not recollect any thing
else at that time.
On going from Brunt's to Thistlewood*s, or
at any otto time had Brunt stated any thing
to you as to any plan they had in agitation I
— ^A plan was stated to me previously to our
getting to Thistlewood's.
What did he state to you? — ^He told me
there was a plan that was drawn up by two or
three, and he had no doubt, if I would consent
to join them, it would meet my approbation.
Did he tell you what this plan was ? — ^This
plan was to assassinate the romisten, the first
time they met toother to dine.
That was belore you arrived at ThisUe-
'wood's?— Yes, it was ; he likewise told me at
this time, ^* besides," says he, **we have got
information where the thieves keep their money,
to the amount of upwards of three million ul
in hard specie ; after we have done this we in-
tend to go to that place and plunder it.*'
Did he say where the place was ? — ^Not at
that time.
Some time after this, were you in confine-
ment for debt ? — ^I was*
In the Whitecross-street prison ? — ^Yes.
When did you come out of prison? — ^The
^ayafter the death of our late king.
That was the 30th of January, the Sunday ?
— ^Yes.
After you had come out of prison, did you
Sto any meeting in Fox-court? — On the
onday evening I called.
You have told us that Brunt lived in Fox-
court? — ^Hedid.
Was that room in the same house in which
Brunt lived ? — On the same floor.
Brunt lived in the two-pair of stairs front
toom P — ^Yes.
Ihis meeting was in the back room f — Yes.
Did you learn from Brunt who hired that
room ? — I beard him say he had hired it of the
landlady for Ings.
Was there any furniture in that room f —
Only a stove fixed.
Did meetings continue to be held in that
room up to the 23rd of February ? — ^They were
held twice a day, except that there was none
on Sunday evenings.
What peisons usually attended those roeeU
iogsr— Thistlewood, Brunt, Ings, Hall, David-
son, Harrison, Wibon, Bradbuniy Tidd oc-
casionally.
Any more that you remember? — ^Edwards.
Do you remember the names of any more,
at this moment P — ^Not at this moment.
You tell us you came out of prison on the
30th of January ; that, on Monday evening,
the day afterwards, you attended one of those
meetings ? — Yes.
Can you tell us any thing particular that
fMssed at those meetings P— ^Kot on ^ Mon-
^ynis^t
Do you recollect any time when Harrison
was there ? — A Wednesday night.
When you went to the room, whom did yon
find there?— I saw Thistlewood, Harrison, and
in the course of the evening Ings was there,-
and Wilson, and Edwards.
Tell us what passed when you went in ?-*
When I went in, Thistlewood and Harrison
seemed in deep discourse, respecting some
conversation they had heard ; inmrmation they
had gained of the life-guards and foot-guards
being to leave London to attend the funeral of
the late king. Harrison was told bv a life»
guardsman, that every man in the li»-guards
that could be mounted and could be spared,
was to attend the funeral of the late king, as
well as the fbot>gnards, and likewise the police
officers ; after he had left the life-guardsman,
he said it came to his mind that it would be
an excellent opportunity to kick up a row in
London that nisht. Mi. Thistlewood agreed
to the plan ; and proposed that it should be
done Of collecting what' men they had among
themselves together, and to take the cannon in
Gray's-inn<lane, as well as the cantmn in the
Artillery-ground, and likewise for the fire-balls
to be made use of to set fire to the different
buildings ; thinking it would be an excellent
opportunity, as the soldiers and what police
officere could be spared would be out of Lon«
don, that there would not be sufficient strength
left in London to protect it
What further passed ? — ^Thistlewood said, it
would be necessary to send a party up to Hyde
Park comer, in oider to prevent any orderly
leaving London for Windsor to communicate
what was passing in London.
Any thing further?— He likewise proposed,
that the telegraph over the water should be
taken, in order to prevent it communicating
any intelligence to Woolwich.
Did this plan meet with the assent of those
persons who were at that time assembled P— >
it met with the assent of those persons then in
the room.
After that, did Brunt and any other person
come into the room ?— Brunt and Ings at this
time.
When Brunt and Ings came into the room,
was this plan which had been in agitation
communicated to them? — ^It was communis
cated to them by Thistlewood.
On its being communicated to them by
Thistlewood, what passed ?— Brunt and Ings
boUi declared there was nothing short of the
assassination of the ministers which they had
in view, that could satisfy them.
In consequence of this, was that project
which had hieenso mentioned given up? — ^It
Do you recollect a meeting which took
place on Saturday the 19tli of February P-«
les.
Who was at that meeting P — There were
Thistlewood, Harrison, Brunt, Ings and HalK
What passed at that meeting? — On my
going into the nHnB, they seemed to be in A
tS44T 1 GEOBGEIV.'
st»dfhdtmw6 thetttelrcB; they^ot up, tttad
Thistlewood said, '* weH, it is agreed <», thai
if DOttnng happeos between Ma and next
^•daaaday night, on Wednesday night to go
10 work."
Did anything further pais at thait laeeting I
«— Yea$ Thistlewood giaro inscnictioiif to
Bniat«
Did he SMign any reaaon why they orast
go to work the next Wednesday night I-^Hm
leaeon he assigned was^ that Chey were all so
poor they could wait no longer ; he gave in-
stnictioBS to Bnin«, and thoae in theroomi
that there sheoU be a meeting sit the next
■lomiDg at nine o'clock, to draw vp a plan to
iettle how ihey shonld act.
Did they separate after that r----Yeiy at least
th^weotaway.
Did a meeting take place en the nest mom*
ing T**-Yes.
Was that meeting larger than ainal? — It
was.
Were the prisoners at the bar among the
party who met that morning?— •Yes.
Both of them f^Yea.
Tell as what passed on Stooday monUng,
the 30th of Febitiaty ; what tiaw did yon get
there f — sTost before eleven oVlock ; Thistle-
wood said) on looking round, ''there are
twelve of us, it is time to proceed to businen ;''
he proposed Tidd to take the chair. Tidd
tflJces the chair with h pike in lAs Iwnd ; and
be began by Mating, that <'we," he said,
^ hate come to a determination, that if no*
thing transpires between this and next Wednes*
day night, we intend to go to work, for we have
been waiting so lone expecting the ministers
to dine together ^ nnding they do not, we
intend if nothing happens, that they do dine
together between this and that, to take them
separately." On this, he began to propose his
plan, saymg, he intended to take the two pieces
of cannon in Gfay's-inn-lane, the six camion
in the Artillery-ground, and for Mr. PaUn to
take upon himself to set fire to the different
bnildinn.
Was ralin to do that alone, or how? — ^He
was to have assistance from men that he had
4*oUected himself. Mr. Thistlewood said, this
was an outline of the plan at present ; and as
Mr. Brunt had got a plan to propose respect-
ing the assassination, ne should drop it for the
present, and leave it to Mr. Bmnt to speak.
Upon this what took place? — Upon this
Prunt came forwards to explain his plan;
Thistlewood stopped him, saying "let my
plan first be put trom the chair 3 if any one in
the room hks any thing to say upon it let him
epeak.**
Was it put from the chair?— Yes; and
agreed to by all present.
The prisoner^ Tidd, being in the chair? —
Yes.
After this was put from the chair and agreed
io, what took place ? did Brant come forward ?
•-Brunt came forward; and spoke to this
•ffect I Broat said, as we oaaoot get the mi-
9f It^iOmm Damis&M md
[US0
nisten all together, afa if was tnoptedtotile
them separate,^ I propose to yon tbect ibflbc
as many as we think we can take; as mmf
men as we can get shall be kepaiated inlOM
many parts, ai^ from each, allotmat ta
shall be a man drawn, and that mm iktt ii
drawn, is the man that is to do (he deed.
The men should be divided into a ootm
nnariMr of parts^ and from each put t dh
drawB for the |{uxpose of coanoitiiBg evh
murder ?— Yes, just so ; that man that the bt
fell upoh, if be attempted it and didaotdstibe
thing, if there was any signs of cowaidice,h
ShonM be ran through tkpon (hespotdirectij;
upon this I got upmyeelf; I asksdUinifke
thought it was impcttible for a mm to H-
tempt to do A thing of diat kind and lul; up
I, ** if a man foils, is he to be raatiwosghN
the spot immediately;'' he said «<bo, ooks
there is signs that he is a ooward.** IVsm'
tion was put from the chair m beibn^ fd
agieed to ; directly after this, in ctsie Fifi%
Potter and Strange*
Falin, Whose name you hare bdiKHKi*
tioned, and PoUer and Strange, caaeiaioAe
moml— Yesr , • .
Was that the Palin who was to hod th
party for firing P-* Yes.
On their coming into the room, v^*
circumstances that had passed commoD^
10 them?— Yes, they were; aad tbeyigiw
to them after Ihistlewoqd and Brant liad 00-
mimicatfed the same to those as be ted to tu
in the room before ; Palin got up to spew »
the chairman, saying he wishsd to 07 s*^
thing, that he had paid due sUeotioo, »
that he amongst the rest had agreed to *»
had been pn^wsed ; but he wished to^
how those things, as they had so mftiiyelS^
to be carried at the same time, were to K
done ; «you tidk of the Wml^ j«bt«
ifom forty to fifty men#" ^e^M
Had that number been mentioofld for WJ
called the West-^ild job 7— Yes, it Wli»
by Thistlewood. , ^»
What was the meaningof «he West^sdjC"
—That meant the assassination of the ««■*
ters; it was so oalled. ^jlm
And from forty to fifty rhea ^ere tWJ
neieessaiy for thia purpose?— Yeo; JL
talk of taking the two pieces of ciiid^b vm
GmyVion-lane, and six pieces cf cam* "^
the Artillery-ground, and my »««"*. rr*.
the buiMings; I wish to know »»*»»""
be done ; you oug^l to know *'**^
have men |o depend uponsofficieot: 1<^
give you any satisiaction on that P^^^jj
can see what men I can speak tD|l ^
have instructions from hew wtea^'^
communicate to them what hst f***''
this morning.
»
d
What was answered to that ?-U ^ ^
md D|«|'^
there was no doubt that Palin
from the chair, ThisUewood sad Bn««»^
there was no doubt that Palin cerUiiflT .^
the men he had spoken to ^^^Pf^^J^U
Palin was satisfied wijhin ^BBtt^^f^ ^
got such men as he could depend'^*'
RkkMttd TkUfor Higk Treatoh.
«u at liberty to iwt, and to tstt tliem what-
had passed.
• Upon tllat was ke satisfied? — Upon that
he sat down satisfied.
Afesi this had taken place, did the meetifig
faoreak up ?)^The chair was left upon this.
Did any thing further take plactF — lliey
were pretty well all standing; at this tine
Thistlewood suddenly turns himself rounds
** Ob, Brunt, weU thought of, now as Palin is
hero, you may aa well take him to this spot
doss by here, and let him see whether he
thinks it is practicahle."
What place waa that ?«^ That place was
FumiTal's-iniwbuildiacs.
Fumival'Mnn»builcmigs was at that tkae
not fiaisliedl— The b^ part of it was not.
Was that near the back of Fox^ourt ? — Yes.
la consequenoe of that, did Brant and Palin
go out ?-«-^They did.
Did they return before you quitted the
place ?— They did.
What passed, on tbeit return? — On their
return, Mr. Pajin ga?e it in that it was a itery
good job,^ and a very easy one^ and would mid^e
a very good fire.
^ Did any thing further pasa OB that occasion?
-r^Yea; Tkustfewood said, that it would be
highly necessary (if it was possible) to get the
BMu together, and to coosmunicate their in«
tipntions to h^iTe them, if possible, to give them
a treat ; but be said ^ aid not know how it
waa to be done, for they were all so. poor ; on
this, Brunt turned himself te the fire, walked
%ci08a the room and baok again, and said he had
a pound note he had reserved fer the purpose,
diough he had done Mttie or no work lately,
but he would be damned il he did not spend
it upo^hia ipes} Thietlevood said, ''where
shall we take them to? I suppose Hobhs would
have no objection to letting us ha^ the roon^
iq> stairs."
Hobbs kept the Whiite Hart P-^Tea.
Had these been aag^meetings at the White
Bart preiious to, ^bom meetings held in die
back room at Brunt's lodgings ?<~Yes.
Were those meetingB hela in a room at the
White Hart, or in eback loom^Inabadc;
noaa in the yaid. Those meetingi were dis-^
eoDtinaedTilhile yeifcwei»in pnsoa for debt?
T^Yes.
Now proceed. —••.Bmnt said, he did not
mnch like it after what had dropped from my
Montk ^bnt neaer mind,'' saffa Brant, '^we
can go there, as time flets. so> riioit ; I do not
see what occasion we have to inr the tiaps,"
or some egression oS that kind.
Had you, in point of fhot, made some oo»»
munieation to them of what had passed be«
tween you and Hobbs f—-Yea; he said he
wioald calion Hobbs, and heas what he had to
aay ; en second recoibction^ he said he would
gi^e hie bcnr. a holiday that day^ send his udfe
eat, and wat men he had to coUect togetheiv
to have them in his own room.
ARer this ednversatieii had passed, I be-
lieve you sepaiatBd?-p*Ye8,
A. TL 1820.
Cissa
Tell us whether yoU luid seen any arms Jn
that back room at different periods ? — ^I had«
Had you seen among other things, any pike^
staTea?--*Yes.
In what state were they ?---In the roagh.
Had any thi^ been done to the ends of
them ? — ^No more than just as th^ were cut
from the tree they grew on.
Waa any thing done after they were brought
in there ?-^Bradburu sawed the ends of diem
off widi a saw, and ferraled them.
Was that done in that back room P — ^Yes.
Were there anyaoeketa or holes made id
t)Mm?«*Yea.
After those ferrules had been put on in the
ioanner you detcrihed, by Bradbum, what
passed ^-*-There was an aheiation, it was con-
sidered, after the ends of the pike stick had
been pared down to the ferrule that wae
knocked down, that the pike staff was so wedq
it would not support the pike ; in consequence
of that, every ferrule was cut off again, and
bigger ones were got and pot oo.
Was that done also io the room ?«— Yes.
Besides those pike*staves, were there any
hand-grenades brought there?— There were
some that were brought kt there ready made,
and some made th^e^
Did you see Dandson db any thing therein
•«^Yes, Davidson and Harrison ; there was a
kind of a thing that was wound round a tin
case first, and some pitch that was melted in
an iron-pot; after this was put in, there were
some nails bound round.
Did you see Harrison make any of them:?
^Yes.
Did you see Davidson also do any thin^
towards making them?-^I did.
Was there any other place where Aey were
afterwasda canied to?— -They were canied to
TuU*8.
To Tldd*8 lodgings ?^Yei^ in Ilole4«.the
wall passage*
What was tint caDed ?i-«The ddpdt.
Who was it that suggested th^ should be
leasoied from die voom F^-^Thistlewood.
Wbait reason did he gie e l*-He assigned the
reason, that there should be nothing kept ia
that room, in case diere should be any
persons come ta thai room who might give
information.
In consequence of that, were the tbing»
from time to time removed to Tidd^sT— They
were.
00 you remember a meeting which took
place on tkfB Tuesday morning, the 22od of
Febraary ?— Yes.
The meeting of which you have been speak-
ing was the Sunday ?'— Yes.
Where was that meeting on the Tuesday
held P-*In the same room as Brunt's^
About vrhat time l^*%^bout ten ofolock.
Who were the persons present f«^There wae
Thistlewood^ Brant i there wae Hall ; there was
Ings at this time ; and, jnst after this, Edward*
oomesin, and brings the accouatof theinftmna-
tion be had seen in the paper, of a dinner that
was to be held on the Wean^ay night.
1350] 1 GEORGE lY.
Tfitd ^ BltUam Damdstm tmd
naao
A cabinet dfamer ?— Yet.
At what place ?— Lord Uarrowby's, in Gro»-
▼enor-tquare.
In consequence of this, was a newspaper
sent for ?— Yes ; Mali fetched it.
Did it appear by the newspaper thai the iiw
formation was true ?— Yes.
What passed on this information being com*
mnnicated ? — On dits being communicated^
Brunt expressed himself, '^now, damn my
eyes,'' says he, ** I beUeve there is a Ood ; i
have often prayed that those thieres vutj be
called togetner, that we nm^ have an op-
portunity to destroy them, and now '* says he,
<« God has heard mypityer.*'
. Was any thing else said, that you remember?
— Ings was equally alive to it; upon this
Tbistlewood proposed that there should be a
eommittee sit directly, in order to alter the
plan of assassination which had been agreed
•n on the Sunday,
Referring to the plan of individual assassi-
nation ?— «Yes ; my sitting in the chair. Thistle-
wood proposed me to take the chair ; I takes
the chair, and called to order. Tbistlewood
was going to speak ; lanterrupted him ; I said,
** Gentlemen, I hope from what fell from my
mouth yesterday morning, you have given it a
due consideration/'
. That was the communication that had been
made to yon by Hobbs, the landlord of the
White Hart ?— Yes.
Suggesting something, I believe, respecting
the police officers having inquired at Hobbs's ;
—Yes.
You communicated that to the meeting? — ^I
did.
Tell us what'^took place T — ^Upon this Brunt
put himself into a bit of a passion, and so did
all of them, and particularly Harrison, so much
that he walked about andthreatened the first man
that attempted to fling cold water upon the con-
cern, he would run that man through directly
with a sword ; upon this I opened my coat in
this wa]r, and said, Harrison, if you have any
conception that I am not a friend to you and
every man in this room, do it now; Palin
and Potter and Brad bum were in the room ;
Palin got up, surprised from what he had seen,
and walked across the room ; and Palin was
the man thatholla'd out, insisting on my being
heard.
Was Hall in the room at that time ?— He
was.
In consequence of this conversation that
took place, did Brunt make any proposal ?—
On Mr. Palin insisting on some explanation
being given of that I had alluded to, Brunt
got up and said he. would get up and tell the
whole ; Brunt got up and communicated it.
Did Brunt make any proposition ?— He
made a proposition, that lord Harrowby's house
should be watched.
When was that watch to commenoe ?--At
six o'clock that evening.
Who were the two men that were at the
ftrst on the watch ?-*Davidfon was one, but
the other I cannot remcata^ and Brant «d
Tidd were to relieve them.
When were they to relieve them ?— Atme
o'clock.
It was to be a three hours watdi?—Y«i
Were Davidson and Tidd both pranta
the room at that time ?— Yes.
Was it said why that watch was ta be ap-
pointed ? — That watch was to be appdsiedto
see if there were any police officer CBtecd
the boose, or any soldiers ; if there wv m
thing of that kind entered the home of bii
Harrowby, it was to be commnmcstri td th»
ooomiittee; if there wasnodungof thatlnd
seen. Brunt insisted upon it that the boiiea
should be done the following night
After this did you separate?— Noyie^
not ; after this proposition of Brant's wii at-
Ued, Tbistlewood directly proposed Tidd a
take the chair, in consequence of my iotenpt-
ing their business.
Did Tidd take the chair thenf-Tei, k
did ; then Tbistlewood came ibrwiid with th
proposition of a fresh plan, respectingthei^
sassination of the ministers; he pnfom
going himself to lord Harrowb/s doorvtta
note in his hand, for the servant to give «> ^
master, telling him he must hare an tasM\
at the time he got in, the othen weie to m
in liter him, and to secure the sermti,|in*
senting a pistol to their breast, thmtoi^
them with instant death in case they aade
any resistance ; at the same time oilier pf-
sons were to go to take commaad of tbeitaia
leading to the bottom part of the koet;
another party to take the coaunand of tbeaias
to the upper part of the boose, and two an
to the area; these men were to take, toea*
sUtion, a hand-grenade a pieoe, » *^ "^
pistols and blunderbuss; it any «"«"J|f'
tempted to retreat from the upper or wg
part of the house, or the area, a hanigw**
was to be thrown among them, with a net "
destroy them; at the same time it was pnp
sed that they should enter the >«*■•*?
was the man that ofiered himself «<> ta« »
command, to lead into the room. W P^
posed to go in this kind of way; ^'^^T
entered the room he was to aooost tbar ih|-
ships l^ saying, « Now, my lonU, 1 »»* I;
good men here as the Manchester yeoW|
enter citiaens and do your duty;" «»« ^
swordsmen were to follow in afierh»»-
Who were the two swordsmen?-! «" ^
myself, and Harrison another. . .
Harrison had been in the liM"*^
He had; on this being done, the swoia^
entering the room, Mowed by die pt>e;*r
Ings declared he would fbUow and cat «*^
head off as he came to them. , , ,. «•<
What was Ings by tnide?-! "^^JV;
led to believe that he was a butcher ; m» ^
well as that, he proposed ^^^^^
lord Casamagh's hands o£ loP "^
bags with him. . l— t4ie
What was he to do with thej^ ^
proposed to bring, away ths hia»
13611
Itickard lUlfor High Trmm. A. D. 1830^
ri36«
Castkreagfa and lord Sid mouth in the bags;
he would have one of lord Castlereagb*s bands,
saying, that he would cure that, as it would be
thought a great deal of in a future dav. Ings
had on a former day said, he would exhibit
those heads on poles, and carry them through
the streets; on the house beine left, after thev
had done what they had to do, it was proposed,
and Harrison undertook it, to eo to the King-
street barracks, and set fire to the shed where
the straw and hay were deposited, and to de«
stroy the whole building.
Was any further use to be made of the
heads,, when they were brought away ? — ^Yes,
this thing was often talked of ; this discourse
finished on the Wednesday afternoon ; those
heads, afier they were brought away, which
had been proposed by Ings, saying he would
exhibit them about on a pole, Thistlewood
said, '^no, the best way of carrying them will
be to put them on a pike each, and carry them
behina the cannon to terrify the people, to
make them belieye that there was somebody
of more consequence than they were aware of
at the head of them."
Was any further use to be made of either of
them after that, of lord Castlereagh's head for
instance?— It was proposed after this, by
Bradbum, after it had been exhibited about
the streets for two or three days, says he, ^ I
will make a box and inclose it, and send it
to Ireland, or take it over myself to be ex-
liibited there."
Did any thing further pass at that meeting,
ss to the plan? — Yes, it was proposed that
after they had done at lord Harrewby's, Har-
nson was to go to the horse barracks, support-
ed by Wilson, to set them on fire, by a ball
fnrepared for that purpose, and others were to
proceed to Gray Vinn lane ; if they met with
ftny- interruption from the people, it was pro-
posed to run the pikes through them, and to fire
upon them occasionally; and after they met
the party in Gray's-inn-lane, to assist them in
takhig those two pieces of cannon at the Light-
horse stables, ana to proceed from there to the
Artillery-ground to taxe the six cannon there.
Who was to head the party that was to take
the six cannon at 'the Artillery-ground? —
Cook ; after Cook had got the six pieces of
cannon he was to load tliem, and bnng them
into the street, and if there was any interrup-
tion to fire ; if he found the people came oyer
to him, to enable him to advance, he was to
advance to the Mansion-house, divide the
cannon into two parts, place ^ree on each
side of the Mansion-house, and demand an en-
trance ; and if it was refbsed, fire upon it on
both sides.
What was to be done with the Mansion-
house? — ^Tfae Mansion-house was proposed,
by Thistlewood, for the seat of the provisional
government.
Cook was not to be of the party at lord
Harrowby's? — No, he was to command the
party that was to go into the city; then it was
proposed that they should take the Baoik of
VOL. XXXIII,
'England, and plunder it ; but the books were
not to be meddled with, as Thistlewood thought,
by preserving the books, they would com-
municate to them something more than they
were aware of.
You afterwards broke up, for the purpose of
making preparations ? — Yes> that is the outline
of it.
On the Wednesday^ what time did you go
there? — I went up about two o'clock, as near
as I can guess.
Was any thing said as to a sign or counter*
sign P— Harrison was the man that proposed
this ; saying the men that had to go round
to communicate it to what men they could col-
lect
It was proposed, then, that the persons
there should go round for the purpose of con^
municating what they had in view to their
associates f — Yes.
What was proposed as to that? — ^Harrison
proposed that bvtUm should be the countersign.
How was that to be ? — ^The roan appointed
to stand in Oxford-road was to pronounce the
letters 6, «, f, and the man in waiting to say
t, o, n ; on doing this he was to be considered
a man friendly to their concern.
Where was that station to be ? — The end of
Oxford-road, by Tyburn-turnpike.
After they had made those arrangements
did you separate for the purposes of prepara-
tion ? — ^Yes.
Did Davidson and the other men go upon
the watch on the Tuesday, as had been ap--
pointed? — Yes, I found Davidson on the
watch ; but the other man I did not know.
At what time did they go upon the watch ?
— ^They went upon the watch at six o'clock.
You state it had been originally proposed,
that Tidd and Brunt should go upon the
watch at nine o'clock for the purpose of re-
lieving'Davidson and his associate ?— Yes.
Did they go upon that watch ? — They set-
tled for that ; but Brunt came back in about
five minutes^ saying, that Tidd had called at
his house, and found the man that he had
appointed; and that he was a man of too
much consequence to be left, and that there-
fore he could not go on the watch.
In consequence of that, what proposal was
made ?— For me to go instead of Tidd.
Did you, in consequence of that, go upon
the watch with Brunt instead of Tidd ? — ^Yes,
I did.
When you got upon the watch did you see
Davidson there ? — ^Yes.
Did you and Brunt continue on the watch
till twelve ? — Not in the square all the while.
Did you, part of the time, go into any pub-
lic-house in the neighbourhood ? — Yes.
Where was that public-house situate ?->At
the back of the square; a public-house at the
comer of the mews.
Did Brunt do any thing there ? — He played
at dominos there.
Did you, during that time, go out into the .
square to see whedier all was quiet, and re-
4S
1363] 1 GEORGE iV.
Trial of WiUiam Davidum and
[\m
turn again ?— Yes ; and I went out at eleven t
o'clock, and stopped till the turn of twelve^
and then went home.
Yon found all quiet? — Yes.
Do you recollect on Tuesday afternoon, or
evening, going to Fox-court, and smelling any
strange smelW — Yes; on going up stairs, I
smelt a strange smell ; on going in, I found
Edwards, Ings, and Hall. Ings and Hall
were employed in making illumination-balls to
fire the buildings, and Edwards in making the
touch-paper for the grenades. Hall was laying
the paper on the floor, to receive the balls, to
prevent their sticking to the band.
Did you stay there any time, or go away? —
I went away almost directly.
The next day, I believe, you did not go very
yearly to the room did you ? — No.
Some business of your own kept you away ?
— Yes,
What time did you go ? — About two o'clock.
Whom did you find when you went there?
»-I found Brunt in his own room, the front
room.
While you were in that front room, did
Strange come in ? — Strange was the first man
that came in after myself.
Did Strange come in by himself, or accom-
panied by other peisonsr-^By himself; there
were one or two strangers came in afterwards.
What were they employed about?— There
were some pistols laid upon the drawers in
•Brunt*s room.
How many ? — I saw half a dozen.
What were they doing with those pistob?
— They were endeavouring to fix the flints in
them.
Was any thing said by Brunt ? — On these
.last men coming in, Brunt proposed they
should go into the other room.
Did they in consequence of that go with the
pistols into the other room ? — Yes. *
You went into the other room too f — ^Yes.
Whom did you find at that time in the other
room? — ^There were no other persons in the
room at tliat time, except those who followed
from Brunt's. room.
Who came in afterwards ? — Thistlewood
came in soon afterwards.
Was Ings there P — Not at that time.
Did you see him there in the course of the
afternoon ? — Yes.
Wliat was Ings doing ? — Ings, within a veiy
little time after he came into the room, began
to equip himself.
Did any thing take place before Ings came
.in ? — ^The different strangers that were then in
the room were busy in fixing the different
.ftints to their pistols, and likewise the slings
to the cutlasses that I saw lying in the room.
Did any body make any proposition to them?
--Not as yet ; on Thistlewood coming into the
room, he looks round.
When Thistlewood came in, were they pre-
paring themselves ? — Yes, they were ; and he
said, "this looks something like as if you
were going to work;" he claps bis hand on
my shoulder, and asked me how Hid ; I aid
'< I am rather unwell, and very low in spirits;"
in consequence of this, he pmposed to Bnat
to send for something to drink to pat me in
spirits ; and he proposed directly after tkii,
that there should be some paper fetched, is he
wanted to draw up some bills, and mooej is
produced from Thistlewood to Bront.
Was any thing said about the sort of paper!
—Thistlewood wanted such paper as the
newspapers were printed upon ; he did sot
know the name of it, and I proposed tohia
to have some cartridge paper ; in conseqneace
of this, cartridge paper was sent for, aad
Brunt said his apprentice or his bojsboald
fetch it.
Brunt has a son as well as an apprestittf
—Yes.
Did Brant go out for that purpose ?-Vi^
and the cartridge paper was brought
Was there anv table in the room ?— A tilile
and chair were brought in from Bront's ma
at the time.
What was done with tliem .'— ThistlevMd
sat down, and wrote three bills ?
What were the contents of those bills?-
Thistlewood wrote " Your tyrants aie de-
stroyed. The friends of liberty are caBcd
upon to come forward. The provisioDilfH
vernment is now sitting. James lagSi scot-
tary. February 23rd, 1820.''
As he was writing the third bill, did j»
make any observation upon him?— On sj
looking at Thistlewood, I perceived him to m
very much agitated, and he could not ^nH
any more, and he wished somebody else »
Uke the pen, and proposed Hall to take w
pen ; HaU refused it; there was anotherBM»
a strange man, in the room, who reMtf
first to take the pen, but afterwards toektf^
Did he proceed to write any other Ml.-
Yes, he did. ^
We must not ask you the contents w *»
bill; what was to be done with those biUs?--
Those bills were to be stuck up at thende «
different buildings that were to be set fire ttM»
order to communicate to the public whati*
been done. ^^
After those bills were Irritten, whatfirt»
took place at the meeting? how was i^
equipped ?— Ings equipped himself by pii^J
a black belt round his loins, another hao^
upon his shoulder to support the cn^jS
with a couple of bags in toe form of a soW«»
haversack.
Were these under his great coat ?-w o^
each shoulder. .v.
Under his great coat?— Under the coit»
wore at top, he put on his great ***^*^
vntrds ; the belt round his loins was to coo^
a brace of pistols, a belt for his cntlass; »»
on viewing himself, he perceived that W"*
forgotten to bring his steel. . ^ ^o.
Had he any knife?— Yes, a large b«tt»ff'
knife, with wax-end round the handle.
Was he asked any question ^^l^^
enc^ was wonnd round the handle .*»•»
1365]
lUdiard Tiddftr High Treaton.
A. D. 1820.
[1366
was asked the reason^ and be said it was to
preveDt its slipping in his hand when he was
doing the joh.
Was that like a butcher's knife P — No, a
butclier's knife is sharp at the point ; he said
he had procured it for that purpose; about
this time Bradbum came up, saying he wished
Thistlewood to send some person to the men
he had collected together, at a spot where they
nught be more handy.
Who was appointed for that purpose? —
Tidd was appointed ; Tidd was not very will-
ing to go, as he said, because they were Irish-
men ; he thought it would be better for one of
their own country to go ; for one of their own
country would do better with them.
Did he at last go ? —Yes, he did.
Do you happen to recollect how the pri-
soner DavidsoD was accoutred? — I cannot
cha^e my memory that I saw any thing of
chat kind.
Tldk, — My lord, I did not understand the
evidence the last time he brought my name
into question.
Mr. Baron Garrow. — You do very rightly, if
any thing passes which you do not hear dis-
tinctly, to inform us of it, and it shall be re-
peated : the last he has stated respecting you
iwas, that on Bradbum coming up, and saying
be wished Thistlewood to send some person to
the men he had collected near the spot, you
were desired to go ; that at first you rather
objected to that, stating that the men who were
to be met were Irish, and that one of their
own countrymen would manage better with
them than you who were English, and that
you at last consented.
Tidd, — You have made a mistake there.
Mr. Baron Garrow, — ^You will have an op-
portunity, by your counsel or yourself, to put
any questions that you think proper ; but it is
DOt only more regular, but it is more advan-
tageous to you to wait till he has concluded
bis examination before you put any (juestions ;
jou shall have the full opportunity in its pro-
per time.
Mr, SoUeUor General, — Do you remember
Falin's coming in ? — ^Yes.
On his coming in, did anything pass? —
Yes ; Palin, seizing the opportunity of This*
tlewood and Brunt being out of the room,
begins to address himself to what were in the
room ; saying, ** Gentlemen, what you are met
bere for, I hope you all know what it is; if
such, I hope you will give it a consideration ;
first ask yourselves respecting the deed of
the assassination, whether you conceive, within
yourselves, it will be a matter of consequence
to your country ; if you conceive it will be of
eooiequence to yonr country, then in the next
place you ought to come to a determination
to stick true to each other ; unless yott come to
this determination, you can do no good ; any
sun that is seen^ after you .begin this, to .show
the least signs of cowardice, that man ought
to be run through upon the spot ;" a tall man
that was in the room, whose name I do not
know, spoke, saying he could pretty well see
the meaning of his speech ; " out," says he,
<<you speak as if all that were in the room:
knew wnat we were met here for; that is what
I and some of us wish to know ; I am not a
man that am afraid of myself, nor should any
man that turns out on such a thing as this be
afraid of his life ; I will be the ftrst man, if I
see any man a coward, to run him through."
Palin was going to speak again ; at this mo-
ment, in came Brunt into the room.
Did Brunt come alone, or Brunt and
Thistlewood?— Brunt alone. Brunt seeing,,
as it appeared to roe, an alteration ii\^
the countenances of the men in the room,
wished to know the cause; he was told that
there were those in the room, who did not
know what they were met there upon, and
wished to know. Brunt said directly, "This
is not the room where you are to be informed,
go along with me to the room in the Edgware-
road, there I will tell you." Brunt said then,
"any man that goes along with me, I will
treat him with a drop of something that is
good, in order to put them in spirits for what
they are going about." The tall man made
answer, "I hope whoever is going on this
piece of business will not go and drink, for a
drunken man in such a business as this is not
fit to be trusted ; for a man so doing would
throw himself into the hands of his enemies."
On this Brunt began to put the men on the
move to go to the Edgware-road, saying (and
that was the first time I heard that), that Palin
would want that room to bring his men to.
DavMiion.— Mr. Attorney-general, you asked
the witness how Davidson was accoutred ; does
the witness mean to say that I was at Fox-
court that evening.
Mr. iSWicifor-Gcnerfl/.— Was Davidson at
Fox*court that evening ? — I have not said he
was : I did not see him there that afternoon, at
the time I am speaking of.
You have given an account of meetings that
took place from the beginning of January to
the 23rd of February; was Davidson fre-
quently at those meetings in that place?-*
Yes.
But he was not at the particular meeting to
which you now speak ? — No, he was not.
Mr. Boron Garrow. — ^I have been looking
to my note of what passed on a former day, as
well as the present, and he did not name you
as one of the persons present at that time.
Davidson. — ^Thank you, my lord.
^ Mr. Solicitor General. — ^Was be at the meet-
ing on Sunday, when this meeting was. ar-
ranged ? — Yes, he was.
And be had been at several of the previous ?
— ^Yes; the first of my knowing Davidson was
on the loth of January.
1367] 1 GJBORGB IV.
That was before you went to priion ?— Yes.
After this had takea place, aod firant put
the men on the move, did you go up Ozfocd-
Btreet ? — I did.
Did you meet Thistlewood in the Edgwaie*
road ?— Yes«
Was Brunt with you at that time? — Brant
and another man.
Did you all go together to the stable in
Cato-street? — ^Yes.
When you went into the stable did you see
any person in the stable on the ground
floor? — I saw Davidson sitting, and Wilson
standing, apparently, as it appeared to me
ia walking along, doing something to the
pikes.
Did you go up into the loft ? — ^I did.
How many men did you find assembled al*
together, including those that were below ? —
There were about six or seven of them, or
there might be more.
What was there up stairs in the room ? — On
the bench in the room, there were pistols and
cutlasses.
What kind of a bench was it ? — ^I did not
take particular notice of the bench.
Was it like a carpenter's bench T — Yes.
What passed up there ; did more men come
in? — There were more came in the course of
the evening. From the accounts that Thistle-
wood gave, counting the men that were in the
room, there were eighteen men in the room up
stairs, and two below, which made twenty.
' Did they appear to you to be as numerous
as that? — ^Yes» they did»
Were you yourself armed in any way? — ^I
bad a blunderbuss, which I took off and laid
upon the bench, and a broomstick, that had
been prepared for the reception of a bayonet,
ibr Brunt ; I delivered them both.
Was Tidd there at that time ? — He was not.
* Was Brunt there? — Brunt was up in the
loft when I went up.
And Thistlewood went up with you ?— Yes,
he went up before me.
Did any thing pass about Tidd not being
there ? — In going up from the stable, Thistle-
wood and Brunt were in discourse together.
Thistlewood seemed rather agitated, for
fear, as it appeared to me afterwards, Tidd
would not come. Brunt perceiving there was
an alteration in the countenance of what men
were in the room, and Ings as well, Ings began
to stamp and swear : he hoped they would not
stop now ; if they did, he should either hane
himself or cut his throau On this, Thistlewood
goes to the end of the table ; just after tfiis
Tidd came.
Had any thing passed about Tidd's not
coming? — Brunt turned himself round to the
bench, and said, he would venture his life that
Tidd would come ; (bat he was confident of
it, and shortly after this Tidd came into tha
room.
Tell us what passed ? — I saw Tidd talking
to Thistlewood ; Thistlewood seemed at this
time a little agiuted, and so did TiddfaisMelf ;
Thistlewood saeing me lodkingat him tnmi
himself away; Tidd came towudsme, aail
said to Tidd, ^ Tidd do not you tbink Uiitii
a pretty set out; do you think it ispoaiUe
for the men here to do that which is talked
of ;*' Tidd said, *^ no, it never can be done.*
2W.^My lord, I have no oppertimitjif
speaking.
Mr. Barsm Gmrcw.-^lt would be modb
better for yourself you should postpone it;
you may be sure your learned coaosel viH
take a note of it.
2W.— It immediately oonoens abal Mr.
Adams said last.
Mr. Baron Gomw.— It is irregulw «Br jw
to break in, but I would not on that aocont
if you tell me you prefer doing it now, forW
your doing it ; but you may be quite sore it ii
more for your advantage to bear aH hei^i
before vou put any question, than tobiwkii
upon his narrative ; if you should ooiiil «
consequence of baving your mind oocnpieai I
undertake to remind you before the proper
season for your putting questions ii gOK ^'
Mr. Soiidtor GoierflZ.— Did Thistlewwd ar
any thing upon this ?— Thistlewood w^ "I
hope for God's sake you will not tldnkflj
dropping the concern now, if you do, it wj
turn out a second Despard's job;" saying, tW
there were quite men enough in the roon^ aj
" you seem to be frightened for fear of wt
having strength enough." Thistlewood s«i
" supposing lord Harrowby to have Mtw
servants in his bouse, they will not be pn*
pared as you are ; but not only that, bat tjj
will be terrified, and from going into tlieM*
to coming out of it again, will not ««* j"
minutes.^ He just went over it »y*^^
fourteen men, he thought, would be esoap*
go into the room ; these fourteen ^.^
proposed, after its first being put to aU law
room, whether all in the room preseatwet
agreeable to go. ^.
It was put to the persona in the room, «*•
ther they were agreeable to go ?— Yes.
What was done upon that'-Ontheircj
senting to go^ there were foorteea ■» P***
For what were those fburteea i«*VrT
out ?— Thejr were picked out for the iofc!P
pose of gomgintothewK)mtodotij«»""r
What were the others to do?-T« ^
six were to secure the seivants.
The six were to be employed in w^'JJ'J
you represented before, to guaid theitan
the area P-^-Yes. ^
Was any thing done in thewtyofsep^
them from the rest?— The men •^•Vj ,
tinw where they were, and Brunt pw^^ j
bottle, and just at the condusioo of m
heard a noise dawa stain. ^
I want to know whether te "^^Lt}
moved to any sapaxata part of ^f^t^ •
-•No, nottoth(Bopp«ilta*«^"*'^
1369]
Bkhari Tiddfxr High TrtuoH.
A.IX 1890.
Liara
after the officers came into the room, they
sidled into the little room.
Were the fourteen men tingled out for the
purpose of doing this ? — Yes.
what did they do ? — They agreed to go into
the room.
Who were those menf — There were, This-
iiewood was one; Ings was another; Brunt
was another;. Ually Wilson^ and Dayidson
was proposed.
Where was he f— He was down below.
. Do yon remember any more? — I do not
know ; I ha?e mentioned all the names I
know, and Biadbum and some others that I
4o net know. Were they separated to a dif-
ferent part of the room from the rest P — ^Those
who were to go in.
After that separation had taken place^ or
while that was going on, was there any alarm
l^iven below ?— x es.
Mr. Banm Oamw, — Before this, had any
other person mnde any address to the people i
-—Mr. Brant made an address to the people ;
he turned round to the bench again, and said
^You seem to think there is not sufficient
strength to go ;'' he declared that if there were
not more than eight or nine men, he himself
vras determined to go; he directly said if there
^ere not more than five or six men he would
go. ^'We hare things here which some of
you knownothinff about, that will blow the
houae up, and if I go with fi?e or six and find
myself in danger, iwill clap fire to it, and
Uow the house down orer our heads.''
Mr. SolkUor QtneraL — You state, thai
while the picking out the men was going for-
wardy you heard a noise below ; what kind of
noise was that ? — ^Tbe sound of a pistol ; 6u
■ecdy after this, at Uie bottom of the ladder,
Ifae word was given " Holloa, show a light T
on this, Thistlewood turns to the bench, takes
the candle, and from that goes to the head of
<be ladder in the room, looks down, saw they
ivere coming, turned round, and set the candle
«n the bench ; on this they began to sidle off
^which was the first time I saw this little room)
into the little room ; the officers came into the
soom.
They came up the ladder ? — ^Yes : and took
the command of the room, with their pistols
presented.
You need not describe what took place at
tiiat time, as we shall have that from the offi«
eers tfaonselves; I believe the lights were
blown out after Smithers was killeid ?-*Yes ;
as soon as the pistol went off.
And you^made your escape? — Yes.
When Thistlewood said that fourteen men
^vould be sufficient to go into the room, was
Tidd in the room f— He was ; but I am pretty
sore that Tidd was not one that was to go into
elie room.
Was he in the room at the time when they
gave the assent to what Thistlewood proposed,
theft tb^ should go on with the measure f^-
Yes^he WB8*
Mr. Baton Ganvw, — ^Was he there when
Bnint made the speech you have just stated ?
•—He was«
Was that after you had made the observa-
tion to Tidd, '' A pretty set out; do you think
these men can accomplish the woriir— After
I had made the remark.
Mr. SoUdtor General. — ^Both Brunt's and
Thistlewood's speeches were after that ? — ^Yes.
And Tidd remained in the room ?— Yes.
When were you first apprehended ?— On
Friday the 25th.
When you made your escape, did you go
back to your own apartment? — ^Yes, and re-
mained there till I was apprehended.
You were afterwards, I believe, examined
at Whitehall, with the other prisoners ? — ^I was
not examined that day.
But you were afterwards P — ^Yes.
Tiaheri Adaum^ cross-examined by
Mr. Cunoood,
As all the jury have not had the misfortune
to meet yoK' three times, just tell iee what yon
told us — that among your other virtues, yon
abandoned your religion; that is se> is it notf
— It was so.
You became a disbeliever in Christianity?
—I did.
And that at the age of forty-five years?—-
Yes.
You do call yourself a christian now ?— Yes.
When did you come back to the belief of
Christianity ?-^I may say that I oame back to
the belief of Christianity about the 24th, but I
was convinced beibre that.
Though you were convinced of it before,
yon did not come bade to the belief till the
24th ?— I did not exactly.
That was the day after you were in mar-
vellous great danger of Ming hanged? — It
was so.
So that the fear of the halter brought you
back to your old belief ?— It might have some
effect.
I observe you have very much altered your
' manner; you do not seem quite so vehement;
has any body been talking to you since you
were exam'ined here ? — No ; I do not want any
body to talk to me.
You have changed it because you think it
somewhat more decent? — ^No; I am rather
onweil.
Had you mixed much in political society
before you met Mr. Thistlewood f — ^Never in
my life ; I have had my political c^inioBS, but
never to join a party.
Was it among your political opinions, that
it was lawful to sweep off fifteen men in cold
blood ? — It never was lawftil in my sight.
I dare say you thought it a very atrocious
act?— I thought it a very cruel one at the
first proposal.
You reoottect you told me it was first pro*
posed to yoa on the 2nd of January ?— Yes.
. And notsrithstanding yog thoughiit so itniel
137r] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of William Davidson and [137}
tn act, ]roii consented to be introduced to Mr.
Thistlewood ten days, after^ on the ISthP — ^I
did.
And from the 12th of January to the 2Srd
of February, when you were disappointed all
•f youy you still continued to freauent meetings
vrhere that matter was debatedi settled and
determined on ? — ^Yes, I did.
Notwithstanding all your private opinions,
and thinking it was a cruel act ? looV to the
jury? — t did ; I am not going to enter into
debate at all upon it ; I shall answer you, yes
or no.
And you took no inconsiderable part in
those meetings according to your own account ;
^-I have stated every part that I recollect;
if you are in possession of any part I have not
communicated I am ready to do it.
I am in possession of more than the jury
know of you, or than I wish to know ? — ^I will
state every thing to the jury.
You were at one time appointed chairman
of this committee of assassination ? — ^Yes.
Did you call yourselves so ? What did you
call yourselves? most committees have a
name ? — ^If I may be allowed to make a remari^
upon that—
Mr. SolkUor Genera/.— Make no remarks,
but answer the question. There was no par-
ticular name appointed.
Mr. Cunoood. — Were they all members of
the committee? — ^They were regular exoept
Cook, on the Sunday morning; that was the
first time that the committee met.
- A committee is part of a larger body ; where
was your large body ? — The larger body tliat
was got together was in the room in Cato-
street ; that was the largest number that was
ever collected together to my knowledge.
Weie they the whole of those you expected
to revolutionise the government with ? — ^Tbere
was a talk of a vast many more attending.
Do you know of any others ?— I do not ;
not by name.
Could you have brought any men into the
field ?— No.
Your single sword was all you could con-
tribute?— I never got that, nor the worth of a
•hot towards it.
That was all you agreed to contribute ?—
That was all I agreed to contribute.
Keep to your own account ; *' all the com-
mittee themselves did not know what was
going forward ?*'— Those that were upon the
committee knew what was going to be dtne ;
there were some that attended after the com-
mittee ; it was not regularly termed a com-
mittee each time.
All the meetinn did not know what they
were going to do f— No, some did not.
You knew what was going to be done ?— •
Yes.
But some roan in a brown coat got up and
said, *' You suppose we all know -what we -are
goinsr about, but I wish to know P*'-.Yes.
When he said that the design being to
assassinate the cabinet ministers, Mr. Bnst
said, *' You must come to another room, lod
there you shall know P" — Yes.
And upon that, men joined yoa?-TWf
followed us.
It was not the same party that were to go
from Cato-street to lord Hanowby's, that wot
to seize the cannon in Gray's-inn-lane?— Hk
same party that were to do the west-eod job^
were to go to GrayVinn-lane.
Did not you tell us, that Mr. Cook vm it
the bead of the party to seize the cannon ?-
That was at the Artillery-ground.
But not the west-end job party?— No.
Did you know where Mr. Cook's partj i«
to come from ? — No.
You never heard where his diTim bit
themselves ? — No ; I have seen Mr. Cod
himself.
Was Mr. Palin to fire the town vitb iiis
own hand P — He and others.
Where were his men to come from?— I «
not know.
You have told us about a proclaaatios; I
suppose that proclamation received uoiverw
consent when it was read ?— The three hills.
The three bills, saying, "Your tyraots «
destroyed ?"— Yes ; 1 did not hear any Wj
object to it.
it was part of ihe plan that those hills weR
to be stuck up in the streets the same nigtt-
—It was proposed by Thistlewood ; it wmwJ
put from the chair ; it was said by Thistleww
they were to be stuck up arainst the hooso.
What became of them r— I cannot say; »
saw them in the room, but nefer out of it
Who were to stick them up ?— I do notkiMJJ.
I will not go through the whole of iw
story ; but ask you, do you know 1 mas of tte
name of Thomas Chambers ?— I do noL
Then if you do not know him, yoo nerff «
course called on a roan of that name, «■
solicited him to join you in killing his m^
ty's ministers ; telling him, at the same tine,
you wouW have blood and wine forsupptfj
I do not know that ever I was acqoii"W
with such a man. . . . .
Will you deny this fact ?r-I wifl poMtff^
if I were guilty of the fact I would a^«J«"
ledge it ; but I am not and wiU not acki»fr
ledge it.
On the night of the 23rd, the night yos^
all detected, did you and Edwards «»'*T
man, Chambers, and desire to lea« *r
arms with him? — ^I never saw Edwaiw »»
the Wednesday rooming. ? t&I
Then you mean to say you did not?— *Of
will swear I did not . ^
That we may have no mistake ^7
man, the Chamben I mean lives m o0b^
cock-court, in the Strand?-! do ^ "*
that I could find out Healhcock-couit ^
You have never been in that court,
that I know of; I may have becainUf'^
' I do not know it. . ^
You have omitted some things in J'J'
dencc to-day P— I have omitted a giw'^
en-
J
13731
Rkhttrd Tidd/or High TrmuM.
A'f>. 18Sa
U374
You stated before^ that tliere were to be
messages sent to the out-ports, to present aoy
gentlemen' leaving the kingdom withoat an
order from the provisional government ? — Yes.
That Brighton was to be taken possession of
by a force?— Yes.
What had Brighton done?— Nothing more
than the other places.
. Mr. Baron Garrow, — ^You will find that con*
nected with the circumstance of their permit-
ting no persons to go out.
Mr. Solicitor GeneraL — I have omitted many
circumstances, in consequence of my desire to
shorten the case.
Mr. Curxvood, — ^His lordship has reminded
me, very properly, of a circumstance ; they
were all 10 be plundered if they permitted any
person to go out of the kingdom ? — Yes.
Where was the force to come from to do
this? — I cannot say, but they expected the
people to come over.
As you were a leader, what were the ar-
rangements for all this ? — I had not the am-
bition about me to be a leader; I did not
expect they would bring things to such a
pitch.
What were your motives ? — I have told you
before ; I had a reason for it, and shall not
make allusion to that again.
You stand here to give us the tnith, and the
whole truth; what was your object?— My
object was to search further into the principles
of Brunt, as I stated the last time.
What had you to do with Brunt's prin-
ciples ? — I had a foolish and curious idea,
wnich I call a very weak one.
A foolish and curious ideaP — ^And very
weak indeed to run myself into so much
danger for that.
You wish the jury to understand, that you
joined men for the purpose of assassination,
firing the city, and overturning tlie goyem-
ment, because you had a foolish and curious
idea, to know what were Brunt's principles ;
do you mean to state that to the jur^ 7 — I state
to the jury, that that v^as my motive ; that I
took Brunt by the hand, and I had not been
iong acquainted with Brunt before I had
reason to believe what I thought of Brunt was
confirmed.
So because you thought something of Brunt,
and you wanted to know whether it was well
founded or not, you mixed with a plot to as*
saitsinate fifteen illustrious men, to fire the
city, and to overturn the empire? — ^There was
no number of men mentioned at that time.
His majesty's ministers, who amounted to
fifteen? — ^Yes.
You state to the jury, that was your only
reason for joining in this plot? — I do.
Do you know a man ot the name of What-
man ? — No.
You have told us, that there was a con-
versation in the loft at Gato-street, in which
some one said to Tidd or you^ I believe, *^ This
is a pretty business, do you think there are
enough of us here to do such a job ;" and he
said, '' No ;" did not Tidd tell you he had been
deceived in the business- which had brought
him to that loft, but finding what it was h^
would have nothing to do with it ? — He did
not say he had been deceived, but his answer
to me was, ** No, it never can be done."
Was that all that he said^?— Yes.
Mr. Boron Garrow. — Prisoner Tidd, you hare
heard the last question put by your learned
counsel, and ^he answer given to it ; if yon
wish to pursue that question further, you may
do 60, and if you wish me to refresh your
recollection by repeating to you the question to
which your former interposition referred, I will
do it.
Tm/J.— Thank you, my lord; with respect
to the last question put to him, that was the
question I intended to put to him ; but what I
stated to him was this, when I came up to him
he said, ** this is a pretty piece of business^'
I observed to him
Mr. Baron Garrow* — Before you go further,.
I would suggest to you, whether it may not be
more prudent in you to confer with vour
counsel, and to put yourself in the guardian-
ship of his discretion and judgment, rather
than to put the questions yourself. You will
exercise your own discretion. Do not imagine
for a moment, that the Court wishes to prevent
your putting any question which you may
think for your advantage; the court interposes
because sometimes persons put questions which
they suppose may benefit them by their
answer, and they do them an injury; when
they have the benefit of such assistance as yoa
have, perhaps it will be better to suggest the
question to your counsel. Having stated that
1 am ready to take down any question you
may propose.
7W.— I am very much obliged to you my
lord.
Davidion,^'! will send my question to ay
counsel.
Mr. Curwood. — ^With respect to Davidson,
^ou have stated that he was not at the meet-
ing on the 23rd ?— Yes.
Was he armed when he was in Cato-streetl
— I do not recollect seeing him armed.
Do you remember seeing him there at all ?
—I do.
If he had been armed in any extraordinary
way must you have noticed it? — ^I saw him
both in the stable and up in the loft.
Had he at that time a belt round him, with
a sword and pistols and musket?— I did not
observe that he had any arms ; I saw that he
was very busy amongst them.
But YOU did not observe that he was armed?
—I did not.
If he had been armed, must it not have aU
tracted your attention ? — Of course, if he had
had them about him perceivable, I should hive
1975J t GBOSGB IV.
Triat^Wdlitm iknUmiKuii
\\n
seen theiD| Vat for me to say he had no aias
abonthim, I cannot; he might have them in
hispocket.
Had be a sword by his side?— I did not
observe that.
Had he pistob in his belt ?— I did not see
ihem.
Or a mnsket in bis band ? — ^I think I mnst
have seen it; but when the officers entered,
the arms were principally lying on the bench ;
if thev had not, I think uie consequences must
have been more fatal than they were.
Bobert Aiam» re-examined by
Mr. SoUeUor Gemnd,
Do you remember anv person erer bringing
any bullets to the room r — ^Yes.
How .many ? — He stated the number to be
about fire hundred ; this was at the room in
Foz-courty on the Tuesday morning, and he
had a hand-saw in his right hand.
You have been asked about the Christian
religion ; what was it that ledvou to disbeliere
in the Christian religion ?'-Tbe thing that led
mt to disbelieve the Christian leligion, was
the works of Paine on the Christian religiott,
that were put into my hands by Mr. Tidd
•himself.
You have been asked as to other persons;
was Palin in Cato^treet ?— No.
Was Potter in Cato^treet !— No.
Was Cook in Cato-stieet!— No, not to my
knowledge ; I did not see him there.
Did you find any of the persons to whom
Palin alluded as his men ?— No, I did not.
There were some persons who were to set
^fiie to the town, of whom you knew nothing?
—No; he had a parly from his own month,
•that he was to ladl on, of whom I knew
nothing.
Did you know any thing of Cook's party ? —
I did not.
You knew nothing either of Palla's or Cook's
party ; the one being to take possession of the
cannon, and the other to set nre to the town?
—No.
I think you say Hall was in the room at the
time those proclamations were written P— Yes.
Mr. Btmm Qarrmo, — ^Hall is not to be tried ?
Jdr. SoUcUor Genervtf.— No, my lord.
EUtmor WaOotr swomd— Bzamined by
Mr. Onra^.
I believe you are the niece and servant of
Mrs. Rogers, of No. 4, Fox-court, GrayVinn-
lane ?— Yes.
Did Brunt, who has been tried here, lodge
in your house ? — ^Yes.
Had he lodged there for many months before
'last Januaiy ? — ^It would have been a twelve
month this last Easter.
What rooms did he occupy P — The two front
rooms on the second-floor.
In the month of Jsmuaxy last, did he intro-
duce any person to you to take another room ?
—Yes,
Whet room was diatf— tbe two-pn of
stairs back room.
Who vras the person whom he soiotrodwd?
— Ings.
The person who has been tried ?— Tes.
Did be state to you what lags ivu?— Ib^
he did not.
Was it at all mentioned what bosnes lap
was f — ^No ; he said -peihaps he mfjbi brios
his goods in in a week.
The room vras unf umiahed ?— Yes. .
The rent was three shillings a week ?-Tes.
Did Ings ever bring any goods ia ?— Not 1»
my knovrledge.
Mmy IZc^iers sworn.— Exuninedbj
Mr. Gim^.
We have learnt from your niece, that in di;
month of January last, a two-psir of stsn
back room was let to a person?— Tei.
Whom did that person tun out tobe?-
Ings, I understand.
How many weeks did that perxnoccipj
the room ? — Four or five.
How many did he pay for?— Foor, to the
best of my knowledse ; he left one urDsid.
In the course of those four weeks, aid jn
make inquiry of Brunt as to who aid vkal
Ings was ? — I did.
What did he sUte to you wss Ing8'shB9ics|
—He stated thathe vras a batcher, and that »
knew nothing more of him thsn seeing kin ^
a public«house^ and hearing him inqiiiR Kir »
lodging. .
Did Ings ever bring any fonutare lai-^
In the course of the time thathe oocnpiMi^
do you recollect any evening seeing as; p^
sons go up stairs ? — Ves, ^^rvwdL
How many in number? — Three »«■*,
Was there any thing ^emMk^^
person of either of the three r—lbe middle »
was.abla^man.
[ApaKrvfOihmdedtothecimrtkl^l'^
DmAoR.]
Mr. Barm Gomnv.— Do y on wiA 4»
question to be putf
Dditniboiir— TlMy are pretendisg to ^
me, but I do Hot press the questioD.
Mr. Bank Gmww*— Do not ^^ J^
self : the question you hare now hasdM <P
be put bv your eooneel, is oaewbch"*
present form be would not bsve ^JZ
probably would not have put at sU : ^at«<v
abo do well to be att^tive to the end^"^
she faasnot said that she has known jeoy^
not asked whether you are the P^^^y
therefiwe the jury and I shaU not take itj^
she at least has proved that yoa ^ >J^
your question is 4>ut, itw^^t"*^??^
ble that better recollection might fix tn» r*
■were.
Dotwboii.— I understood st W ** **
did speak to knowing me.
1877];
BiAari TkUJbr High Trmok,
A. D. ISSOi.
11378
Mr«. Batm- Gmrmo.^-^o^ 'she neither has
done ao upon this nor upon a former occasion.
Daoidion. — I am obliged to your lordship.
. Jimpk Hale sworn* — Examined by
Mr. Curney,
Wer# yon apfmntice to ihe prisoner Brant|
who has been tried?*- Yes.
Did yon live with him at his lodgings in
Fox-coort ? — ^Yes.
He occapied two rooms } — ^Yes.
One he occupied asaworfcshop^ and- the
other as a room to lite in f — Yes.
Did you sleep in theworkshop?—* Yes.
Do you remember' a back room on the same
floor being looked at by a person in January
last?— Yes.
By whom I — ^Bv-Ii)g» and Bmnt.
After they had looked at it together, did
yon hear either of them speak to the other
upon the subject ? — I did.
Who spoke P— Bmnt spoke.
What did Brunt say to Ings ?— He said ^< li
witt do ; go down and give them a shilling.^'
Did Ings- go down? — ^Yes.
Had you known Ings before that ? — Yes.
How long f — About a fortnight before was
die first time I had ever seen him. '
In whose company had you seen him ?— He
was with Thistlewood in Brunt's workshop.
How • many times -had you seen him at
Brunt's in the course of that fortnight?— I do
not remember seeing him but twice before he
took the room.
The same evening in which Bmnt and Ings
had looked at the room, did Ings come there ?
—Yes.
How did he get into the room ? — ^He came
and asked Mrs. Brant for the key.
She.had the key ?— Yes.
Did she give it him ?— Yes.
'^ Did he go into the' room ?-*Yes, he did.
Did any other persons come into that room;
on- that night ?*— Hall, the tailor, came with
Inffs. >
Though you might not see, did you hear any
other peqH>nfl come into that room on that
niflbt ? — ^Yes, I believe there w^re.
xour master was taken up, I believe, on
Thursday the 24th of February ?— Yes. .
From the time that the room was taken by
Ings, till ynur master was taken up, were any
meetings of persons held in that room ? — Yes.
At what time of the day do you recollect
meetings to have been held? — Mostly they
were hAd about seven o'clock in the evening.
Give me the names of persons that you have
seen come to those meetings?.— Thistlewood,
IngsDavidson
B^ Davidson, do you mean the prisoner ?
—Yes; Brant, Bradburo, Adams, Strange,
Potter, Hall, Edwards.
' Look at the bar, and see whether you see
any other person there? — No, I do not re*
-meniber seeing any other.
• Do yon know any penon of the dMne of
ridd?-Yes.
VOL. XXXIII.
Do you know his person, or only his name ?
—I know his person.
Do you see him at the bar ? — ^Yes.
Did vou ever see Tidd there ?— Yes.
I did not hear you to repeat that name, but
I understand you did?
Mr. Baron Garroto.— I have taken him to
mention the name of Tidd.
A Jurynunh-^yfe did not hear him nam«
him before.-
Another Juryman, — I did. .
Mr. Gvmey, — I will put the question ; did
you see Tidd come to that room ? — ^Yes.
Mr. Baron Garrow. — Thistlewood, Jngs^
Tidd, Hall, Davidson, Edwards, Potter,
Adams, Strange, Bradbura; do you recollect
any othen? — ^Mo.
Mr. Gunuy.— Did you know Tidd well ?— •
I have seen him coming to grant's many
times. •
Was he of the same trade as your masterl
—Yes.
Did he oorae to your master about woikr— ^
I do not know that he did, but I have seev
him at 4>ur lodgings.
Have you ever been at his lodgings?— Yes. r
Where were they?— In Hole-in-the»walI-
passage, Brool^s-mari^et.
On any occasion when vou passed the dooi^
of that room, was it open ?— Yes.
Did you see any thing in it ? — ^Yes.
What ?— I saw some long poles, like branch-
es of trees, rough as the^r came from the tree.
About how many in number ?— About
twenty.
In the oourae of the time this room was used
in this way, did you hear any work going on
in it ? — ^Yes.
What kind of woritP-— I have heard ham*'
mering and sawing.
On the Sunday before your master was
taken up, was there any meeting in that room?
—Yes.
At what time of the day ?— In the morning.
Was it a larger or a smaller meeting than
usual ? — I believe it was a larger one.
Were the persons whom you have named all
there ? — ^Yes.
Are you sure, particularly,- that. Tidd was
there? — Yes.
Are you sure Davidson was there ? — Yes. *
Did they all go away* together, or separ^
ately ?-^Separately, one or two -at a time;
Was your master in the room with them 7-^
Yes.
After the meeting broke up, did anypersov
come out of the room with your master, int9
your roaster's room ?— Yes. • ;
Who was that? — Strange.
On the Monday and >on- the IHiesday," weVe
their meetings held in that room ? — Yes.
On the Wednesday, was there any numbab
of persons- there ?"— Yes.
Dayou^remember any perRlna being thei!»
at about two o'clock ?— I es. * - • <
4T
19T91 1 GBOIIGS IV.
^ T^^V t|^ ■» w^^^K^K ^#^^^Hi^^^V
»S* I
wbom I do not know.
Did Stnuigt and tlitl pt iwn cmm inio jfiir
workshop 7-- Ye9.
WiMl did Ihf7 do ihm^^Tl^yvm Mint-
ing pistols.
How manT pistols ? — Tire ox six.
Did they finish th^ dinting of diem, or did
any thing interrapt them T— Hiete were pet>*
aoM overlooking them.
Who obeerred that7— I do not know IIm
That stranger ohserred that T— Tea,
What did Brant say upon that !— Bmnt told
Ihem to go into the back-room.
DidttM^dosoT-^Yee.
In the eowte of that aAemeony were llrtie
iereval pertons in the baoki^oomf—Yei.
Did any person come ont of Uie bedMrnens^
Mid ask you fbr eat thingf-*>Yei.
Whodidr**-Tbistlewood.
What did he %A you for?— A pieot of
liiiliiig peper*
Did you give it him? — ^Yes, I did.
Wheie dSd he go vitk ii>--lMo te baet.
AAer that, did any other peitoa eeom Ml el
*e baek-iiooln lo yoti l-^Yes.
Wiio7— Brant
What did he desire yon in do Y-»Heteldinf
ti fb aAd get some paitridge paper.
How much P-^-Six sheets*
Did you go and buT it f— Yes*
Did you n^e it to him ^-*Yes.
Wheie did he take il to ?— Into the beclb*
Thii was on the Wednesday f — Yes.
At about what time did yowr mailer go
e«t ?«*^t about six o'dook.
After this, had your mistress occasion for
any thing for the puipcee of making leal-
Yes, she wanted a table.
Vbe table vaa efdinarifar in your Uring
«mmP— Yes.
To what place did she send yea le gel it?—
To the baefe*foom.
Did you knock attbe4oor7---Ye9*
Who opened it ?-*Potter opened it*
Did be give it you.?— Yes» he did.
After that, did any other person oellf"<^Yei^
Whooeltad?— TiM.
Did he come into Mrs. Brunt's ioaml-«r
Tea.
Did she show bim anv thing)— Yee*
What T^fihe showed him 0 piko-bwkd avd •
ewoid, which hang in onoLof the cupboardk
What did she ask him ?-^e asked ki«
what she oould do with tko»<
c What did he siqrlr-«etv< if sbo wohU
gWe them to him, he fiould lake th«m ow v«
Did he take tbem?->Yee.
' ISoiAttpiilMK-SQtbobiMlMQViik
After tbat, did fw hm m^ fiwin f»
4ota aiaiia fiom that iopint»-"Yoi.
After those persons were fene^ did 009
hoit ootne into your aieftiHWi tmm ind
apeak to her T— Yea.
WliMiaaie«go dad be
if oiqrinraanooatted^ abo
the White Hert,
lliat is a public-house dose by ? — ^Yes.
Shoilly allef,did any peiaows eallf— Yes.
How many ? — Ibreo.
Did yowr wditiem diiool tbom iw thw lUis
Hart ?— Yes.
Did tiMOF. know tbo wni l^lio*
What was done to show tbom tte imgp f*^
went and showod tbom Ibe wa^«
Upon your i«t«ea» did yow ftad em]FOiber
persons r—Wben I eeoko lo tbo dbor» I m§
there two or tbioO minnto% and Pofltor «a«M up.
Did yoi dimt bim 10 tbe WbiAo ilwiiiv>r
-Yet,
Were there any persons with bim^-^Yo^
Did you |o t* lU White Ban lo
tbo woy f «^o.
Why did yoo wii2— He eppaewo>l lo
know the way.
At about wboi time did yo«r
homo 1^ Alt about nine o^doek*
Weio Ikr M of has freot coeir «»4 iw
in the same condilioo as wbest his
No.
In wbnt oonditaoii were tbejf — XWir
TOrr muddy*
Did yoo bear what ho soid lo bio
bocomoinV-^-Yoaw
What did he s^ ?.-r^ aoid it wm oil w^
or words to thai ettiet«
Dtdbetypeor^ompQeedof mbogwigof Ue
appeared conftued*
WhaisaoM didbottyf^-ao oaadkaM
Mved hia Hfe^ and that was.alU
Did he say what bad happened to poahin
lile in danger N-"Yoi; bo aoM wimio lio bod
been a lot of oAoers had come in.
Just after he bad said tb«^ did awy
person come in T-**Yee.
Wbi that nemon known lo ,
to you ?-^ do «ec knew who it ik
How did fiaaat mceim himl««-B«
hands with him, and asked bim if hie
WwWWi» woo ^MWHbrWOO^w^pW
Mr* Bifwi Gtf^fowb-^ITfy to gliw ws _ .
words.— Ue shook bonds with biwH amd
**Doyoukn^wwliobaiialbnDed Urn.*
Mr. Ovmejf^ — Can yon remember the ttal
words be nsedv.when fie Game int— 1^
were the words to Ibe beet of my leocllecti
What did the stranger I87r— Ho saiii|
he did not.
From the manner ef tfieir 8pealtin| to
other, did it appear to yon fhat tbey nd
together ?— Toi.
What more did the stranger say ?—^B^ laid
be had had a dreadful blow on tbo sidhf and
was knocked down.
Mr. fioron 6erHNs.«*-'niat. Jfi^^^gf^mtieii
to be sp— ^"*^ tn thn samct trsnsaf llfm nf wisfn
yonr n^a^torbad boeo jgtca^llt^^^'^^^
Mr. Gormyi— After tM*. didyow
107 ao9^ tbibsli^Toii boamd^^ilhoao 9
thing to be done yet*'*
1981]
tlkhm4 TUdJbt High TrmMB*
A. D. IMD.
tlStt
AftAr wpa^ ^sty wtet did be laid lh«
stranger do ?— Tbey belli went awiy togeHttf.
After (bey weie fl^ef did Mn. Brent end
yon ffo into tbe back room P— Yes.
What did 3Pe« see Ibcief— I sSw in sone of
the eupboards a lot of rolls of brown paper^
with tar in them, and ionr large baUs, maae of
strief tanedy as big as my two fists.
What do yon now underatand them to be? — I
have heard since that they are hand-grenades.
Any thing else?— -Yes, sotne flannel bags;
two of them were Aill of something.
The otiiets were emp^t-- -Yes; and tome
cartridge paper.
Was there nx^f iron pot?— Yes.
To whom did that pot belong!— Bnint
Did yonr mistress take the things out, or
leave them in ihecupboaxdP*-»Len them ia
Ifae cnpboatd*
At what time did vonr master come home t
s— At aboat eleven o elo6k.
Before he went to bed did he give you any
instructions Ibr the next moming ?— Yes, he
told me to get up as soon as I oomd, and clean
his booto.
Did you get i^ soon in the morning, Aud
cleaa hb boots 7— Yes, I did.
After that, did he m^ke any inquiry of you f
•—Yes.
What was that P-^e asked me if I knew
the Boroufiby I told him yes.
Did he ask yon whether vou knew aur place
In the Borough ^— He asked me if I knew
Snow's ilelds ; t told him. no.
Did he then tell you wliere to go to?— Yes,
ipjn> to Kirby^stseet Snow's fields.
T6 whose house ? — ^To the house of a man
of the name of Potter.
Did he tell you what you were to take ?— *
He said I was lo take the things thai were in
the bask room.
Did he and you go together into the baolL
room ?-*Yes.
What did you take with you ?— We took
two rush baskets.
What did he direct vou to put into those
baskets? — ^The things that were in the cnp-
bowrd.
These things you had seen the night befi»e ?
Dsd you do se ?— Yea.
After that, was any thing done with resped
So either of Ihe basketoP-^Yce, eoe of tuem
IMS tied up ia a Uue apiott beleagiag to Hie.
Brunt.
What «ei Imd bean mftde of theft blue apron
Ibr some liaM l»sfi>re f'^It had been nied u «
iMftain to fthe window of the beek joem.
Was the other basket tied up in any thaeg?
Did your master go into, his esMS roomP—-
Yes.
' What hap)>eMd m, thit timeP-^Whtle we
^insve them locAiittf fetr sosoeOiliig to 4le M
other basket in, two ogcefs came in.
DUmMfylakeyMirsoeeieriiiie ouiiDiyt—
Yee.
They losk possession of the iWo baskeU
containing those things, and the iron pot ?—
Yes.
Jo$tfk Bde cress^xamined by
Mr* Curwood*
Do you know a man of the name of Dwyer?
—No.
Yon say you do ktiow Edwsrds !— Yes.
And Adams ?— Yes.
They were frequently there?— Yes.
Were you near enough to heat their vdctt
when they spoke ?— No.
Mr. Ow^, — ^WiU you ferf»ve me asking
one question r You have sMntioned Thistle-
woqil as one of the persons who used to come P
—Yes.
By what nanM did the others use to address
him ? — Sometimes T. and sometimes Arikur.
Did yon hear the other persons cell eaeh
other by their names P— >Yes.
Mr. CuntfootL-^l dare sfl^ ^ou have heard
the nian called by his Christian name many
times, have not you?— Yes.
And sometimes by the first letter of hfk
name? — Yes; and sometimes by his nam^
Thistlewood.
Yousqr Adams and fidwaids vrere frequently
there?— Yes.
More frequently than the other people do
you think P — £dvrards was there oftener than
Adams, but AdSmS used sometimes to com^
up.
Tkohm SrnaH sworn.— fixsmiued by
Mt. iJUkdak.
AfB yon a wntehmea ?— Yes.
Were you el wateh on the night of the SSai
of Febraaiy last» in GrosvenorHN|naie ?*— I
WPS.
Did you see any men there who perticalarijr
attracted your Uotiee ?'^I saw four.
Whet time of niflit was it?— It was about
half-past eiffht, or a quarter befose nine, at tbe
iunhast ; i^ I had eelkd half-pest eight.
What were they doing ?— They were looking
through the pelisades ; Uiey stood at the comer
When I went up to them. '
Where was that ?— It was at Mr. Maberl/s
house they wore at that time; they were look-
ing about, and I went up to see what thejr
wanted.
Did yen eey any thing to them P-^They
asked me what c^eledc il was, and I told them
H Was neef nine.
Did you observe any thing about the afu
peerenee of niy of them?—! thought Aev
Weie vefy eusplaoui iteraolers ; oaeof diedt
had a stick.
Wei One of them e daik aMa?'^Yes; a
mea of eoleuh
Do ¥0a know Whether Bissix was a watch*
man tnere P-^Yes, I called Bissix to make
otiseieatioai ^sMing- himi saw some suspicious
characters.
I38T] 1 GBOHOB FT.
^Md tfW^iam Onidtm *»i
118M
tny pencil arritv Wfera tmn o'clock ?
Wlnt did be do?«-I aiked hjM wImk k wm
we were going lo s he teid, et a mewt in Edge^*
were-road ; he went to a box at a comer of 3ie
loom, and took out a pistol, which he pot into
a belt which was round his body.
What else did he take ?*-AhoQt six or eight
pOte-headi wrapped up in brown paper.
Did yen look at tli^e pike<4ietds paitie»>
larlT?--No, I did not ewnine them.
xott did not see whether they weie bayonets
oriilesT-^lliey appeared to be these square
like bayonets; then he took a stiff of abovt
four feet long, with a hole at the eiidy as if to
pat a p&e in.
After he had thos proiided hinseify did you
go oat togetlMr?— Yes.
You went down into Holborsy and from
thence into Oxford-street f— Yes.
While you' were going along, what passed
between you? — ^I asked him what we were
going about ; and be said, I should know when
we got there; I then asked htm, whether we
^^ore going to the House of CooMnoos; he said,
no ; there were too many soldiers near there; I
iMked him again where we were going to, he
•aid to GfQevenor-s()ttare; I asked him^ whi^
tfaer any one ia parueular lived there ; and he
said there was to be a cabnet dinner there
HHut evening.
Upon his saying tiiat, did you undentaad
intended r— Yes; I did net ask him
any 1
D
^id you go on with him towards Edgware-
road f — ^Yes.
Did you come to an archwsy that leads into
a narrow street? — Yeu
When you got under that atehwity, did jrou
find any persons there ?— 'Yes, two men«
Dki may coufersation pass? — ^Tiddwasbe*
fore me; he spoke to them, I belieTeaftnr
Words, and then we eotersd into a sieble.
Did you find any persons there ?— Yes, three
or four men.
At the farther extrsmity of thit staUe there
was a ladder?— Yes.
Did you go up that ladder?— Yes, I went
up after Tidd.
Did you Bnd any perteos in the loft above ?
*-Yes ; about three or four-and- twenty psraons.
Did you see any thing like a carpenter's
bench ?-^Ye8«
With what was that covered ?— Swords and
pistols.
Was Thisliewood among the pewoas whom
you found there f— Yes.
Cm yon tell us viliat passed in the room
after you got there ? — ^There was a man ia a
hvbwn great eoat sitdag oa the other side of
the earpeaier's bench, who spoke of (he iaii.
propriety of soing to lord Harrowby's with so
small a nomber as ftfe«and«>twenty men.
UM the number been mentioned before f—
Yes; some person was going to eoantthem,
and Thistlewood said the#e was no oocasle«,
«he«s fPSie fivoMiad-4weaiy.
Jxnk at the prisoner Da^dson; ^id joa
him there that evening ?— Yes.
Did he come into the loft after yon, or did
jrou find him theref-*! do not think ka was
in when I first went in, but he came in aftei^
wards.
Had you ever seen him befofe?'-— At one or
two meetings In Smithfield.
So that you knew Us penon ?— Tea.
Mr. Bsroii Gerrew^— What do ye«
meetings in Smithfield ?— Public
Are you sure of his person K— Yes*
Had he taken any promiBent part in
tiaciy so as to give you an opi
obserring hie person ?*«hNo» I never faaaid
speak.
But you h«ro ao doabt of his peeaoia f— Ho.
Mr.
Gflierat.— Did yoa the feBow-
inff day, or soon afterwards, see him at Whit^
hall ? — I saw him not the following ds^, for
we were put in separate rooms; but the dsf
we were taken^to the Tower, and the day
before that, we were all put into a room toge*
ther.
Mr. Banm Gtartomj^Ymi say tbat Ais pe^
son remarkedea the impropriety of going lo loi€
Harrowby's with so small attuasber; did he
meatiott loid Banwwby's aamo f-^Yes^ I linak
he did.
Mr. Soliator CeaeroiL— Repeat whatpes^'
ed?— On his saying this, Thistlewood said he
only wanted iotute^i men to go into the room;
and, supposing lord Harrowby had sixteen
men servants, that number would be <piita
sufficient : upon which the nwn in tlie Wown
coat said, *^ when we come out of the rooos, of
course there will be a crowd roand the doer —
how are we to set away?*' Thistlewood said,
"you know tne largest par^ are wlktstdj
£me ;^ upon which l^vidson told the man ia
e brown great coat not to throw cold watsr
upon their proceedings.
Was the Davidson you speak of the pt^
soner at the bar? — ^Yes; for if he waa afiaid
of bis life» he might ^o, tiiey would do vnthoai
him; and Brunt said, that sooner thanthqf
should go from the business they were goias
to do, he would go into the room by himss^
and blow it all up, if he perished with them;
and he said, *^ you know we have got that that
can do it.^
After this conversation had taken piaos^
were any parties separated ftom the rest la go
into the room 2— Yes»
Mr. Jhvoa Omrmr^JM the vaaa la <tto
groat coat make aaysMBwer to tiset f-^-Vai;
he said as thej^ dl seeoMd for it, Urni^ lio
did not like gomg with so small anlnahmiiia
woidd not be' against it j ead herpibposieiiaat
they should all pot fhemselvaB '•ader iM
orders of TMstleWood ; erpon wUoh TMstfc
wood said, that every one engaged ia tftil
buaiaess woid4 base IM eaaieMM^arsi"
sei^ "
1889]
Tiiifii
JLD.]80(L
Mr. StMikiT GeiMr4»--After thai coqvok
Mtion kid uyieo plaoe, wert the (misods who
vwe to 90 into Um xoom Kpamt«d l^m th«
^ei«?^Y#a) Thiotlewood ,th«a piQpoetd
th«t th9 lovnteii BMD to go into the room
should Tolunteer from the pervons theii eesemp
Vled» vA that thoie who so Tol«Ate«red should
pleot themMl?e» at one side of the loom.
Upon that proposition being made^ did any
of them separata ihemselres for that pivrpoee ?
— Yesy about twelte or Ihirleeo.
Can ]F0« tell ua the namesrol any of them ;
yoa do not know the names of many of the
Sute any withw yowc knowledge ?«-Tidd«
SnmtyDafidfOQ and Wilsoo ; tlMit «i aU that I
recollect.
While this i)«a going on» did any alarm take
place below ?— I did not hear any; Thiatl&p
wood weat down staiis and came up again^
and said, he had iust received inteliigence that
the duke ol Welllugton and lord Sidmoutb^
had just avrived aa Ivd Harrowby's.
Shortly after that, did any alarm take place
below ^^X did not hear any alarm till I per-
ceived the men at the top of the stairs; they
laid they were oAoeia^ and bade them anr-
i:ender«
I will uot ask as te» whajt passed^ beoause
we will have that from other persona; you
were taken into euatody yourself r-^ Yes.
Smitheis was kOled?--! did not know it
was him till afterunupds; there was a man
. Yo«iwuie«xamiin«la|tWhitebs]l?—Yes.
Od oae of those oocasiousi were you band^
cuffed to ThisOewood?— Yes, both the last
limes I went
State what ThisUewood said to you ?-— He
said, if I.was asked who led me into that bu'i
uiMss and took me to tJie meetings, that I was
to say it was a man of the uame of Edwarda.
miat did you answer to thatP^I said,
^Hisw can I tell that fiUsehood, when you
Iluow I sever saw the maa;" he said that was
«fuo consequence; if I was asked what sort
«£u man he was, I was le say that he was not
amchl^lier than sasrseU^ of a sallow com-
yleiftou^ and dressed in a brown great coat*
l^h^ l&smmail cro8S*>e]iamined by
Mr. Cunoood
- You bad joined in thb plan to assassinate
ids majes^s lainisten .'^-Unwillingly.
You did join it?«<»Xhrottgh fbar^
. Bow through fear 7— I was afraid if I did
^t join it, il would be the worse for me; Ibr
when Brunt came on tlie 22nd of February, hp
isaadt that any one that was auy wiqrs qdo.
iianrnd with them, and did not go, would
flm tuHifoyed*
Xhefuteeyaahaiiini been ooDceroed with
tb«n' 'No more than what I hara stated.
Bud yeu beeft octocened wiihxtbeaa baiore ?
ri8M
^ iiai«tyeut(9ldi»allthatyottknefwtOi4ay?
*»Yes ; all I can rec<^leiU*
You do not kaow any tlaig of any ether
aohemea or plans ?-^No.
Yottknow BOtbingabout a prsttlamatimi?-^
Mo.
You know nothing of a plan to raise rebeU
lien, and levy war 7---»Nob
All you know is aboat a plan to **miirinttfu
his majealy'a miolatem P-^Um.
Mr. l^aron Garrow.^^U not that ezaminatiou
into the legal consequences ?
Mr. SoUcUor Generd.—! understand you to
say, you have told us all you know?— Yes.
Mr. Oarwood, — I will ask one question more
if you please : did not 'Hdd, when you were ia
the lort, tell you he had been deceived, and
Sersuade you to go away with him and leave
le party?— No. he did not; I wish for hia
own sake aawell as mine, that he had»
VimaoM Mmumeid sworn.— 'Examined by
Mr. SoUator QenerdL
You are brother to the last witncea ?•— Yea.
Are you a shoemaker?— ^Yes, I am.
Do you live with yonr brother ^— Yes.
Do you remember Thistlewood calling upem
your brother at his lodgings ?•— Yes.
Did Thistlewood call alone P— Mo, be was
accompanied by firunt.
Do you remember Thietlewood going out
to have some convenation with yonr bretherr
^Yee, he asked my brother if he could apeak
with him.
Udou Thistlewood askiuff your brother if h«
could speak with him, did they go out of th»
room together?— Yea.
Did they renmin ailMent for a short time?-^
Yes, diree or four nunutea.
Did Thistlewood and Brunt to awav
together P-^Yes.
Do you remember, ea Tuesday die 92nd of
February, Brant ciUling upon your brother ^p^
Yes.
Alone, or in oompanv with any peisou V^
In company with Tidd the prisoner.
What paused when they came w^Msr
brother said, ^ I tbou^t I had lost you."
What did Bnmt say in answer to that?-—
Something was said ooaeemiag tiie kh^e
death; it was said, that had made an alteiatioB
in their plans.
What did your brother answer to tfaat?*^
My brother asked him what pUna ; he said
they bad different objects in view.
What Aen took place ?— Btant ashed Tidd
if they should give us aa outline of the plaa,
but I do not know whether Tidd made ai^
anawet ; I did not hear any aaawtr. Brunt
said wo wuie to meet the followiug evtmng at
six o'elod^ at TybunHtampfta^ awl h^ihstt
gaare ua the pass-word.
What waa it?^That w« weia to use tha
lettem At^ aadif any of their party warn than
thef uBould anawer ^yiVS and then wo should
know theib.
Did anj^thiag poio pasal-<4fa^
laOl] 1 GEORGE IT.
TnalqfWUIiam^DaMumand
[im
Did Bniiit say^uiy thing about oalliog the
next day ? — No, he did not, but he came the
next afternoon, ^ween four and five o'clock ;
my brother could not go with him, for he had
work to finish ; then Brunt said, you must call
onTidd in Hole-in-the-wall passage, and he
will take you.
Did your brother go, and if so at what hour ?
—I believe it was near seven o'clock ; I did
not see him afterwards.
You did not go yourself? — ^No, I did not.
TTiomas Hiden sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. Gurtiey.
Hate you carried on the business of a cow-
keeper and dairyman in Manchester*mews ?— •
I have.
You have now the misfortune, I believe, to
be in prison for debt?^I have.
How long have yod been so ? — ^I have been
in a week ago last Saturday morning.
Do you know the prisoner, Wilson ?-^Yes,
I do, perfectly well.
.A lew days before the 22nd of February, did
he make any jproposition to you P — He did.
What proposition did he make to you ? — He
met me, and asked me if I would make one of
a party.
Foe whatf-*To destroy all his majesty's
ministers.
Where? — ^At a cabinet dinner; that they
were waiting for a cabinet dinner.
. Did he say whether they. had provided any
thing for the purpose ? — He said the^ had got
every thing ready^ and were waiting for a
cabinet dinner..
Did he describe what sort of things they
had ready ?-^He told me they had got such
sort of things as I never saw ; that they were
covered with tarpaulin, and bound round with
cords, filled full of nails and other things, and
that they had got some made of tin, which were
very strong indeed. .
Did he say what those things would do ? —
He said, the strength of them is such, that if
they were set fire to, and put under the walls
of the houses in the street where we were
walking, they would lift them up.
Mr. Boron Garrow. — Did he state how they
were to be used?-<-That they were to be
lighted with a fuse, and put into the room where
die gentlemen were at dinner; and all that es*
caped the explosion, were to die by the edge
of the sword, or some other weapon.
Did he mention any thing to be done with
any. persons' houses? — ^He told me after
that, that they were going to light up lights to
set fire to some houses.
Whose houses did he mention ?— He said,
they were to bum down lord Harrowby's,
lord Castlereagh's, the duke of .Wellington's,
and lord Sidmouth's and the bishop « of Lon-
don's, and one other that I do not recollect^
and by that means it would keep the town in
a state of confusion for a fi^ days, and it would
become general.
What answer did you give hin^ to this
proposition? — ^I asked him how in&ytbK
were to be ; he said, I had no ooeasioa tobe
alarmed, there was a geiiileman*8 serfantvb
had given them money, and if they would Kt
upon the subject, he would give them a o(tt>
siderable sum more.
Did yoQ tell him you woakl be oneM
did; I told him I would be one; I badi
reason in so doing.
After yoo had toki him that, did yoa trite
any letter to lord Castlereagh?— I did.
Did you go to lord Castlereash's booaeM
did.
Did you get access to his loidshii^?— I ^
not ; I went tvro or three times.
After that, to whom did yoo getacMsM
fcaw lord Harrowby.
Did you follow him f— I did, to the prt;
and there I spoke to him.
Did you give him the letter yoa wioteto
lord Castlereagh ? — ^I did.
Is that the letter [Aemg s }dter t» ^
wUneu] which you gave to Im Hanowbjl*
It is the veiy letter.
Did you the next day see his lordship tgu
in Hyde-park ?— Yes, I did, by appointoie^
On the next day, Wednesday, did yw «»
Wilson again ?^I again saw him oa the SSii
That was the day of the Cato-itnet tasr
neas P — ^Yes.
At what time of the day?— Ibetierelfr
tween four and five o'clock in the aftenwB-
What did he then say to you ?-He net-w
as I was walking up Manchester-street ^
one of my little girls; he said, "Hjdei,J»
are the very man I want to see ;" I ««*, **»»
is there going to be ;" he said, « thcreistote
a cabinet dinner at lord Harrowby's, ia Oni'
venor square." I asked him where I »*^
meet them ; he said, I was to come up WW
Horse and Groom, in John-street, the conff
of Cato-street, and there I was to ge ioto oe
public-house, or to stop at the corBertiflI«"J
shoved into a stable close by. I WM w"*
them at a quarter before six, or Bxo'dfick. i
asked him, if that was all that was goiBf "
be ; he told me that there were to be fowf*'
ties, one in Cato-street, another in Guy »*•
lane, one in the City, or in Oee's-couit, I "*
not certain which.
Where was the fourth to be?— Theft *»
to be one in the Boroueh. ,
Did he say any thing more aboottjeei-
court ?— He said, I bad no occasiwi » ».
alarmed, for all Gee's-court was in it
By whom is Gee's-court inhabited f-jiw*
Heve it to be generally inhabited Bioiily'>y
Irishmen. ^^jl^)
Did he say any thing more about In*»»-
—He told me that the Iriahmea ""^^^
but they would not act till the EbT**^
began first, as the EngliA had so iDaBy«>^
deceived them. ^. gv
Did he/aay any thing about 3««"^^
told me that there were two pieces <>JJT^!
in Oray's-inn-lane, that wereeaalyl*"'?
breaking in a small door.^ -
139d3
kk^ard Tiddjbr Hi^ Treamf.
A.D. 18S0.
[1394
Mr. Boron Chrrow. — ^Did he say what par-
Scalar business was to be done by your party?
—He told me, that our particular party was to
go to lord Harrowby'Sy in Gros^enor-square;
and that they there were to do the grand things
to destroy idl his majesty's ministers.
Mr. Gftmuy.— Yon say, that he told yoa
there were some caniioa in Gray*s-inn4ana,
4hat eould be got by knocking in a small door ?
— ^Yes ; and that there were four more pieces
•of cannon in an ArtiUery-groimd somewhere,
tet I do not know where; and that they could
easily be got, by killing a sentinel.
Did he say where they were to go, after they
had done that which they intended in Gros-
Tenor-square ? — ^He said| after the grand thing
was done, all parties were to meet somewhere
in the neighbourhood of the Mansion-house.
Did he say any thing more to you? — He
told me I was to be sure to come, or the grand
thing would be over before I came.
Did you go to J<An-fltreet that evening? — ^I
did.
At what time? — Between six and seven
o'clock ; but I believe-it to be near seven when
I ffot there.
When you got there, whom did you see ? —
When I came into John-etreet, by the comer
of the post by Cato-street| I saw Mr. Wilson
and Mr. Davidson.
By Davidson, do you mean the man at the
•bar f— Yes, I do ; the coloured man.
Had you known Davidson before f —• Yes, a
long wiule before.
What did either of them say when you
came ?— Mr. Davidson «aid, ** yon are come ;"
I said, T was come, but I am behind my time ;
lie asked me then if I was going in ; he said,
Mr. Thistlewood was there; I told him I could
not go in, as I had some cream to get, and
must go and get it, if possible.
You left them, and did not go again?— I
left them, and did not go again.
Did you ask him what time they should go
away? — ^Yes ; and be told me they should go
^i^ut eight o'clock, and if they were gone, I
was to follow them down to Grosvenor-squavs,
the fourth house from the comer, on the lower
itide.
. Do you remember Davidson saying any
thing to you? — ^Yes ; the last woids he said to
me were, *^ come you dog, come, it will be the
best thing you were ever in. in your life."
•Mr. Gttrnfy. — We do not offer the letter in
'Ovidenee^ iqy lord not conceiving it to be com«
petent to us to offer it ; . if my learned friends
call for it, it is at their service. .
Mr« Bsrsit €kaTO».>^Yca nadMStaad by
lA^9.gentleiMn, the.piioe«cator cannot read that
letter, because it is a conaHuiiflation with
mhvcik none of the prisooeie'cbaigad, had any
thing to do ; I mention that, becMfe you might
loader that it is not read.
A Juryman (Mr. FoHnjg).— It strack me quite
forcibly, my lord.
VOL. XXXUI.
Thomm Biden cross-examined by
Mr. Cunoood.
His last words were, ^ come, you dog, come,
it will be the best thing you were ever in in
your life V — ^Yes, they were.
And you expected a great deal of plunder,
I dare say ?— >No, I did not expect any thing
of the kind, for I never intended to go.
How long had you known Wilson ? — I had
known him a good while.
Had you often seen him? — I had seen him
at Mr. Clark's the tailor.
You mean to represent yourself as an honest
man ? — I do, in that respect.
Did not you think it a very odd address to
you, an honest man, that a man should come
up to you, without any introduction, *^ we are
in a plot to assassinate his majesty's ministers,
will you join us ?" — No, I did not think it at all
surprising, for I had seen Mr. Davidson, the
black, before that, at my friend Clark's, and he
said to mcj as he went out, '* Hiden, you do
not come forward like the rest of us, to support
the meetings.'' I said, no, I could not ; and
J had been denied to him by my family* be«
cause I did not wish to see him.
There is a great deal in that ; but I do not
understand it ?
Mr. Boron Giotow.— I must take it down as
he has stated it ; it will peifaaps be found to
bear upon this ; state it slowly ?—
WUnm^^ynal% I was at Mr. Clark's, the
prisoner at the bar, Davidson, came in, and he
said as he went out, ** Hiden, you do not come
forward as the rest of us do, to support the
meetings ;" I told him I did not, my business .
would. not let me; he told me, that the people
that had come forward, and promised,to suppoit
the cause, them thatdid not come forward would
be the first that they should murder ; by so do-
ing, when Wilson met me, haviuff seen him there
at the same place, I told him X would come,
for my own safety, to the meeting, because
Davidson told me that the men that did not
come forward, would be the men that. they
should first murder.
Mr. CunoocN/.— You kept away firom them
asinuch as you could? — Yes; I never went
among them, but at a shoemakers' club twice.
Then, of course, you did not know what their
objects were? — ^No, I did not, except what
Wilson told me.
Except what Wilson told you on this day ?
— On the days I have mentioned.
Wilson told you they had a plot to murder
his majesty's ministers ? — That they were going
to murder his majesty*^ miinsters.
That was all he told you ?— He told me they
had got hand-grenades, and things of that
kind.
But he did not tdl you of any other plots
they had in hand ? — ^He did not tell me, unless
it was the cannon, and what I have stated.
It was part of the plan to murder his ms^es*
4U
1395] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of William Daridmrn and
[1396
ty's ministers, and set the town on fire ? — He
Slated that which I have told yon.
Mr. Baron Garrow. — By those means it
ivould keep the town in a state of confusion
for a few days, and then it would become
general.
Mr. Cunoom/.— You were too many for me
the last time ; you know a man of the name of
Bennett F^Yes.
I asked you whether you had not invited
him to attend any private radical meeting ?—
I never did ask him to attend a private radical
meeting, and I will be on my oath to it.
Did you or did you not tell him that when
he was there he might speak or not speak, just
as he liked ? — I do believe I did say so.
Had you never asked him to attend ?
Mr. Oumey, — A radical meeting you asked
him the first time ? — I never said the word ra-
dical meetings of any form whatever.
Mr. Cunoood, — Did you tell him he might
be called upon to take up arms, and if he was
called upon, he must take up arms?— I never
said so to the best of my recollection.
Will you or not swear you did not? — I
never will swear what I do not know, for no
man living; I never recollect saying so to him
in my life ; I never made use of the words
radical meeting to him.
Did you or not tell him that if he were called
upon to take up arms, he must do it ?-»I never
recollect saying such a word to him.
You must recollect whether you did or not ?
— I do not know that I did use that word to
him.
Do you think you could have said that and
forgotten it P — I do not know that ever I said
such a thing to him ; if I did know that I had
said so, I never would have denied it.
Then all you mean to say is, that you might
have said it, but forgotten it f — No, I do not
think it possible that I did ; for I did not know
of it being in contemplation at the time.
Then you have not recollection enough to
tay you did not? — ^I have not.
Thomoi Hitlen re-examined by
Mr. Gvmey,
You have been at a meeting called a shoe-
maker's club ? — Yes.
How many times ?— I went twice.
With whom did you go?-^Mr. Clark, a
tailor.
Did he live near yoo^ or in the same house
with you?— He has done, but did not at that
time.
Whom did yon tee at those meetings P—
Davidson the prisoner, and one more of the
prisoners who is now at the bar.
. Who is that ?— Harrison.
Where was that club, called a shoemaker^s
club, held ?— I believe the sign of the publio-
honse was the Scotch Arms, in some court
near the Strand, but I do not know any other
direction than that; it was on a Soodif
evening when I was there, but 1 nerer vm
there but twice.
Did you at any time propose to Bennett to
go with you and Claik?— Yes, I did; nj
friend Clark called upon me, sod induced m
to ffo, and I said, I dare say Bennett will go
with my fnend Clatk and another person ; aid
the other person said, ** No, give the other a
Newgate calendar, it will suit him mochbettv
than going.**
But Bennett went with yon and Gufc ?— To;
that was as long aco, I may safely say, is fbtf
or five or six months.
John Baker swom.--Eiaiiiined hj
Mr. Aticni^ GtHavL
I believe you are butler to the eari of Hv'
rowby ? — ^I am.
Do you recollect, in the month of Febraaj
last, by his directions, issuing cards of iavitatioa
to Uie Cabinet ministeia to dine at hishooef
—I do.
On what day in Febmaiy was it yoo isMd
those cards ?— On the 18th or 19th; I ntkr
think the 19th.
For what day ?— The Wednesday foDowi^;
the 23rd.
The cards of invitation were issued eitiier
on the Friday or Saturday preceding !—Tkf
were.
Do you know whether before that time, ii
consequence of the king's death, theeabinet
dinners' were suspended? — ^That was the &*
after the king's death.
' Was the dinner prepared for the 23id^'U
was.
I believe the preparations went oo tUl ik
dinner hour ? — ^Yes, till after the dinner kfl«r.
At what time, on the evening of tbeiH
was the dinner countermanded by loid Hat*
rowby? — ^About eight, or it might beteDa*«
nutes after eight.
Up to that time had you and the otber mi^
vante of my lord Harrowby expected thcnm*
ters to dine at lord Harrowby's boose M<ir
y[e expected them momentarily.
At what hour did you expect thcffl ?-«'*'
o^clock was the regular dinner hour, andle^
peeled them from that time. ^
I believe one of tlie houses adjacent to ion
Harrowby's is the Archbishop of Yo**-^
Yes, it is.
Do you remember, between six """J^
o'clock on that evening, obsenring cin^
setting down or taking up?— Yss, ^*2
carriages^ I believe, taking up bcftweestf •»
seven o'dock.
Mr. BortmOomno.— €entleneD,theo0iM^
would nataratly call lord Harrowby v(A "•
hie lordship is probably ensagdd in sosie pow
business, which prevents his hehqpherev"'
moment. His lordship will be v^^^^^f^
arrives, to prove the comim»i«w*j
Hiden, and that the preparations for !»•■■"
went on as you have jast beard.
i
13971
Richard Tiid'far High Treaton.
A. D. 1890.
[1393
Bichard Munday sworn. — Examined by
Mr. LUtUdak.
Where do you lire ? — At No. 3, Cato-street
Do you remember on the afternoon of the
23rd of February last, seeing any person in
Cato-street ? — Yes ; when I came from work
in the afternoon, I saw Davidson walking
to and fro in the gateway.
Did yon see him again? — ^Yes, I saw him
running away after the transaction took place ;
but I had seen him between that lighting
a candle, with another candle in his hand.
Did you see him go into the stable ? — Yes,
I saw him push the stable door open, and go
into it ; ana I saw Harrison at the door at the
time.
Did you obsenre, whether the coat of either
of those men flew open? — Yes, Davidson's
eoat flew open, as he stooped with his hat over
the candle ; and I observed a cross-belt round
him, and a belt down here; and I saw two
pistols and a sword, I suppose, sticking out
here ; I thought it to be a sword that stuck
out in that way.
In the course of the afternoon had you seen
any sacking, or any thing put against the
door? — I heard a nailing up at watering
time, and I looked up and saw them nailing
some sacking over the railing of the door, a kind
of bread-bagging or something of that sort.
Would that prevent any person looking into
tfae room ?— I thought it was to keep the place
warm, to bring some cows back being cold
"weather; but it would keep any persons from
looking in.
Had the stable been empty for some time ?
—Yes, the cows were taken away before
Christmas; I had not seen the door open from
that time till this.
~ Had you seen persons go in and ontf —
When I passed by, I saw two go in and three
eome out.
Later in the evening did you observe per-
sons ? — ^No ; after half-past six o'clock I was
never out of my door.
George Caylock sworn. — Examined by
Mr. IMtledak.
Do you live in Cato-street?— Yes.
Did vott see any person in the street on the
33rd or February ? — ^Yes, Mr. Harrison.
Had you known him before ? — ^Yes.
Did you see him go into the stable ? — ^Yes.
Did he tell you any thing about it? — He
told me he had. taken two chambers there, and
<^vras going to clean them up.
Did you see any other persons go in and
oat of that stable that evening ?— Yes.
How many? — ^From twenty to five^nd*
twenty.
George Thomoi Joteph BxUhven sworn.— Ex-
amined by Mr. Bottand.
You are one of the constables of Bow-
reet ? — ^Yes.
Did you, in consequence of information, go
on the 23rd of February to Cato-street t— I
did.
At what time did you first get there ?-~I
did go dp in the afternoon, and at six o'clock
I went there again.
Did you go into the Horse and Groom ? —
Yes.
Did you see either of the prisoners at the
bar, or the persons charged with this indict-'
ment, there ? — Yes, I saw Cooper and Gilchrist
there.
Had Cooper any thing with him ? — ^Yes, he
had a mop-stick or broom-stick.
Did he leave it or take it away ? — He left it
there.
Did either of them come back for the stick '^
— Gilchrist did.
Did he get the stick ? — He did not, I have it.
What sort of a stick was it ? — Like a hair-<
broom-stick, a mop-stick; and there was a place
round it, as if to receive a socket.
Did you go into tlie stable ? — I did.
At what hour? — ^About half-past eight, as
nearly as I can tell.
Who was with you when you went? were
Ellis and Smithers and others with you ?^*
They were.
What did you observe ? — ^I observed a man
with a gun on his shoulder, and a sword by
his side, with cross-belts.
Do you know who that man was?— I do
not.
What did you then do? — ^I went up th^
ladder.
What did the ladder lead you to ? — ^To a
loft.
What did you observe? — A bench, with
arms upon it ; and I heard a clattering of arms.
How many men ? — I suppose about four or
five and twenty.
What did you say ? — I said, ** We are ofii-
cers, seize their arms."
What, did they do ?— Thistlewood, whom I
immediately saw, seized a sword, and retired
to the inner room.
What did he do with that sword? — He
stood fencing with it, endeavouring to keep
any body away that approached him.
Did any body approach him? — ^Yes, Smi-
thers.
What did Thistlewood do on his approach-
ing ? — He stabbed him.
Did Smithen fedl?— Yes, he died imme-
diately.
What happened after this? — A pistol was
fired, and the lights were put out instan;-
aneously.
By whom was that pistol fired? — I have
heard since, but do not know of my owu
knowledge.
What was done then?— I heard a voic-.
from the corner where Thistlewood Was, cat,
" Kill the b ■ rs ; throw them down suirs :
I joined in the cry, and got down with them.
Where did you go? — I got into John-slree^.
and met the soldiers, and returned with cap-
tain Fitzclarence.
1900] 1 GEORGE IV.
In whtt state was the loft when yoo
turned ? — I did not get into the loft for some
time after that
Upon your coming back to the stable door,
did you observe any body ? — ^I observed Tidd«
What was he doing? — Hewasendeavonrinff
to get away from the stable-door^ as it appealed
to roe.
Did yon lay hold of him ?•— I did. I said to
some body, ^ Lay hold of him f and, as I spoke,
he lifled up his arm, and then I saw a pistol :
I hud hold of his riffht arm, I turned him round,
and fell upon the dunghill, and he. upenme ;
the soldiers cam^ up soon alterwards. The
pistol, I shoufd mention, went off.
Mr. Baron Ganvw, — ^Did it go off whilst it
remained in his hand? — ^That I am not aware
of.
Trial ^WiOumDavUsm mid [UflQ
self, ^ damn me^ here is nothing ben W t
tobacco-box f
Mr. Baron Garrow. — ^Was that so ? that job
expressed yourself on searching him, ' there s
nothing here but a tobacco-box ?— No.
The Earl of Barrowbjf sworn.— ExaBiaed
by Mr. AUomof GenereL
I believe you are one of his nja^*i forf
council?— *I am.
And one of his Hnnisters ?— I am.
We understand, my laid, from yoBrbnthr,
that cards of invitation were issasd faj ynr
lordship's direction, lor a cabinet.
Mr. ArffawL— Was he secured ?— He
and I conducted him into the pubKe^ionse.
On taking him in, was he searched ?— ^He
What was found on him ? — A leathern belt
round his waist, and two ball-cartridges in his
pocket.
Did you remain in the pnblio-bonse ? —
Befbre t had finished searehin|r him, a man,
named Bradbum, was brought in.
Did you search Bradbum f — I did.
What did you find T — I found a string twists
ed five or six tines round his waist, and six
ball-cartridges and three balls loose in his
pocket.
Were dkfer^ Kny others brought in?— Wil-
ton, and the black, Davidson.
You did not search either of them ?— No*
Did Davidson say any thing on hik beipg
brought in? — ^Yes; lie damned and swore
•gainst any roan that would not die in liberty's
cause; that be gloried in it; and he sung
part of the song, ^ Scots, wha' hae wi' Wal-
lace bled.'' ,
Did Wilson say any thing? — Yes^ he said it
was all up; he did not care a damn; they
might knock him on the head now.
You returned to the loft, I believe ?— Yes.
Who were there? — There were some sol-
diers, and some of the prisoners, and one who
is an evidence*
Monument ?— Yes.
Did you find any arms there?— Yes.
Who were the other three, t>e8ides Monu-
ment ? —Strange, Cooper, and Gilchrist.
What description of arms did you find?— I
found two swords myself, and i saw some
pistols found, and a gun or two ; I found ten
grenades in a bag, and one laige one was
found in my presence, by Nixon, ml given to
me, and two fire-balls.
Have you the custody of all these P— lliey
are here, Taunton has the key.
Tidd, — My lord, I wish to ask him a ques-
tion ; if you recollect, I was the first man you
took into custody ? — ^You were.
TuM.— .On searching me, he expressed hte-
tbe 33id of Febrmiiy last?— Thev '
at the cloee of the precediBg wsaL
I must trouble your lordship to repeat (hi
names of the members of the canoet, aad thdr
respective offices ? — The lord chsDeellor; kd
Westaaoreland, the lord privy sesl ; the eulof
Liverpool, first lord of the T^eararj; Mr.
Vansittart, chancellor of the Bxdiemier; lorf
Castlereagh, secretary of state for toe foiei|i
department ; eait Bathurst, ttenM^^^
for the colonial department; lord aidsMilii)
secretaiy of stata ror the home dtmitaat;
mr lord Melville, first lord of Ae adai.
ralty ; the duke of WelUngtou, master geaim
of the ordnance Mr. Canong, praiW «
the India board; Mr. Robiasoa, (nsBdeata
the board of trade; Mr.BraggeBatoit)^
cellor of the duchy of Luicaster; Mr. W«-
lesl^ Pole^ master of the Mint; and the en
of Mulgrave.
Aad yourself? — Yes. __ji
Your lordship is president of the csodbIH
I am.
Mr. BoroR Garrowi — Fifteen in oombcr?-
Yes.
Mr. Attorn^ GenerW.— In coawqneiMjl
his late majesty's deatii, I belief e the a^
dinners had not been held as usual, ftrsoae
time ?— They had not -
I omitted to ask your lordship ^'^'^^''^
those noblemen and gentlemen iriiobafeiK'*
mentioned are privy councillors ^—T^ J*!
privy councillors, and compose wliit'*'*'^
the cabinet council. .
Does yeur lordship remember, oo voj
preceding the Wednesday on which the ci^
binet dinner was to be had, ridiogin the p»'
Does your lordship remember ii«»f j^
person ['Hiden] near Owfrenor-gate?-! w»
accosted by him near Gvosvenopfite'
Did he give you any letter l-Ht did.
I« that the tetter? hkemigakt»^^
io»Wp.V- That ia die letter. ^ _. ,
A letter addmsed to my lord Ctfie"^
Did .he desire year lordship tohave^
communicated to my lord Castlereag- .
told me it contained intelKgeace of V^Ji
portance-to his lordrfiip and ^'J^'/zul
sired I would have it oottBumcatid f»^
Castlereagh,
14^11
Rbikard "Hid fir H^ Trtmon.
A.D. 18a(K
[i4ee
Did you upon that inquire his naiiie?^-He
expressed a wish to have some further conveiw
sation with me; lassked him whether he had
pat his name and address in the letter, he^aid
he -bad not. I told him, if I was to eommu-
nicate with him it would he necessary I should
know Ids name and address, and upon that he
gave me a card containing his nan»e and
aMress.
Did you make any appointment to meet
him again? — When I knew what were the
ooBlents of that lettev, I made an appointment
to meet him again in the park, at eleven
o'clock the neact morning.
Did your lordship ascertain the contents
of that letter ^i)e yon were with him? — ^I did
not; the letter was produced by lord Castle-
reagh at the counciL
Did your lordship meet him again the ibl*
lowing meriting T — ^I did the next morniM, in
the young plantations near the Ring ; I ap-
pointed that spot, because he appeared to be
extremely apprehensive of being seen in my
eompany when I met him the day before near
Grosvenor-gate.
Having seen this person in the manner you
stated, did the dinner take place at your lord*
ship's ?— The dinner did not take place.
The preparations went on ? — They went on
until the communication of a note which I
wrote from lord Liverpool's house, between
seven and eight o'clock ; that must have reach-
ed my house about eight.
That was the first communication that your
lordship gave to your ^rvants, that it was not
CO take place ? — ^It was the first.
Jama EUu sworn. — Ezapoined by
Mr. Atiornejf General.
I believe you are one of the conductors of
the patrole at Bow*street? — I am.
Did you go to Cato-street on the evening
of the 23rd of Februaiy last ?— Ye^ I did.
Did you go with Ruthven ?-<-I did.
Did you go into the stable in Cato-street ?
—Yes, I did.
About what time did you arrive at 'the sta*
bleP — ^As near as I can state, abpnt hal£.past
oight o'clock.
On your entering the stable, did you observe
any man in the stable ? — I did ; I saw David-
aan ; 1 believe it was Davidson.
Where did you see that man whom you be-
lieve to be Davidson ? — Between the foot of
the ladder and the door of the stable, about
half way between.
The ladder is opposite to the door of the
stable, at the further end ? — Yes.
What did he appear to be doing ? — He bad
flot a caibine, or something of that kind, in
his right hand, and a sword at his left side,
and'f^ appeared as if he was walking sentry.
Did you observe whether he had any belts
on ?«— He had v^ite belts.
Did you observe any other person in the
stable? — ^There was another person in the fur-
ther stall of the stable.
Thai was tike stall nearest the ladder ?•— -Yes.
Do you know who that person was? — I
cannot tell ; I should not know him again ; I
only saw that he was a shorter man, in a dark
coat.
When yott say, you believe the man yon
saw on first entering to be Davidson, did you
observe him ?— Yes ; I took him by. the collar,
turned him round, and looked in his foce, and •
saw it was a man of colour.
How soon afterwaids did yon see him in
custody ?— I took him into custody withqn five
minutes afterwards.
Mr. Baron Gorrtno.-^When you took hin^
into custody, did he appear to be dressed in
exactly the same way as you had observed, hiiOi
before ?— Yes, exacUy the sao^e.
Mr. AUamey General.— Had he the beh? —
Yes, he had the white cross-belts.
At the time you apprehended him, had
he a carbine and a sword N— Yes, he bad.
Did you go up the ladder to the loft above ?
—I followed Ruthven up the ladder.
What did you observe when you got into
the loft ?-r-Wben I got into the lof^ I observed
a number of people f&lli^g back to the back
part of the room.
How many persons did there appear to be
in the room ? — I judged there mignt be about
four or five-and-twenty altogether; I cannot
speak positively.
Did you see any of them retire into a small •
room adjoining the loftT — ^There yiest three
apparenUy attemptinff to enter Uie small room,
and as I went up, Arthur Thistlewood bran-
dished his sword at me, and was advancing
rather towards me ; I desired him to desist, or
I would fire, at the same time holding up a
pistol with one hand, and my staff with the
other.
What did he do upon that? — ^Upon that he
retreated back just within the door of the little
room.
What happened then? — Smithers, who im-
mediately followed me, on gaining the top of
the ladder attempted to enter the little room ;
at that moment Thistlewood made a stab and
stabbed him on or near his riffht breast; upon
that his hands went up in that way, and he
fell back, and exclaimed '' Oh my €k)d Y* on
that I immediately fired at Thistlewood, but
vnthout effect ; Smithers staggered against me,
and fell past me, a general rush and confusion
took place ; I was pushed on to the ladder, and
pushed down the ladder.
Into the stable? — ^Yes; upon that I at*
tempted to get into the door way into Cato-
street; I remained in the door*way a few
seconds, when two or three shots were fired
in Uie stable, one or two of which passed me
in the door-way ; another was fired by a ti^i
man, in a dark-coloured coat, by some person
up in the comer of the stable; the man firing
stood under the ladder ; I then attempted to
to outside the door, when some shots were
red from the window of the little room*
1403] 1 GEORGfi IV;
TrialofWimaM
and
[1404
The window of the little room looked into
Cato-street ? — Yes.
In what direction were those iihots fired from
the window ? — ^Towards the door.
That window is not directly over the door }
— >Noy it is over the ouvhouse, three or four
yards out of the line ; I then heard a cry of
^<stop him;'' and saw Davidson mn in the
dkectioB from the stable towards Qoeen-street;
I pursued him, and came up with him I think
about serenty yards off, and took him into
custody.
What happened on your getting «p to him ?
—I catchM him by the collar, and he at-
tempted to cut at me, but I was too close to
him, and Gill, another officer, came up and
assisted me in disarming him; he maae no
resistance after I had once got hold of him.
Had he a carbine when you took him ?— He
had, and the cross-bdts.
' I believe you afterwards assisted in securing
tome of the other prisoners } — ^As soon as I
bad left him in the custody of others, I re-
turned to the stable, and assisted in securing
three or four more in the stable.
Jame$ Ellis cross-examined by
Mr. Curwood,
. When you took Davidson, did you take him
into the public-house ? — I took him into a shop
first, not a public-house at that time*
It was a chandler's shop, I believe ? — Yes ;
he was afterwards in the public-house.
Robert Chmman sworn.— Examined by
Mr. SolicUor GeneraL
You are also one of the Bow-street patrole ?
—Yes.
Were yon appointed to go to Cato-street on
the 23rd of February ?— Yes.
Do you remember being at the Horse and
Groom in that street ? — Yes.
Who was with you ? — William Lee, the con-
stable.
Do yon remember seeing any persons
come into that house? — Yes; Davidson and
Cooper.
Who was the third? — I cannot identify
him ; I believe it to be Gilchrist.
Tell us what they did, when they first ob-
served you? — ^They stood observing us for
some time through the rails.
They were outside ? — No, under the door by
the lamp.
In consequence of their observing you, did
you go on ? — We went away ; but previous to
that Cooper went past ; Gilchrist, 1 believe it
was, passed me so quickly that I could not
identify him at that time; Davidson had a
drab great coat on, that covered him entirely
over, a very large one, a servant's coat.
You passed on to Molineux-street 7 — ^Yes.
Where did you go then ? — We turned roimd
one of the streets to Queen-street.
Did you ob«erve them again ?— Backwards
and forwards, I saw persons go in ; Cooper as
he passed in said he should go in and have
some beer, and as they passed diey looked a
in the face.
As if observing who yonjrere ?— Yes.
DM you afterwards go round into Qvees-
street?— Yes.
Did you, when yon got to the QneeiHtKtl
end of Cato-street, hear the report of apinolf
—I did.
In consequence of that did you ran up Calih
street?— I did.
What did you observe ?— The persom were
then running Teiy hat out of the stable, iid
there was a firing ; two armed men ran don
the street, and as I had just overtaken then,!
heard a pie6e go off ; I turned roond sod
heard somebody say, ^ Stop him T I tniud
round, and I observed a man with his haoi
up, I thought to strike any person; I weot^
to him, and he struck at me, and I then avit
was a sword. Ellis recovered, and laid hold
of him by the collar, and Ellis and I tookUa
against the wall ; he had also a carhiiie.
Who was that ?—DaTidson. Hewasdreeed
quite differently then ; we took him into the
chandler's shop.
Was there any thing else in bis podLet?—A
couple of pistol flints in his pocket.
Davidson.'^yLy lord, I would beg to ak
this witness a question.
Mr. Adolfha. — Send it over to me, ndl
will ask it it I think it proper.
[The pritoner wrote mum kisqwatim,^^
was handed to his counsel].
Robert Chapman cross-examined by
Mr. Adolpkm.
Did you go into any public-hoosei at aO
with the prisoner F-^No.
Did you remain with him ? was he in yosr
custody from the time when he was takes?-
Yes ; till I went with him into the stable.
And he never was taken into any paW*"
house at all ?— No, not then.
Where was the carbine F —Benjamin uiB
took it, and loaded it in the shop ; he «^
and bought some powder. Gill came ap vb
struck him on the sword hand, and took it &«*
him.
You saw that done ? — ^Yes.
Was not the carbine in the road, at iobi
distance from him, when you took him?— *^^
I think not.
Robert Chapman re-examined by
Mr. Solicitor GeneraL
You conducted him to the chandler's sM^
and afterwards to the suble ?— Yes, witkawt
of soldiers. -
And afterwards yon gave him ^V^'T.^^^
Whether he was taken into the pnW*wK*r
or not, you cannot tell F— No; but I do »»
think he v#&s. »^
You do not know, one way or the c^^
No, I do not.
1405]
Richard Tiddfor Jtigh Treann.
A. D. 1820.
C140)5
WiUiam Lee sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Gttmey,
Are yon a Bow-street patrole ? — ^Yes.
On the evening of Wedn^ay the 23rd of
February, did you go in company with Chap-
man ? — ^Yes.
At about what timeP — Somewhere about
hal^past six.
Near the sign of the Horse and Groom did
you obserre any persons? — ^I observed Da-
vidson.
The prisoner Davidson? — ^Yes; and Gil-
cbrist. Cooper, and Harrison, as well.
After you had stood there some little time,
did you walk away ? — ^Yes.
Did any person follow you ? — Thistlewood
followed us, and spoke to us.
In what way? — At least I spoke to him
first ; he came and stared us in the face, and I
said it was very rude to stare us in Uie face ;
Chapman said, ^'I suppose the gentleman
thinks he knows ns.'' Thistlewood returned
for answer, ** Oh, it is a mistake;" and turned
on his heel towards Cato-street.
You and Chapman had been sent first I
believe, as officers less known ? — ^Yes.
After walking away some little time, did
you return and look at tlie stable?*- 1 went
round and came into Cato-street, and then I
saw Davidson leave the stable, and come to
the comer ; at that time Gilchrist and Cooper
were under the gateway. I will not be sure
of Harrison being there at that moment, but
he was there soon afterwards ; they were talk-
ing to a man dressed like a baker.
At half-past eight, did you enter the stable
with the party which accompanied Ruthven
and Ellis ?-Yes.
Did Ruthven and Ellis and one or two more
go up the ladder ?•— They did.
You heard a firing and confusion there ?— -
Yes.
And they were hustled down again ?— Yes ;
and the lights appeared to be put out.
Was there any firing down the ladder ? —
There were several shots fired down the lad-
der.
Did you quit the stable ?— Ruthven desired
me to stop under the gateway, the people
were crowding in shortly after the military
came.
Before the military came, were there any shots
fired from the window of the loft, or the room
up stairs?— There were.
When the military came, they entered the
itobleF^Yes. .
Ba^mam Gtorge Gill sworn.— Examined by
Mr. Boliand.
Arer yon one of the dismounted horse patiole
mt Bow-street ? — ^Yes. .
Did you form one of Westeoatt's party to
go to (W4treet?-^Yes.
At what time did you arrive?— I cannot
state exactly*
Did you go into the stable ?— Yes.
Were Ruthven and Ellis there ?^Ye8, they
were before me.
What did you see ? — ^There was a light there ;
I saw a man standing at the bottom of the
ladder.
Was that man armed ?— He had something,
but I cannot say what it was.
What sort of a man was he ? — A short, thick,
stout man, of a dark complexion.
Did Ruthven and Ellis and Smithers, go
up ? — ^They went up, and I followed Nixon ;
he was on the ladder, he was near the top, and
I was as close to him as I could possibly get.
Did anything happen to you, before yoa
could get into the lottr — I heard a report of a
pistol, or something in the loft; Ellis came
tumbling through the place, as if he had been
knocked down ; he ki^ocked down Nixon, and
Nixon fell upon me in the comer.
Was there a rush from the loft ? — ^There was.
When you got up, where did you go ?— I
do not say I did get up, but I got near the
door, and by a sudden rush, I was pushed into
Cato-street.
When you got into Cato-street, did you see
either of the prisoners at the bar there ? — ^Yes,*
Davidson.
Where was he when you observed him first f
— I observed him come out of the door with a
carbine.
How was be coming outP — Running out;
he discharged the carbine right at me.
Did he pass you ?— He did ; after he had
passed me, I saw he was a man of colour.
Did he pass away from you or stop ? — He
ran.
Did he do any thing, more than fire the car-
bine, before he ran away ? — No ; I was about
three or four yards from him.
Had he any thing else than the carbine ?—
Yes, he had a large sword ; I ran after him,
and cried out, ''stop him, stop him 1" and had
very nearly reached him, when he made a
back cut at me with a sword, and then he ad-
vanced forwards again.
Was he stopped by any person P — ^He was
stopped by Ellis.
What passed on Ellis stopping him?-— I
cannot say ; I got up as soon as I possibly
could, and pulled out my truncheon, and
struck him on the under wrist, and he cried
out '' oh ; I am lame, I am lame I'' I said,
''damn your eyes, I vrill cut your han4 off;''
I made a grasp at the blade of the sword with
my left hand, I found it very sharp, and let go
of it; it cut my fingers.
Did you strike him again f — I cannot say.
Did he reUin the sword? I think it was
twirled round his wrist, by a strioa on the top
of the sword ; I think it must have been ftuten-
ed to his hand, or he would have dropped it
before, when I struck him; but on this the
sword fell, and I picked it up.
Did von take the carbine nromhin?— I took
the caraine ool of the open hand.
*
Mr. Boron Garrow^^In what position wtt
140^1 1 GfiOttCE tV.
TriiU of WiUmm Dffokb^n md
[1408
lib idien y<m picked tip ibb YWord; Ellis bad
got hold of him and another man.
Yon never loft ridit of Urn after yoa ww
him widi the swbrd T-^No.
Mr. JBbtoiA— Where was he taken to?—
Over to a little shop in Qaeen-streeL
Did yon take the carbine with Toa ? — ^I did.
What became of the swoid?— 4 left it with
£Uis.
Are the sword md the oarbiiie both forth-
coming now f — Yes.
Shall you know them ?— Yes, I shalL
Jokn Muddock sworn. — ^Exammed by
Mr. LUtiedak.
Are you a soldier in the Coldstream regi-
ment of guards T-^Yes, *
Were you one of the party that went to
CatO'Street ?— Yes.
Do you remember when yoa got into the
yard, seeing any one standing near the stable-
door? — Yes ; 1 did not know his name at the
present, ))Qt I know the person.
Did you see him the next day at Whitehall ?
, ^Yes ; I found his name was Tidd.
Look round and see whether be is there ? —
/Ibat is the gentleman [pointing him ouf].
Did he do any thing r— Yes; he presented a
pbtbl to Mr. Fitzclarence.
Did he fire it off f — ^Yes ; and I saw serjeant
Xegg take him afterwards.
Did you after this go into the lower room ?
-*I went towards the stable-door, and I saw a
prisoner cut with a sword at captain Fitz-
clarence, and he immediately tumea the sWord
again to cut.
Which prisoner? — I do not know ; he went
in again and I did not see who he was, and
afterwards Mr. Fitzclarence made an attack at
ihtm, and went in at the door, and I followed
him in.
After you got in, did anjr of them do any
^ing? — ^Ves; after I got into the centre of
the room, the prisoner, Wilson, presented a
nistol to my breast, and it flashed in the pan,
out did not dischai^^ ; 'I afterwards maae a
^•tabat him with my bayonet.
I believe you afterwards secured him ? —
Yes.
You saw him slfterwards, and knew him to
\% Wilson ?— I took him to the public-house
«and lookM at him by the light.
Is that the same person you see at the bar T
•^Yes, it is.
William Legg sworn. — Examined by
Mr. JHomsy Ot$WNd,
I beliere Ton are a serjeant m the Coldstream
guards ? — T es.
Were you one of the party that went under
the eomnkand of Keutenant Fitzclarence, on
the night of the D3rd of February ?— Yes.
. Upon your comfng into Cato-street, you
'know the stable there ?-^Yes.
When you came to the 'MttMe, did you
obserre any man standing near the stabler—
*Yes. •
How was he standing?— He wai fUndiog
with his back against the wall, betweeD the
gateway and the stable door.
Between the gateway leading out of Jda-
street and the stable door?— Yes.
Had he amr thing in his hand ^—YeiyheM
a pistol in his hand, and he levelled it t
-lietttenant Fitsclarence.
Was lieutenant Fitidarence at tbeliadrf
yoor picquet?— About a yard and & bilf it
"Uie head of me.
Upon your observing this man lefd In
pistcH at uentensnt Fitsclarence, what didTn
do?— I knocked the pistol aside by mjpne,
and seised d»e munle end ef the pistol wiih
my right hand; a scuffle ensued between fte
man and me which should have the piitoly td
the pistol went off in the souffle.
Did yon puU the trigger ?-Vo, I had boU
of the musste of it.
Ibe man who had the pistol bsd bold «
the other end ?— Yes.
What was the effect of die pistel goiof «[
—It tore my jacket into ribbons; I hwtw
jacket here, if you wish it ; whatew the ptow
was loaded with, tore the sleeve of the jid^
off the right arm.
Did you secure that man?— As soon if w
pistol went off, he let it go easily ; he ana
struggled any more for it.
Did you secure bim ?— I did ; I seesred hBr
and debrered him over to the potioe oAeoi
Who was that person whom yousecBwdf-
Tidd. .
You saw him afterwards?— I «w hiaiw-
wards and hare aeen him mee. .
I believe you then went into die lUMe «>
up hito the loft ?— I went mto thesuUe.
You assisted in securing some of the pei***
iHio were taken in the loft?— They k» «J
rendered when I got there to part « «*
picquet.
Yon assisted in securing some of the ana
that ^were taken in the Idft?— I di^*
Eatamined by Mi.AHmn^Gf^
I believe you are a lieutenant of the Ci*'
stream-guards N— I am. ^
Do you' remember being applied to «r
evening of Ae «3rd of P«*>""yJ?it
picguet to John-etreet, or Cato-^treetM^
1 believe you commanded that pJcqw^^f
did. ij
What attracted your notice after yoo p "
John^treet ?— the report of fiie-sntf. .
In consequence of that report, d» f*J
with your punnet to Cato^reetT-^JJJ'V*
the picquet forwards towaids Cato-streW'
On your getting to the archway, leadjW"
Cato^treet, -what passed ?— I »«J* Ku
officer, crying out, **soldieM, •*•««]*::
Stable 4ioorl'» I made towards it, Jf J
moment I got to the door I mctt«o ■Jj^
of whom Dresentfld a pistol, and tbesv''^
at me by a sword ; we ezcbasged •**'^-/
he, seeing the1>ody«ftfirpteqaet«»^ ^
14091
Richard Tidd/or High Treaton.
A. D. 182a
[1410
ran into the stable, and I followed him into
the stable. I came up to one man, who said,
** do not kill me, and I will tell you all." I
gave him in charge, and then returned and
took another man out of one of the stalls ; the
soldiers took him away. I then led the men
up into the loft, where I found three, foui^ or
live men, with a large quantity of arms upon
the bench, and on the floor.
. What sort of arms ? — Blunderbusses, pistols,
and pikes.
You assisted in securing the persons in the
loft, and the arms?— I did.
Serjeant Legg was of your party, I believe ?
—He was.
Did you observe seijeant Legg contending
with a man ? — I did not attend to him ; my
attention was called to the man with whom I
had a scuffle.
Lieutenant Frederick Fitzclarence cross-
examined by Mr. Adolpkus.
Did you take Davidson into your custody ?
— ^Yes.
Where was he taken ? — ^To Bow-street.
During tliat time was he taken to any other
place? — He was brought into the stable in
Cato-street.
Proceeding from the stable, was he taken
into any public-house or other house to your
memory ? — No.
Mr. Attorney General, — You do not re-
member his being taken into a public-house }
— ^No, I do not ; I will not be sure whether he
was taken into the Horse and Groom ; there
were two or three prisoners there ; there were
Tidd and Wilson, I am not sure whether he
was or not, I rather think not.
William Watcoatt ^wom, — Examined by
Mr. Solicitor General.
You are one of the Bow-street patrole? —
I am.
You went to Cato-street on Wednesday the
23rd of February ? — ^Yes.
On going up did you see Ings, one of the
prisoners at the foot of the ladder? — ^Yes.
He was in that stall at the foot of the lad-
der?— Yes, he was.
John Wright sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. Solicitor General,
You are one of the Bow-street patrole ?— I
am.
Did you go up to the foot of the ladder in
the suble in Cato-street?-— I did.
Did you see a stout man standing near the
foot of the ladder?— -A stoutisii man.
Did yon take any thing iirom that man ?^A
knife.
What sort of a knife ?— A butcher's knife
and a sword.
Was there any thing twisted round the
handle of that knife ?~-Wax<^nd.
That knife is in the possession of the officer ?
—It is.
VOL. XXXIII.
I believe you were knocked down? — ^Yes;
immediately, after I took the 'knife, I was
knocked down, and received a stab in my
right side .
And that man escaped from you ?-> Yes, he
did.
Ings was immediately afterwards brought
back in custody ? — Yes.
Joteph Champion sworn. — Examined by
Mr. SolicUor General.
You are one of the Bow-street patrole ? —
Yes.
You were at the stable in Cato*street on the
night of the 23rd ?— Yes.
Do you remember seeing the man who was
tried here the other day, Ings, at the foot of the
ladder ? — Yes.
Did he sing out any thing on the ofiicers
appearing ? — Yes ; " look out above there ! "
He afterwards, I believe, made his escape ?
—Yes.
Was he brought in custody? — Yes; Brooks
came up bringing him in custody, in the
Edgware-ro&d.
Did you search him ? — ^We took him to
Mary-le-bone watch-house, and searched him
there.
What did you find on him?— Two haver-
sacks slung across his shoulders, under his
great coat, one under each arm; a tin case
nearly full of powder; three pistol balls; a
knife-case, and a belt round his waist.
What kind of knife-case was it ? — Made of
i cloth.
For a large or a small knife ?-— For a large
knife; there is a knife wrapped round with
wax-end, which fits it ; and which is in it now.
William Charles Brooks sworn. — Examined by
Mr. SdicUor General.
You are one of the Bow-street patrole ?—
Yes.
Do you remember seeing a man run in
John*street, on the night of the 23rd of Fe-
bruary ? — Yes.
Did you pursue him ? — I met him.
When you met him, what did he do? — He
presented a pistol at me, and fired it.
Was the pistol loaded ? — Yes.
How do you know ? — ^Tlie ball went through
my clothes, bruized my shoulder, and grazed
my neck.
On this pistol being fired at you, you stag-i
gered into the street ? — ^Yes.
And the man ran on ? — Yes.
Was he afterwards taken by Moay the
watchman ? — Moay laid hold of him.
Was he afterwards searched in your pre-
sence?— I searched him in the watch-housCi
and took two haversacks from him, slung one
on each shoulder, and albeit round his body,
and a tin case nearly full of powder.
And a knife-ease? — No; Cbampt<in took
that.
In your presence ? — Yes, and tlie balL
When he was taken, what did you say to
1411]
I GEORGE IV.
TridqfWMamDamdttmmi
C14H
lum?— I aikod htm how heouac to iie «l ne,
a BUD he had never leen hefora ; he daomed
vie, end said he wished he ha4 killed me, as
he meant to do.
Samud Harcuks TmuUan sworn. — ^Examined hy
Mr. Own^.
Yon are an officer at Bow-etreet?— I am.
On the morning of Thursday the 24th of
February, did you go to Brunt's lodgings to
apprehend him ? — ^Yes, I did.
la what room did you take him ? — ^In the
front two pair of stairs room.
Did you search the back room two pair of
stairs? — ^I did.
Did you find there any things in two rush
baskets f— I did.
Besides the rush baskets, there were an
iron pot, and a pike-staff? — There were.
yTe will not trouble your lordship with an
enumeration of the things now, as they will be
produced hereafter. Did you ask him a ques*
tion about that back room ? — I did ; he denied
their being his apartments.
Did you then call up the landl^y, and ask
her whose it was 7 — Yes.
What did she say? — She said the lodgings
were let in his presence to a man, she did not
know his name ; I then inquired of Brunt who
this man was ; be said he had only seen him
once at a publio-honse, and he did not know
who he was.
Did he mention how he came to recommend
him? — Only that he met him at a pnUic-
house,
Was that all ?— Yes.
Any thing about his wanting a lodging? —
No, not to me.
Did you then go to Tidd's lodgings in Ilole-
in-the-wall passage? — I did.
Did you find any articles of ammunition
there ?~I did.
We will not take the detail of that now.
At what time did yon go to Brunt's ?— About
eight o'clock ; and to Tidd's at nearly nine.
Did you ask Brunt about these baskets ?-^
He denied knowing any thing about them.
Dankl BMop sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. Gvmey,
You are a Bow-street officer ?— Yes.
On the n^orning of the 24th of February,
did you apprehend Arthur Thistlewood? — I
did.
At about what hour ?— sBetween ten and
eleven o'clock in the morning.
Where did yon find him? — At the house of
a Mrs. Harris, No. 8, White-street, Moorfielda.
Up, or in bed 1 — ^He was then in bed.
How were hia clothes?— He had hit
bceeohes and stockings on.
And his coat and waiatooat by the bed side I
— ^They were.
Did yon find any thing in his coat or waist-
coat ? — In his coat and waistcoat I found tl&re^
leaden balls, a ball cartridge, and a bl^nk
«artridge» and two tou^ and iiimaU silk aash.
Yon took him to Bow-street, and Acn to
the Secretary of State's ?— I did.
Dankl Buhop croas-eiamined hj
Mr. Ciarwood.
Do yon know a man of the name of Siimwi \
— Thwe is an officer belonging to BofWHitied
of that name.
Did any man of the name of SaloaoB gn
with yon to appreheod Thistlewood ? — Salmon,
one of onr officers, was present, and likewise
Larender and Ruthven, and sereral patrein
at the back and front of the lionea for inr of
miachiel^
Mr. SoUcUor Genenrf.— Yon snmmnded tte
honse before you entered it ?— Yes.
Bfr. Sofiat&r GcncnaL-^I am afraid, my lesd,
the case cannot be cloeed to-nighc I wonU
beg to submit, at what time your lordship
would think it proper to leave oC
Mr. Bortm Garram, — Gentlemen of the
juiy, the solicttor-general intimateey that thqr
hare now, on the part of the proeeontioB, get
through probably all their caae^ except the
production of the arms andanunnnitionfinmd at
the Tarions places. If we oooM hope, that fay
sitting lor some few hours longer, and in-
cveaamg your fiitigne only to that extent, we
eottld £inh the trial this erening, I would take
your opinion, whether we should proceed to
Its dose ; but it is quite dear we should only
aet on to a late honr of the night, and nn>r
bably not accomplish it at last. If, tfaercmre,
we must adjourn, I hare no doubt yon will
concur with the Court in thinking, this is dw
most convenient time; therefore, to-monow
morning the counsel for the proeecetion will
close their case, by the production of the aress,
and then the case for the prieoDen wiU be gene
into.
Foremm qftks iiirsr.-^We all coiwnde with
your lordship.
\. — My lord, haying been taken bf
surprise, and not having my witnessee, wonld
your lordship permit me to be visited fay my
wife to-night, that I may send for tfiea f
Mr. Gnmey.— Yov altoracy«
Mr. Beron Gorroio,— The ConrI hm polking
to do with these arrangements, but diose to
whqm your application will be made throngh
your solidtor, will, I am sure, take care tlmt
you shall not snfihr by any want of access of
necessary persona to you ftir diat perpose.
Then, gentlemen, we wm have the honour of
meeting you predsdy at aiae o'dock to-mor*
row morning.
SESilONS HOUSB, OUDI BAIUnf,
Thubsdat, Ami. STfh, 10SO.
William Davidson and BHtetd Tidd
set |q thf bar; and Jam«i WiUiam Wil-
son, John Hahiaon, Ridiaid Brndtaro,
14181
Tliehard TitUJmr J^k 2Vwn>n,
A. D. I8S0.
[1414
John Shaw Strange, James Gilchrist, and
Charles Cooper, were placed hehind.
Mr. Gttmey. — ^We shall not require the at*
tendance of the other prisoners.
Mr. Banm Gatrow, — Is it wished, by the
eounse) for the prisoners, that they should be
present. ^
Mr. Cunoood, — ^No, my lord.
Mr. Banm Garrow, — The other prisoners
may retire.
\J%ey were removedfrom the &r.]
George Thoma» Jotak BMnen called again —
Eauuninea by Mr. Gunney.
Are there now upon the table the arms and
ammunition found in Cato-streetf — ^There
are ; there are three sticks which have got on
by mistake.
[Th^vme ran&vedjrom ike toUs.]
MHthdrawng ihem, the articles on the table
were all found in Cato>street? — ^They were.
Were there more hand-grenades than there
are here F — Yes, six more.
The others, I believe, have been opiened in
the course of the investigation ? — ^They have.
At the time these pikes were found, were
they ferruled, as I observe some of them are
now T— They were.
Rave the ferrules of the others dropped off
in consequence of the greenness of the wood ?
•»I pfeauole it' is in conseonence of thai.
I obterre that tome of the pikeJieads are
files sharpened, and others are bayonets?— «
Yes.
All these holes are bored for the reception
of these pike-heads to 8(irew on ?— Yes, they
will receive them.
Mr. OurHey. — ^We will hand you, gentle-
men^ one parcel of the sharpened files, and
one parcel of the bayonet^ and a pike-staff.
[They were handed to the jmy^ and one of the
bt^fonett tcretoed in.]
The hand-grenades, I observe, are all fitted
with fuses?— Yes.
Mr. Gvrn^* — The several persons who found
each are in attendance, but my learned friends
have not desired the personal identification of
each.
Mr. Boron Garrow. — With a view to have
that distinetly understood, you may ask* him,
whether they were either found by him, or
deliveied into his possession by persons who
were there before tney quitted the spot ; then
if the gentlemen wish you to call any person
who found any particular article they may haive
that done.
Mr. Cunoood, — ^We do not desire it, my lord.
Ml-. Baron Gomno.-— THen^ 1 take* it for
Sninted, without calling A. who found this
Particular blunderbuss, and B. who found this
sword, and so on, that it is to be taken they
were all found in the stable at Cato-strcet, and
put into the possession of the witness Ruthven ;
the gentlemen on the part of the prisoner do
not require it to be carried forther.
Mr. Gfirwy.— Whom was the carbine taken
from ? Davidson ? — I cannot state that myself.
Where are the haversacks ?— That is one on
the table.
They were taken off the person of Ings ?—
Yes.
£Th^ were handed to thejwy,]
Mr. Baron 0«rr«p.— You will have the good-
ness, gentlemen, tO' attend to the dimensions
of those haversacks.
Mr. Gts-ney.— Is this the belt, this the knila-
case, and that the knife, taken from Ings ?—
As I understand.
Mr. Gfttrmey.— You observe, gentlemen, the
belt and the knifoiksase are made of the same
materials, and you will observe the fitting of the
knife and the knife-case, you will observe the
wax ends round the handle.
[They were handed to the jury,}
This list is your making out ? — ^Yes.
In the loft, thirty-eight ball-cartridges, fire-
lock and bayonet, one powder flask, three pis-
tols and one sword, with six bayonet spikes
and cloth belt, one blunderbuss, pistol, four-
teen bayonet ^ikes and thsee pointed files, one
Imyonety one oayonet spike and one sword
seabbaird, onecavbine and bayonet, two swords,
OM boUet, ten hand-grenades, two fire-balls^
one large grenade and bayonet, a rope ladder,
one sworS sticky forty ball-cartridges, one
bayonet and three loose balls, these were all
found in the loft : in the steble, in the pocket
of Bradbum, six ball-cartridges, three balls,
and some string put round him to act as a belt ;
the pistol which it is alleged Tidd fired, the
pistol which it is alleged Wilson attempted
to fife, a blunderbuss, sword belt and scabbard,
two pistols, one sword, twelve sticks with fer-
rules: in thepocketofTidd, two ball-cartridges,
and round him a leathern belt : two ball-car-
tridges fsioing the stable, and ten ditto in Newn-
ham-street : one musquet cut down and one
sword from Davidson; one haversack, cross
belts, one pricker, bayonet, scabbard, cartouche
box and a belt round hvA body : two haver-
sacks one belt and tin powder case, four pistolr
balls one pistol key and a knife-case, from
Ings: one haversack containing seventeen ball-
cartridges, three balls, one pistol flint, one
pricker, one worm for drawing cartridges, one
anife and a turn-screw, one stick cut to recdve
a bayonet, left in the public-house; that was left
by Cooper or Gilchrist ?— By Cooper.
Is that also made to rcK>eive a ferrule at the
top ?— Yes ; it is.
Mr. Baron Gomw.— That was left by
Cooper, and afterwards asked for by Gilchrist ?
—Yes.
I415J 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial qfWUUam Damdson and
[1416
JoJm Hector Morison called again. —
ExamiDed by Mr. Gumej/,
You mentioDed, yesterday, that the prisoner
Ings had brought you a sword to sharpen, on
Christmas eve ? — Yes.
Look at that, and tell me whether that is ihe
sword he brought to you to grind ? [shewing a
iword to the wUness.l — Yes.
What were the directions? — To grind it
sharp from the heel to the point, and to make
the point as sharp as a needle.
Is it particularly sharp ? — Yes.
[It icas handed to the jury J]
Mr. Baron Garrow. — Is that the one you
call a scimitar F — They are both of the scimitar
shape.
Mr. Curney. — Has the edge been sharpened
since it left you ? — The edge has been made
much keener, by sharpening it with a steel or
a stone, I cannot say exactly which.
Benjamin George Gill called again.—
Examined by Mr. Gttmey,
You mentioned a carbine and a sword taken
from Davidson, can you select those from the
arms which are now on the table ? — Yes.
Mr. Attorney General, — Your lordship will
recollect, he said there was a sling.
Mr. Boron Garrow, — ^Yes ; you will recollect
gentlemen, this witness stated, that he believed
there was a sling attached to the hand of the
prisoner, whom he struck to oblige him to
resign it ; you will observe, the one produced
has such a sling.
Was the carbine loaded when you got
possession of it or not? — It must be loaded
oecause he had discharged it at me before.
Did you observe any moisture upon it? —
After I took it to Bow-street, it was quite
damp ; I put my finger down the barrel and
shewed it to several gentlemen who were
there.
George Thomas Joseph Ruthven called again. —
Examined by Mr. Gumey,
Were tlie greater part of these fire-arms load-
ed when you took them ?— They were ; we had
them drawn for the purpose of being produced
here.
What were they loaded with ?— With ball,
with the exception of one gun which had large
jihot.
James Aldoia called again. — ^amined by
Mr. Gumey,
You have mentioned a brass-barrelled blun-
derbuss taken out of pawn by Davidson on the
23rd of February; look at that blunderbuss,
a«d state whether you are able to identify it
as the same ?— Yes ; I believe it to be the
same.
DwirfjoR.— My lord, may I ask Mr. Aldous
one question ?
Mr. Baron Garrow, — ^Yes, certainly,
Davidson, — Do not you recollect, when I
pledged it, my saying it was not mine, and
that you said you would lend me seven shUIings
upon it, as yo« knew me, otherwise you wwki
not have taken it in at all ; that it wis ool
worth that ? — I do not exactly recollect thu;
the prisoner might make that observation, but
I do not recollect it.
Samud Herculet Taunton called again.—
Examined by Mr. Gtrnty,
You mentioned to us yesterday, that pn
had gone to the lodgings of Brant, aad ibtii
the l^ck room two pair of stairs, you foood
two rush baskets, with a number of thiogs?-
Yes, they are here.
Give us the contents of those rash baskets!
— Here are nine papers with rope-yam and
tar.
Are these what you call the fire-balls ^—'^
are [One was handed to the jury].— Then ue
also some steel filii^.
llie other basket is what was wrapped op
in a blue apron ? — It is.
What did you find in that basket f-Fw
grenades, three papers of rope-yarn, tar, and
other ingredients, that is fire-balls, tvo bagso^
powder, one pound each.
These bags are made of flannel, and yn
have weighed them, and found theycostaiooDe
pound each? — Yes.
[They were opened, and fmdtotv^
Have you any of the same kind of fiaaa*^
bags empty i — Five.
Is gunpowder ever sold packed up in M
form?— I do not know; I never bought anj
in such a |tate.
Did you ever see any exposed to sale a
such a state ?— No, never : a paper of g»-
powder a leather bag : containing sixty^bee
bullets.
That cartouc'^e box ? — ^Yes.
These were the contents of the baskeii-
Yes. . . .
You mentioned an iron pot?— This « »
[jprodudng it\ ,
Does it appear that tar, or some such w^
stance, has oeen heated in it?— T^«*"*
been ; there are the remains of it now.
And a pike handle ?— Yes ; there is » F«-
handle.
Are the hand-grenades which haw o^
produced from Cato^txeet, and ^T^
found there, of the same description .-i«^
You mentioned that you Preceded fe«"*
ines of Brunt to the lodgings <tf Tidtf -
lodgings
did.
Give us the things which you fouodat Tide's
lodgings ; have you a haversack here '^*ji
What does Uiat contain F-Fourtai^
and thirty-four bulleU, one-hundrw
seventy-one bflOlpcartridgjBs, sixty-B"* "^
\
1417]
Itidtard Tiidjmr High Tmuon.
A. D. ItM.
[1418
cartridges without powder; and a brown paper
parcel with three pounds of gunpowder.
Did you find a coarse canvass cloth ? — Yes.
What did you find in it ? — ^Ten grenades,
«le?en bags of powder^ one pound each.
Do you mean flannel bags, of the same
description with the others? — Yes; and ten
empty bags ; a small bag, witli a tin powder^
flask ; sixty-eight bullets^ four flints^ and twenty-
seven pike-handles.
Are those the pike^handles you have by yon ?
—Yes,
Are they of the same description with those
found in Cato-street ? — Yes.
Were they all ferruled ^ — They were when I
found them, but being green, some of them
have dropped off.
Were they all bored to receive pike-heads ?
—Yes.
Did jou also find a trunk ? — ^Yes.
What are the contents of that trunk ?— Nine
hundred and sixty-five ball-cartridges.
Made up in parcels of how many each 7—
Five each.
A Juryman (Mr. Toung.) — ^Would that box
be strong enough to remove those from place
to place? — It was tied up strongly when I
found it under the bed,
Mr. Giamey. — ^In that case would it be
strong enough to be removed ? — Oh yes, cer-
tainly; it is now ready to break with being
carried about so often, and brought down here.
Serjeant Edward Hamon sworn.— Examined
by Mr. Gwmey,
You are a seijeant in the royal artillery ?— I
am.
And acquainted therefore with such things
as you see before you ? — ^Yes.
In the first place look at these flannel bags
of gunpowder, containing one pound each ;
what purpose were they intended for?' — I
suppose they were meant for cartridges for a
six-pound gun.
Made up in a proper and convenient shape
for that purpose? — Only too small, they should
have been rounder.
Would they answer that purpose ? — Yes.
They are made up differently from what you,
as a military man of experience, would make
them ? — ^Yes.
Mr. Bartm Garrow.^-^You would make them
in a mould fitted to the gun ? — Yes.
A person who had no opportunity of model-
ing from a gun would make them so ?— Yes.
Mr. Gurney.-^What appear to you to bQ
the ingredients of these fire*baUs? — ^They are
Bearly all alike ; this is exactly like the other,
except that one is without brimstone ; this has
oakum, ttr, rosin and brimstone.
One of them you found without the brim-
stone ? — ^Yes ; that is all the difference I have
seen in them. *
Would they be effectual means of setting a
building on fire, if they were thrown itato a
window on the floor ? — Certainly.
Mr. Baron Garrow. — Do you apprehend
that the one without brimstone was so from
accident or design ? — I do not know ; I should
rather think it was meant for the bottom of
one of these grenades.
The composition of which the brimstone
would not enter? — No.
Mr. Gumey, — If one of these were throws
into the windows of a hay-loft, with two or
three loads of hay and straw, would they burn
it down ? — Most assuredly.
Or thrown into any building and lighting
on wood, they would set it on fire?— Yes.
How long would Ihey bum ?— -That is a
good large one, that would bum four minutes^
Amply sufficient to set it on fire?-*-Yes,
there would be a body of red fire left after ii
had done blazing.
Look at one of those hand-grenades, and
open it ; with respect to those you have opened,
what do you find to be in the interior?— -A
small box of tin.
Containing what ?— About three ounces and
a half of gunpowder.
Is there a fuse brazed into this box ?— Yet*
Mr. Gttmey. — As the counsel for the prisoner
do not object to our leading on these points ;
do YOU find first the rope-yara the exterior I
— Yes.
Then a sheet of paper ? — ^Yes ; there was a
piece of stocking on one.
Then more rope-yarn ? — Yes.
Then a number of pieces of iron tied together
round it ?— Yes.
You then come to a tin box, with a fuse
brazed in it ? — ^Yes.
And filled with gunpowder? — ^Yes.
You have found that three ounces and a
half of gunpowder had been the contents of
the box ? — Yes ; I weighed one, and they all
appeared to be the same.
Is that more than sufficient for a nine-inch
shell i* — ^Yes.
Mr. Baron Garrow^ — Have you found as
many as twenty-five pieces of iron ?— Yes.
Mr. Baron Garrow^ — I ask this, from his
examination on the last occasion ; the counsel
do not object to it ?
Mr. Curwood — No, my lord.
Mr. Bflftwi Oarrow. — If that were thrown
into a room with persons in it, would it be
discharged in about half a minute, and pro-
bably be attended with death and destruction
to the persons in that room ? ^Most assuredly
it would ; [the wUneu proceeded to open one m
the pretence of the jury], there is some brown
stuff here.
Mr. Gttmey. —Is that cemented on ?— Yes,
it is ; here are under that four great naila
fastened on ; then there is another piece of this
brown stuff.
1419] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of WtlUam Bmidtmaad
ru3o
Now TOQ have come to the fin carcase %^^
Yes.
Force out that fuse which is brazed in^ aod
empty the gunpowder ; that fuse has a priming
in it r — Yes ; it has a composition in it.
lliat is full of gunpowder the same as the
other ? — Yes it is ; tlie Tery same.
Is the powder good ? — ^Very good.
These nand-grenades are not made, I be-
lieve, in the manner in which a military man
would make them ? — ^They ara not.
Are thev so construeted as to b« very ef*
fectaal and destructiTe ? — ^Tliey are so.
The regular hand-'gtenade is a shell ? — ^It iSb
That could be obtained only by resorting to
founders ? — ^No.
Then are only four pieces of iron there, but
yoa foosid ia another twenty-five ? — ^Yes.
They vaiy acooeding to the size of the pieces ?
—Yes.
Mr. Attorn^ Gfenersf.— My loTdy that is the
case on the part of the Crown.
BSFBKCE.
Mr. GMnowdi^-OendemeB of the jury, it
has now for the fourth time btoome my rnekn-
choly talk to address yon and other jnriee on
theae occasions. I say my 'melancholy task,
because it is known to all the world, that not-
withstanding all that my learned friend and
myself could urge on behalf of the prisoners,
three former verdicts of guilty have been pro-
nounced. Irksome as me task was to me in
the first instance, I need not tell you that its
weight is much increased in consequence of
those verdicts. I should very ill have executed
my duty on the former occasions, if I could
have any thing new to offer to you on the pre-
sent, because I must have given the case very
little attention indeed, even for the short time
that I bad to consider it, if, at least, during the
Srogress of the three former trials, almost every
ling that could present itself to my mind had
not already presented itself. But, never-
theless, I should be deserting my duty to
these unfortunate men at the bar, if I were
»ot, upon the present occasion^ to address
to you some at least of those observations
which, according to my view of the case, ought
tb be attended with some consideration.
I told you, or at least some of you who were
on the former jury heard me say, that the first
time I rose to address you (and I said it sin-
cerely) I gave more weight to the evidence
then brought forward on the part of the Crown,
than, upon a re-consideration, I thought it de-
served. And the more I come to look at the
evidence which has been given — I mean the
important and material parts of it, that is,
those pa.rts which are to sustain the issue you
Have to try — I still consider it is of so sus-
picious a nature, that every time it is presented
tO'you-anew it deserves, at your hands, a new
and further consideration. What I mean is,
that the charge of treason is > mainly, and F be-
lieve I may almost venture to say wholly, sup-
ported by the evideaee of aa aoconpilieey ari
such an accomplice, that a more complete man
of infomy I do not think caa be nked oot ef
tiie siak of human crime, of any age or of uy
country. He stands tainted ia no costom
degree, he is devoid of alonat every aQiii
and social duty ; he has violated tfaeconfidcBK
of pmata life equally vrith his piifaAic dolia:
—hit duty to God» his duty to his kii;, hit
duty to the public, he has equally dimpnM ;
there ia no daty, public or private, nhkk he
seems not to have violated; he admits, tfail he
has been an apoatate from his religioa, nd of
course a denier of that God to whomhtippab
for the truth of the testimony he is to give; be
adhnits,, to-day, tiMi he has been an inlddad
a traitor, a meditated murderer and an sHon
Now, can you haw a wofse man befoR yei?
The deeper a man is steeped in mhmjt tk
less he deservea credit at your hands v<^ri^^
tells astety, it oaght to be a stoiy probibkiB
itself and cottflniMd by wstaesses of tnih aid
varaoty.
The misfortune of this case is, that liieit a
mixed up vrith the charge you have to trf, »
much of^undeniable guut, that I am dimii
is almost beyond the human power to seppitie
thai part of the case which is proved, (h»that
wfalcn is only charged, and, as I boDbly cos-
tend befose youy not distinedy pfond. It s
not ia the nature of the hnman niad M
where folsahood is mixed up with troth, a jay
should bo able easily to thmw aside the U»
hood, and discriminate between that and the
tsath> mA. which it ia blended. It w?»
patient inquiry and: nice diserimioatioB, m
therefore I pray you distinctly to see vhat a
the charge upon* which you are to pronooatt;
and to consider not, how much guilt is ^xoj»
against these men, but whether there is dis&oet
evidence to prove that precise charge 'ipw
which you are to found' your verdict. » J^
come to examine and separate (he enoe«*
minutely, I think you will find that aU that
fixes the guilt of high treason upon »^
men, depends solely upon the lestimooM
that infamous witness Adams; because it d^
pends entirely upon what took place at tboK
consultations, at which, he says, he ^ P
sent. Neither Hiden nor Monument (^bo a«
two vritnesses implicated to a certain ^^^rV
the same transaction) was present at w»
consulutions, and therefore neither can p^
you an account of what passed ****•*;,. "?-
you are inclined-to give them full ^^^^
both distincUy admitted that, althoosh m
knew (and one participated in) the homd pwa
of assassinating his majesty's ministers, P
they knew of no ulterior plan of levying ^
against his majesty, or oonspiau^ *^.^--
against his majesty, which m the msm cwip'
which you have to try. ». w i^
Always bear in mind that such is tie c»T^
or rather those are the charges you are to
cideupon. Whether there was any oonffl^
to levy war (for that is the l*ofi^*«^T"\^
diclmen^ agaiMt hift mi96sC|> whediv
14211
Richard Tidd/w H^ Treaitm.
A.D. I8t0i
tl48t
vras actually levied, or wlieUier (here wu aoy
conspiracy to depose or put the king to death.
Now let me recall to jo«r recollection, what
maM admitted by my learned friend, the conniel
for the Crown, in opening this case to you
(and he did not admit it without good consi-
deration, for he is too good a lawyer to admit
it if not well founded) that, whatever may be
your opinion of the nefarious and wicked d^
sign to assassinate all his majesty's ministers,
yet, in point of fact, such assassination, or a
conspiracy to do it, does not in itself amount
to high treason. Take this admission and
apply the evidence to it ; see whether you can
find in the evidence, as it is confirmed, any
thing beyond that plan. Do not suppose me
lo speak with levity of that matter, but see
whether you have consistent and confirmed
evidence, beyond that fiict, of any design of
what may be called levying war. The design
of a conspiracy may be gathered from the con*
aoltations and overt acts of the conspirators ;
here are certain overt acts, I admit, proved,
which go in confirmation of some part of the
testimonv of Adams ; the finding of arms, and
the meeting in Cato-street, for instance. But
that only goes to confirm the one part of the
alleged conspiracy. It goes, I admi^ to confirm
him most mainly in this, that they entertained
a design of assassinating the ministers; and
if the prisoners were here now, answering for
that charge, I could not and should not nave
a single word to say to you ; I could not urge
that Uie witness, infamous as he is, is not fiiUy
confirmed up to that extent ; but bevond that
I contend there is not a sln|^e particle of evi-
dence to support the charge of treason. Con-
sider first the probabilities in such a plot to
overturn the government; you must admit
(since the ingenuity of my lesuned friends can-
not deny it) that as a scheme for that purpose
•it it so wholly absurd and ridiculous, that it
never could enter into the bead of a man who
had one particle of reason left No man who
is walking about without a keeper at his heels,
and in a straight waistcoat, ever could set
about a plan of ovenettinff the government of
luch a mighty empire as this with means such
as. they appear to have had.
My learned friend has said very truly, that
when men enter into great schemee, their
imi^nation deceives them, and they are so
anxious for their ultimate obfect, that they
overlodc all difficulties which lie between them
and the wished-for end. That is true to a oer*
tain extent; men do not properly appreciate
difficulties which are in the way of their ardent
wishes ; but there is a limit to that error ; men
do not contemplate impossibilities although
thev underrate dilBtoultiei. If you should be
told, it was a part of their scheme to anest the
•uu in its course, or to roll bade the tide of
^ Thames,-— if a witness were to cone and
assert boldly that such waa part of tiieir schema,
you would not and could not believe it ; then
I will put it to you, are even those impoesibiU
ities which I have staM, moi# abfud than
the plan these men are said to have contem*
plated, for the purpose (A oversetting this great
and mighty government with the means they
proposed ? Now, if this is given you upon, the
eviaence of an infamous witness, and is not
corroborated by any witness of character, euk
you, will you, or ought you, to believe it, when
the lives of eleven men, aye, when the lives
even of eleven in&mous men, depend upon
it ? For however infamous you may consider
the persons charged in this indictment to be^
thank God there ^re specific laws for every
ofience ; and whenever a jury may find tb^
guilty, of those charges of wmch £ey ma^ be
guilty they must pay the penalty annexjed by
Sie laws to such ofllnces. But it is your duty,
not to convict them in one form of indictment,
merely because you think they have been
guilty of an^yther ofi'ence of which thev might
have been convicted in another form of indict-
ment.
Before I proceed to the comments I waa
about to make on the evidence, let me make
this observation to you, that tn accomplice^
when he comes before vou as a witness, should
at least appear with aU the mariu of sincere
contrition ; you should be well satisfied, that
however iniquitous his former conduct has been,
at least at the moment he presents himself to
you, to detail the circumstances he is about to
disclose in evidence, he appears with a mind
thoroughly convinced of tne iniquity of that
former conduct, and that he is then determined
to speak truth even to the last letter. If yoo
should see by his manner and conduct, that
even in that box he was inclined to shuffle, to
prevaricate or speak that which was folse^
would you give him credit for a single mo-
ment? Now let me bring this to your rec<4-
lection ; when I cross-examined him as to h&i
motives, in joining and confederating with
these people, what did he sayP it was fear
kept him to the last with this band of conspi*
rators 1 that this was an idle excuse I am sura
I need not sav one word to convince you;
what fear could restrain him from going to the
proper authorities and disclosing what he
Knew? what more did he sav to account for
his having entered into this plot 7 Remember
it was first told him on the 2nd of January;
he paused over it ten days, and on the 13th of
January he was introduced to Thistlewood; hf
heard all that Thistlewood had to tell him ; ho
attended every committee from that time to
the 22nd of February daily, and twice a day ;
it is true, as my learned friend reminds me^
that he was fifwen days in prison, where he
might safely have inade a disclosure; bat
down to the very night when they were all
taken prisoners, he continued with them, aad
to iJI appearance^ one as full^ bent upon ei^
fecting the sdieme a» any amongst them;
and it was not until that he got bac^ lo the
Christian idi^n, that is to say, when the
halter stared bun in the foee, that his oonseienco
informed him he was in the wrong; and yo«
vemembec jafaeo I asked hia if ht did aot eo^
I4d3l 1 GfiORGB IV.
Trial ^WUUam Damdton and
iim
tertian the design of the others, what was his
motive for thus apparently acting with them ?
he tells you, with an unblushing front, that he
had some suspicion, of the character of his
companion Brunt, and in order to ascertain
the truth of that suspicion, he joined in this
most horrid plot ! there is a man joining in as
murderous a scheme as ever was devised or
imagined, and all for the purpose of ascertain-
ing a doubt as to the character of his conw
panion I Do yon believe him when he tells
you thisP if you do not believe him, then
down to the very moment in which he stands
in that box, you see him still persisUng in
crime. If he is still persisting in crime and
uttering falsehood, how is It possible to believe
«ny part of his statement ? how can you rely
upon any thing that be says ?
• With respect to the crime itself, it is of the
greatest importance to the safety of the lives
and liberties of us all, that the bounds of law
should be fiuthftilly preserved ; crime when
defined, no donbt, ought to meet due punish-
ment, not abstractedly, but in that mode the
law has pointed out. If you conftise the
bounds of offences you take away the best
safe-guard of the subject. But, above all, this
maxim applies to the law of treason. As
it is accurately defined, so ought those defini-
tions to be most religiously observed ; and un-
less you are convinced that the parties here
charged are guilty of the actual and specific
fkcts charged upon them, you ought not to find
them guilty. I do not hesitate to say this be-
fore gentlemen who have pronounced former
verdicts of guilty, and, I must admit, upon the
same evidence ; because from the manner in
which you conducted yourselves upon former
occasions, [ saw that you gave great attention
to the cases beforo you, and I know those
verdicts were the result of your clearest con-
viction ; and knowing that fact, it is with con-
fidence I feel, that if upon another review of
die evidence you should see occasion to chance
your former con<^lu9iotts, you will have manly
boldness enough to do it ; and, therefore, I do
not hesitate to urge again before you for further
consideration, arguments, although from the
past events I must feel they have been un-
^ccessfol upon the former occasions.
• I was stating, that in all cases it-would be
necessary to preserve the bounds of crime,
more particularly, in cases of high treason.
Laying aside, for a moment, the consideration
of the suspicious nature of this testimony, I
will suppose you to give full credit to the
evidence. Then, I say, a very material con«
sideration arises, whether, under this sup-
position of giving tall credit to Adams, the
prisoners were conspiring to levy war, or to
make a great and enormous riot for the pur-
poses of plunder, or any other illegal object ;
for although the guilt of that intent would be
very great, yet, if it amounts only to a riot,
you ought not to find them guilty of high
tteas^^n. I took an opportunity on a former
oocastoD, and must again nkt you to a very
eminent law writer as to this point ; he stalls
that there ought to be an accunte distioctiaB
between riot and levying of war, which btta
would amount to hi^ treason ; and he stalest
number of acts of pariiament, and says, that
all those acts would be useless if every great
riot is to be construed a levying of war; hot
then he goes on to state other cases where
what in common understanding would he con-
sidered a riot had been held to be treason, nd
he says, " These things being decided, we mat
now acquiesce in them, and consider them as
law." Now when a great and considents
writer uses a particular phrase, it is not used
without intention; and, therefore, IcoDteod
that when that learned judge uses this singoht
phrase ** we must acguietce m it,'' thathe mens,
if I had this for the first time aoder ny con-
sideration, I should say it does not amoant tv
levying of war ; but, inasmuch as former jodga
have so decided, I must give a reluctaot coi-
sent. The inference I draw^from this pas-
sage is this, I would call on the learned att»
ney-general (and if the case exists there is m
man more competent to give it you), to shev
you a case precisely similar to the present,
that is, where a case of this sort has been belli
to be a levying of war. If he does not she*
you an instance precisely similar, then bear
what the learned judge says; ''itismuchsaftf
to apply to pariiament for their understaDdiog
of the matter.'* Do not you extend the law rf
treason by construction or implicatioo, beoia^
says he, ** no man knows where it nay tsi
Most truly he said so ; for if you ealaigeco^
structive treasons, if you make that a €«»■
structive levying of war, which, accordinjtfl
common sense is not a levying of war, flomai
can tell where it may end. Eveiyrew*"*
to the civil power, perhaps every Tcsisttiw*^
a play-house guai^ in a play-house riot, 8X7
be considered, in the event, a levying of vaj
in opposing the military and civil power ff
the king, and therefore high treason.
. Look at the evidence which Adams gj^
He states that he was at most, and, I beiicv^
pretty nearly all their consultations. At"*
first consultation which he stata to be ofu?
importance, which passed a few days ww
the funeral of his late majesty, he says,hesi*
Thistlewood, Harrison, and one or mw^
told him it was extremely probable agr^
part of the military would be out of to*n»
the funeral of the king ; and it struck M»twj
would be a most favourable opportunity, w«J
what ? to raise an insurrection and ^^^V^
No I he uses a forcible though a ▼«l«««f^
non, to kkkvp a nwf to «»«e*J*^Jl^
purpose of plunder ; and yeu will '•^"^^^
a subsequent meeting, they m^^^^JST
wait no longer than the following ^*^!r2
why ? because they were aU so poor. l**7
or fourteen men of the hmnWesi a^^
Bfe, were aboat to •feitnm the ttip»» ""
1435]
lUehmrd Tidd/ar H^ Traunn.
A. D. 1890.
[i4fie
they were all to poor, they could wait no longer
than the following Wednesday 1 Now apply
jrour common tense to the transactions stated }
IS it not more consistent that these poor men
were only waiting to begin a system of riot
and plttinier, rather than a system of rebellion
and war against the goYemment of the coun*
Hyp
I stated to you before, that as a system of
levying war, the sdieme was so absurd it was
wholly inciedible; that it did not become
credible because it was sworn to ; and more
purticolarly that it did not become credible
Decause it was sworn to by a witness of such
infamous character.
On former occasions^ ray learned friend and
I went through with more particularity the
evidence in detail ; but I will now merely give
you the outlines of it. The first was their
scheme of aesaasioation, which I do not mean
lo deny has so much oonfirmatory evidence
•s to raise a fair inference in your minds,
thai tJMy contemplated that fact ; but you have
also ^e admiision of the learned counsel for
the Cfown, that that foot does not amount to
high treason ; that the crime of high treason
flonsiats in the levying or conspiring to levy
war, and not in killing or conspiring to kiU
the mintsteia. Let ns now, therefore, look to
their preparations and means for levying war.
They talked of having forty men, and with
these they were to possess themselves of the
oannon in Gfay'd-inn^lane ; how many men
it might re^re for that I do not precisely
know, but without horse and vrithout appars^
tns I should think the parish watch would have
prevented their performing that service. They
were frirther lo detach another part of these
forty to take the six pieces of cannon in the
ArtiUery-ground ; how many men it would re-*
quire for that object a rough guess would
enable ns to judge of. They were to send
■notber detachment to prevent a single orderly
going to Windsor; a single man could not
perform that task, but they must send a auffi-
cieot detachment to take posi?ession, not only
of the usual road, but they must have a sufficient
force to prevent the men passing out over any
of the bridgee, or by any other road ; they
BHiet therefore take possession of every outlet
from London ; they were to take the telegraph,
to prevent a communication with Woolwich ;
they were to dig trenches, to prevent the ap^
pnoncfa of cavalry ; Apd aU this with a force of
fbrty men I Now, I aak, whether the abanrdity
or madnefls of this supposed plan does not
Make it wholly inoedibto; even after giving
foU osedit to the assertion of my learned friend,
tbe Scrficitor-general, that men in their eager*
sese to obtaki an inmate object overlook iui*
termediate difficoltire ? Are these dtffiealties
^^ have overlooked, or are they net the
iwiugB of insane minds ? Who has told you
these deaigne esdsled ? The witness Adams
■-i^ou are to believe him ; why ? because, say
fte leaned gentlemen en 4fae other eide» he is
4Wifiraied. He is confimed aa. to oetlain
voh. xxxm. I
things, I admit ; but because he is eonfiimed
in certain things, are you to believe every ah*
surdity that so iniamous a witness chooses to
state ? I told you before, and I beg leave to
call your recollection to it again, that he is not
confirmed as to those points which involve
the crime of treeson. He is confirmed as to
the procttring of the arms, and so far he may
be confirmed as to the point relating to the
assassination ; but he is not confirmed as to
those plans which he says pawed at their de-
liberations, and which alone make the treason.
Monument was not there ; he cannot and does
not confirm him ; and as far aa be knows and
States, he does not certainly confirm the plan
for levying of war. Uidenwasnot there; he
does not attempt to confirm him ; and I think
in cross-examination, he told you expressly in
words, that he had no knowledge of any con-
spiracy or plan for levying of war ; therefore^
all he confirms, is the plan of assassination, not
the plan of levying war ; and do not, I pray
yon, forget for a single moment, that the plan
of levying war is the only thing which con<*
stitutes treason in this count of the indictment;
There was one piece of evidence indeed,
which, from reading die notice given to the
prisoners, I was taught to expect would have
been produced, which would have been mainly
eonfirmalory of their supposed intention to
excite vrar in the state. The prisoners had
notice to produce a proclamation, which was
said to have existed, and which would have
cleariy manifested their intention, namely^
a proclamation, ** that their tyrants were de«
stroyed ; that the fiiends of liberty were called
upon to come forward as the provisional go-
vernment was then sitting.'' Signed, ''James
lugs, secretary.'' Now, if that proclamation
were in evid^ice before you ; if it had been
produced ; if it could have been produced ; or
even if its existence could have been proved
by testimonv such as you could believe, I
most here admit at once, however visionary,
however absurd all their schemes were, yet if
you had unquestionable evidence that such
were their schemes, that such had beeo
their deliberations and consultations, however
absurd they were, I must have admitted
the case was made out against these men.
But is that &ct confirmra at all? neithet
Monument nor Hiden, the confirmatory
witnesses, say a word about it; they know
nothing about it. Does any other witness
confirm it ? I will tell yon what the supposed
confirmation of this proclamation is, the wit*
ness Adams has told you that such a proda^
mation was written, and that six sheets of
cartridge paper were sent for, upon two or
three <n wbich sheets of cartridge paper thesd
proclamations were vnitteu. Hale proves he
was sent to fetch cartridge paper ; is the send-
ing for a sheet of paper any proof what was
af&rwards written upon that paper? the
wieked ingenuity of this fellow, feeling that
he had here to make out a case of high treason,^
has amled himself of a fiKt in .the eanse,
4Y
1437] 1 GEORGB IV.
Trial of WiUiam DawUon and
[143«
whieb could Be proted, to introduce a iact
into the cause which I am bound to lay did
not exist, because there is not a shadow of
proof of its existence ; he does not eren tell
Tou, that those proclamations were destroyed.
The witness who confirms the fact of sending
for the paper, afterwards states what I con-
sider another important fact, namely, that
among the things id the cupboard was found
part of the cartridge paper : now, if any thing
bad been written upon that cartridge paper,
if even a fragment of it had been left, if you
could only have found the words, ^ provisional
government*' upon that paper, I would have
said that was a fair inference for you to say,
that having found a part, you might ftiirly
believe the rest which was spoken to, though
not found there. But there is not a single
fragment of writing, nor a single witness wbo
affects to have seen it ; but you see a part of
the paper is found afterwards in the cupboard
without a blot upon it« The men had no sus-
picion when they set out on this plan, that
they should be taken ; but when they are taken,
not one word of this proclamation is found
upon them, and the whole proof of this most
important piece of evidence which is to give a
colour to all the rest, remains on the unsup-
ported testimony of a witness such as Adams,
who has described such facts of himself that I
can hardly find terms to say what the man is;
but I must sapr, and do and must ever feel,
that he isoneof thebasestof mankind; and even
in the witnCM box shows that he is not worthy
of credit. Now, can you believe this piece oif
evidence upon the testimony of such a man ?
If, then, it be material and necessary to
confirm this man, are there other sources from
which he might have been confirmed ? because
if there be any one man in existence, who
could have given confirmation to this man, but
who is not called, you will mainly suspect, that
if that man was called, so far from confirming
him, he must have destroyed the whole of his
testimony. There is a man in existence, we
know, who could have confirmed him ; there
is a man in existence, who has been called to
confirm him, but that man is not called again ;
I mean a man of the name of Dwyer. There
was an attempt made, when that man was
called, to impeach his testimony, and I sup-
pose you did not think his testimony upon
that occasion was impeached, because I am
bound to assume, you gave credit to him. My
learned friend, the attorney-general, seems to
think I am irregular in what I am stating,
that I ought not to allude to the former trial.
Mr. Baron Garrow.^li is not strictly cor-
rect, but one is reluctant to interrupt a gentle-
man in ^onr situation ; but even if your con-
clusion IS right, that ^e jury did not believe
bis evidence, it would be the more proper for
the Crown to pause as to calling him again.
Mr. CunoQod. — ^My argument is, that the
jury did believe him then.
But theie if a maa off th« namt of Edwaidt,
who is not indnded in the indictmeat, thoafk
throughout the evidence in the cause he ip-
pears to be a most active conspirator; he iia
every meeting; yon find him inaoaftctnnii
Uie hand-grenades; he is the maa who if
charging tite fusees ; why is he not called? vhf
is he not here P My learned friends niat
pardon me for saying, that I think ere^ wit-
ness, who by any possibility could gire coo>
firmation to such a man as Adams, ought at
least to appear in that box to be enmioed,
and to sund the test of cross-exaninatin;
and you must suspect there is something mm
behind, when that witness is not called bcfae
you.
It may be said, that though JBdwiidi m
there, and is not ^led, there were other €»
apirators present, who are not in the indirt-
ment, and whom the prisonen might biif
called, and who are competent witneaei ff
this had been a case of mere guilt orinooeeMe
there might have been a great deal moie ii
that argument ; but, inasmuch as those wit*
nesses cannot be called to say that tbqrae
innocent men, for if they come here they Ml
admit that they have been guilty of grntoi
atrocious crimes, though they might coeiQ*
entiously and truly swear, that th^ had art
been guilty of this specific crime, thejwooU
come into this court with halteis ahoot ther
necks, and would not be suffered to leanthit
witness box, but most probably would beieot
from thence to Newgate. Is it likely, ihn,
that they should be brought here by the pn-
sonersf Let not that argument, thciefo^
press too heavily against the pnsooen. U
there was any truth in this story, there ^
have been matter, as I apprehend, of eooira-
ation from other quarters; becanse, ca the
night when these parties met ia Cato-8tiMl|
to carry into execution that plan, «i)ia '
perhaps must admit they had in cootemphtioi;
if there was any truth in the testimooy «
Adams, as to their ulterior plan, at that mT
moment other parties ought to have ^^^
eeeding towards the Artilleiy-groow i»
Gray*s-inn-lane. Now, however, ^1^^
Cato-street failed ; it did not fail time eooogt
to prevent the operation of the other p«J»
If there were any truth in the idea of thB pj
there would have been some attempts n w
other parts of the town. Now it »PP*"VJ:
every thing was quiet there, and that therew^
as far as it operates at all, operate iacoBin^
dicrion to the case of the Crown. ^^
There is, I admit, connected with iwpw
of assassination a great deal of ^"*^''**!2:
about public dissatisfaction. Can that, «o»
it not be explained according to ^^f!^
events ? That this lower order of poliuaw
had taken a scheme of arming ^'^^^'^^^S
haps it is impossible to deny ; bat whaU W
is, the inference that my learned |n«°r' JT
counsel for the Crown, drew from it, tt«T
cause they took to arming theroselvgii'^
fore they must of necesrity have coo«3hW
niaiDg febdlioa against the constitBl^ ^
14291
BMAard Tidd/or High TrtatOH.
A.D. 18S0.
C1430
thorities of the country. In other times, (uid
under other circumstances, peihaps, it might
have been a strong argument that it was so
intended ; but look only to recent eyents, and
see whether in those recent events you do not
fiod a key to the whole transaction. I have
alluded before, and must of necessity allude
again to a late public transaction (for where
the course pursued by the counsel for the
Crown is the same, mv track to follow them
must be the same also), though it might be
tedious to the same persons to hear the same
things repeated again and again, yet it be-
comes a duty, and some of you have not heard
what others have. Then let me call your at^
tention to the event at Manchester; where an
immense population, as it now appears, un-
armed, were attacked by an armed force. In
speaking of this event, I am most anxious to
say nothing that should intimate an opinion
from myself either on the one side or the other ;
here I wish to discard, and I hope you will do the
same, any political feeling I may have respect-
ing men wno are entitled to be defendea and
judged of according to the strict letter of the
law, without any resard to their actual or sop-
posed political conduct. But most certain it
IS, that by one set of men that attack was con-
sidered a necessary act of duty ; another set
of men, who were favourers of government in
the main too, thought it an act of oppression
on the people; while another party did not
hesitate to call it the massacre at Manchester;
and as they considered it an attempt, on tlie
part of government, to prevent the exercise of
the legal right of Englishmen to assemble and
discuss their grievances, and to put a stop to
that which we consider as one of the best con-
stitutional safe-guards (I say nothing, gentle-
men, who are right, or who are wrong), but
this I know, it was felt or said by many, that,
inasmuch as people could not assemble un-
armed with safety, many of the demagogues
took advantage of that feeling, and held out to
the people that it was necessary they should
arm themselves to attend those meetings which
they considered as legal assemblies ; and that
explains what Thistlewood said to Monument,
^ All my people are arming themselves ;'' he
does not go on to tell him we are all arming
ourselves for the purpose of raising rebellion
against the government; but taking the cur-
rent feeling of the day among certain people
of the country, it is this ; <* notwithstanding
the attempts to prevent our public meetings,
we will continue to meet, to discuss our griev-
ances ; and as we may be attacked by an armed
force, we will arm to repel force by force.'' I
do not say that it was not a desperate resist-
ance of the law, but be it so. If any of you
think it was, still that will not warrant you in
coming to the conclusion, that the men who so
acted are guilty of high treason in levying war
against the government. This transaction will
furnish you with a clue to a great deal of the
eonduct of these persons ; it will furnish you
with the reason why these men were arming
themselves, without resorting to the supposi**
tion adopted on the other side, that because
they armed themselves they were of necessity
contemplating war and rebellion.
What fortifies me in this conjecture, and
what produces the little pleasure that could
affect one's mind in the contemplation of the
transaction, as it is detailed to us, is this ; I
do not find that the witness Adams, on any
one occasion, has stated expressions hostile to-
wards the person of the king ; this, at least, is
a feature of the case very distinguishable from
the cases which happened in Uie year 1794*
I dare say many of you recollect the proceed-
ings of the reforming societies of that day,
when not only our sacred sovereign, but the
very kingly office itself were spoken of in terms
which made one shudder. And I am most
happy to lay my finger on any thing which caa
relieve the general gloom of this case. In no
part of this transaction, as it is stated to us, is
there evidence that a malignant expression was
used against the king's person ; and if I might
here deviate to state a private feeling of my
own, I feel it with particular satisfaction, for I
am one of those who think we ought never to
name our king and our sovereign, either pub*
licly or privately, without respect and venera-
tion. I do not deal in the language of adula-
tion, gentlemen ; I am one of those who think
the name of the king ought never to be men*
tioned without respect; and I do not say so
firom motives of flattery, but from what I con-
sider sound constitutional principles. Because
that does not restrain me or any man from
boldly and fearlessly canvassing the acts of
any administration, and expressing freely my
opinion of their results ; for the acts of an acU
ministration are to be condemned if bad, not as
being the personal acts of the king, but as the acts
of men who, by bad advice, mislead their so*
vereign ; and I nave therefore a right to oppose,
the acts of any administration boldly and treelyi
so it be done with decent language and tempe-
rate conduct, and I do not, in so doing, fail in
the least in that reverence and respect due
from every subject to the royal person and
authority.
In the variety of evidence which has been
given to you on this occasion, perhaps you will
pardon me if I pause for a moment to see what
further observation may present itself on dif*
ferent parts of it. One observation strikes me
at this moment, that a witness, such as Adams^
at least, should be consistent in his testimony.
But I cannot finil of observing, — and it appears
upon his cross-examination, therefore I may
observe upon it here, that on every trial he has
varied something, and added something new ;
now a man who came in the first instance to
tell you a story so much in detail, ought not
to have added other material facts. But I
cannot fail to observe that as the case of every
separate prisoner has come forward, he has
found out some new fact pressing proportion-
ably harder upon that particular prisoner. This
at ieast is a suspicious feature in his evidence^
14311 i GEOBGB IV.
DM ^if tVOiam Zkmiuit »ii
iim
and will not render it more worthy of cradic
at your hands.
With respect to the confirmation he has ra«
ceived at the hands of witnesses whom you
cannot suspect, that confirmation does not go
to the point of treason : recollect, the treason is
the motire of their assemblies, and is to be in-
ferred from what passed in their deliberations ;
that rests wholly upon himself; no other wit-
ness speaks to that matter. The first head of
eonfinnation which is given is, that they took
a room (two or three witnesses are called who
concur in that respect) at the back of Brunt's,
and had frequent assemblies there ; that is a
&ct not denied ; but it is not their meeting in
that room, it is what were their ddiberationt
when they were so met, which you are to con*
lider. To illustrate this ; suppose in any one
of tiie clubs (the shoemaker's club for instance,
which has been talked of) Mr. Monument had
come forward, and stated, that in this shoe-
maker's club there were treasonable convetva*
tions carried on, and that some person had
eome and proved that all those parties met in
this room ; he is confirmed as to their being
there ; but are you therefore to believe a most
wick^ witness, when he invents all sorts of
stories as to the conversations in that room ?
- Then there is another piece of ooofinnation,
Aat certain persons were watching about lord
Hanowb/s ooor; that is, I admit, a eonfirraa*
lion of part of his story, but to what eitent ? it
is a confirmation of the ttovy, that they had in
design this desperate assassination plot, but it
is not a confirmation that they meant to levy
war against his majesty; that does not stand
eonfirmed ; so that ail the confirmation coming
from unsuspected sources goes to the extent of
an assassination plot, but not a conspiracy
to levy war against the constituted authorities
of the country.
It has struck me in re-considering this very
important case, that I may have overlooked
(what if I have overlooked must be ever matter
of deep regret to me) a very important consi*
deration of the evidence, which, if I am right
in my present view of it, ought not only to
serve the present prisoners, but ought to have
served those who have gone before them ; the
English law in its great regard to the sulject*s
safety, with respect to the crime of treason, has
said, no man snail be held guilty of trsason,
without being convicted by the testimony of
two witnesses ; and here, for a moment, I
would beg his lordship's attention : there must
be two witnesses to a substantive treason. I
do not mean to contend there must be two
vritnesses to each overt act, but there may be
one witness to one overt act, and another wit-
ness to another overt act, of the same species
of treason. Then let us look at the substan*
live treasons stated in this indictment, and at
the overt acts there charged in support of diem,
and see* if there be two witnesses to a sub-
stantive treason, or if any two of the overt acts
be proved by any witness, except Adams,
'ilie indflctmeot (nad you will considef it
with great attention) states slevm oieit asa;
^bey are differently stated in three of the csuli
of the indictment ; but I believe thcj m
in substance all the same. WheD 1 bm
gone through the overt acts in the fint oaat
of the indictment, you will consider vbetba
you find two witnesses speaking distinctly lo
the same thing. The first count, at jw bov,
turns upon whether they intended tolsfywr
or not; and the first overt act stated is, tbt
they met, and assembled, and eoaspiied asd
consulted, to devise, arrange and matore plas
and means to subvert and destroy the goiva-
ment and constitution of the realm. Nov, the
fact of their meeting is proved by seven! wit*
nesses. That I admit; but it is not aapif
the foet of their meeting, upon which ihii sti
depend, it is with what nUaU they met «ks
proves that they met with an tnfcitf toovntm
the oonstitntion 7 Adams. Who elis mm
it ? who says any thing more of the desbm-
tions than Adams ? no one: theiefoic it ion
solely on the testimony of Adams— dutii the
first overt act. The second overt act ii M
nearly the same in substance; that tiny m
meet and conspiiv to stir up, taise^ oste
and levy insurrection, rebellioa and «tf<^
Mind, it is not the fact of tbeir meeti^ «h^
is the overt act, but it is die •"''"'"■jjj
which they met which is lo be proved. Whs
proves the intention with whidi th^m(li<l
one witness? Look through the seciei of ^
nesses called, and see whmer 7!'^^^
Aer witness who proves the istoitow*
which they met. llie third overt Ml ii» *'
they met with a dei^ to assassiaate div««
iSbe privy council of our lord the l^DgjAflll
admit is proved by more than oie ^^^e*--
distinctly proved; bat you are neit 10 w
yourselves, whether the overt aet, eheaiti
proved, furnishes an inference ss a ■C'*^
consequence, that the overt act F^*^]]^
levying of war and rebeUion. I havea »•
mission of the learned counsel, that ^^^^
nate die whole privy council doss not 01 iMi
amount to high treason.
Mr. Baron Gorroia— I undeistood Mr^
ney to admit, that a conspiracy to aoroffs
pnvy councillor is not high treason; w^
never heard him admit, that *i^ ^ j^
(proved over and over again) to mwdff »
majesty's ministers, is not to go to tbe joiy w
them to infer, whether that waswihtt")"*
mate design of deposing the king and icyyn>l
war against the king, I do not wish l» ^'
fere with your argument, but I think J***^
misunderstood the admission*
Mr. Cunoood.-^TAT. Gumey admitted, «*«
law is, that to conspire to morder, or em
actuaMy to murder, Ae whole privy ownff»"
not of Itself a substantive treason.
Mr. Bmm Gontao.— Ifo m» ^^fJU
stand, and esnedaUv when itisiatfaebii**
the counsel for the prisoners, that tli«*'f![
least impatiefiaa on Om pact of I'M ^"'^'
14331
mOard TUd/TT Higk Treaum.
A. D. 1890.
£1484
when yOQ stated broadly* that yon had anr
admission, I thought it right to call your atteo*
lion to ity for the purpose of seeing whether
there was such an admission. I hope you will
not consider my interruption as inconyenient
or improper.
Mr. Curwood^ — On no occasion would I
insider the interruption of his lordship as
unkind ; I haTe on too many occasions to
thank him for great ucbanity. I did not state,
(hat it was not evidence from which you miaht
infer another object, but I contend, that that
being proved, you were not precluded from
exercising your own judgment ; that you were
not bound up from considering, whether they
bad or not another object in view. The learn-
ed counsel for the Crown admitted, that of
itself it was not high treason ; and my argu-
ment is, that it not being high treason of itself
you were not of necessity to suppose it was to
be followed by high treason; you may, in
your judgment, think it is sood evidence — that
there is something else to follow ; or you may
say, on the other hand, that there is no evi-
dence that any thing was to follow. I put it
merely as an argument to your understanaings,
and not as conclusive evidence.
The neat overt act is varying only the terms
of it ; that they did procure divers arms and
treapons to assassinate divers of the privy
council ; to which the same argument applies.
I admit the fact ; but I say, that having admit-
ted the feet, it does not of necessity follow, that
they had any other object in view. Then, the
seventh is, that they conspired to seise cannon
with an nUenUon to arm tLemselves, and other
i^lse traitors, to levy and make war. You
must take the whole of it together, not merely
the conspiring to seize cannon, but for that
particular purpose of levying war against the
king. Why, perhaps they had no such pur-
pose to levy war against the king; stiu it
reverts back to the testimony of Adams the
onl^ vritness who speaks to the purpose of
their minds.
The next overt act is, that of consniring to
set fire to certain buildings ; that I acimit has
been proved, but I deny the consequence.
I say, they might conspire to set fire to build-
ings, but whether for the purpose of plunder,
or for the purposes of levying war, is a matter
for you to decide upon ; and that does not yet
appear in evidence, except on the testimony of
Adams. Then comes the overt act, that they
published divei^ proclamations ; but there is
not a tittle of evidence except that they pub-
lished one, and that from the mouth of Adams.
Then the next is, that they published a spe-
cific proclamation.
, Mr. fisntNi Gorrov.^s it publishiDg, or
pr^aring 7
Mr. Cunvood^ — I beg your lordship's pardon,
k is preparing. Then comes this specific
proclamation. Kow, I iuive argued beibre,
that that proclamation isviot aft all in exbtenee ;
It is a mere invention of vMani; but eves
supposing. that he speaks truth upon this ooca.
sion, what else is there to confirm him ? it rests
solely upon the testimony of Adams. Then
comes the rest— an insurrection actually to levy
war, that is, in fact, if I may so call it, a sweep*
ing overt act ; and the argument I have had the
honour to address to you before, equally ap-
plies to this. That is the whole question^
whether there was, or not, any design to levy
war against his majesty.
Now, I believe I have submitted at least the
leading points of the evidence to your oonsid^
oration. I have not attempted to dilate much
upon it, because in the exercise of the duty
that I have to perform to these unfortunate
inen, I have thought it best to convey mv
meaning in as few vrords as I possibly could.
I have not attempted any thing like declama-
tion ; I have confined myself to such arguments
as have presented themselves to my mind,
praying yon to take into your consideratiett
many others that must present themselves to
your own; but, as I said before, I trust by my
brevity I have not confused what I meant to say*
If I have had the good fortune to state inteU
ligibly those arguments I have presented, I can
only conclude by imploring you to lay out of
your minds all which has passed on former
occasions, weigh deliberately and seriously
before yon condemn men to death upon the
testimony of such an infamous vritness as this
man appears to be. At least be satisfied that
be is confirmed by unsuspected testimony ; and
what I was going to pray, I know you wiH
grant — Those amongst you who have pro-
nounced verdicts on former juries, if you
should, on a calm and dbpassionate review of
the testimony of this man, see reason to alter
your former opinions, have the manly fortitude
to do it; and do not, because without impeach*
ment to yourselves in another view of the evi-
dence you have come to another conclusion^
think that conclusion binding upon you now.
This is all I ask, and this I know yon will
readily grant.
ZVIDEKOB FOE TBS PRISOVIRS.
Mary Barker sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Adolfhut*
. You are the daughter of Tidd, who now
stands at the bar ? — ^I am.
Do vou know a man of the name of Ed-
wards f— Yes.
Do you know a man of the name of Adams?
—Yes.
Did Edwards ever leave any thing at your
iiidier's lodgings, or house T*— Yes, he did.
How long before this dreadful affair in Cato*
street ^— About a fortnight, I think.
What did he leave there ?— He left things,
that I since have heard were grenades, and
likewise powder.
Do yott lemeaaber the grenades by Uieir
shape ?— They were in a kind of caonister.
Was one of them eonsideraUy larger than
iie4ilheis9-^Yes.
143A] 1 GEORGE IV. Trial cf WtUiam DniitM and
ri436
Who left that rery large one?— Adams.
For what purpose did they profess to leave
them f were they to remain there, or not ?■—
Edwards asked, if he might leave them for a
little while.
Mr. Baron Garrow. — ^Do you propose this
as a contradiction of Adams, or as a substan-
tive fact? I do not remember that you ex-
amined Adams to this.
Mr. Adolfhu, — ^No ; I do not offer it as a
contradiction.
Mr. Barxm Garrow. — ^I thought it might
liave escaped my recollection.
Mr. Jd0/jpfett.*-No ; there is rery small
chance of its escaping your lordship's recol-
lection : were they to remain there i — ^No ; they
were to be called for again.
Were any of them taken away ? — Edwards
took them once away, and said he would take
them to finish them^-and he brought them back
again.
How long was that before the Cato-etreet
affair ? — It might be about a week.
Were they ever taken away again ? — ^They
were taken away on the 23rd.
By whom were they then taken away ? — By
Edwards.
Were they ever brought back again ? — ^There
were some brought back on the morning of the
S4th.
How long was that before the officers came ?
•—About a quarter of an hour.
Do yoa know who brought them back ?—
No.
Did you see the person ? — Yet.
Was he a stranger to you entirely ?— Yes*
In about a quarter of an hour afterwards
he brought them agtin ? — ^Yes.
Was there a box, among other things, left in
your house ? — Yes.
In what state was that ? — Corded.
Was that ever, to your knowledge, uncorded
at any time ? — No.
Was it taken away on the 23rd, or did it
remain where it had been } — ^It remained ex-
actly where it had been till the morning of the
24th, when the officers took it away.
What it contained you did not know till
the officers came ?— I do not know till this day.
Thomas Chamhert sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Cunoood,
Is your name Thomas Chambers ?--Ye8.
Where do you live?— At No, 3, Heathcock-
eourt in the Strand.
Do you know the witness Adams, who has
been examined here ? — ^Yes.
Do you remember the day when the people
were taken up in Cato-street t«— Yes.
Did he, in company with any body, call
upon you at any time before thatf — ^Twice.
How long before?— 'About a month before,
in company with Edwards.
What conversation had you with him?—
They asked me (Edwards first), whether I
would go along with them; I ssked tlm
where.
Was Adams by ?— Yes. He said, Why I
was not such a fool as not to know Uiere w
something on foot ; I said, no, I did not knot
there was sometliing on foot ^ Well, we are
going to kill his majesty's mimsten,'^ ajs
Adams, ** and we will have blood and vine
for supper."
Are you sure of the expressions ?— Yes.
What else did he say ? — Edwards replied,
''By God, Adams, you are right; it shall be
so."
Do you remember the evening when Adaai
was taken up ? — No, I do not know iboit
that.
The evening that the people in Cat04ti«{
were taken up, I mean ? — Yes ; I remember
that nothing occurred to me that night
Did Adams call upon you that eTeniog!-
No ; he called upon me the Monday belbn
that took place, and Edwazds with him; witk
a bag with him.
What did that bag contain?— He asked w
to let him leave it with me; laskedvhitit
contained, and he said, only a few pistols «ad
such like ; and a man named William TqB'
bridffe was in my room at the time.
Did you let him leave it ?— I told tbeo, I
would not let them leave it, or any sach things,
and I never saw them afterwards.
You are sure they made use of thoic a-
fressions about blood and wine for sopper!"
am certain of it.
Zilomat CAoaiiers cross-examined by
Mr. Guney.
What book were you sworn upon ?— I ^o w*
know what book it is ; there it is.
Nor care?— I never took an oath hoi «"«
before I came here the other day ; this b tbe
third time -, it is the prayer-book, I MA
suppose. *
Do you believe in Christianity?— I wJ*
am a churchman. ^
And you always said so ?— Yes, I ^^^^
to the contrary ; I always believed in «»
Bible, and was brought up to the chorch.
And Paine's works perhaps you hare i«m-
—■No, I never saw them. j^
Do you know the two prisoners ?— Y«^ '""
of them. -^
How long have you known ^^^^t",**
known Davidson since, I bcUeve, about w
time of Mr. Hunt's procession.
How long have you known riddM»"
not known him except in the trade.
You and he are brother s^oemakeis •^»^
How long have you known himt— I **•
say.
Oh yes, you can ; half a year ?-I cw»?|5i
Will you swear you have not known w»
twelve-monUi? — ^x es, I wilL ,^
Will you swear you have not ijom ^
nine months?— I cannot say pointedly.
WiU you swear you have not to« ""
six ? — ^I caDnot say*
1437]
Siehard Tidd/or High TreatOH.
A. D. 182a
i:i438
Did 70U not know him at the time of Mr.
Hunt's procession ? — ^Know him ?
That is all I ask you? — I did not, par-
ticularly.
Did not you know him ? — I cannot say, not
to swear to him, not particularly.
Do you mean to say, you did not know him
as early as Mr. Hunt's procession into Lon-
don ? — I cannot say.
How soon after?— It might be at some of
the meetings.
Meetings where ?**In Sroithfield.
Did you attend them all? — ^I did; every
meeting that was held openly in the air.
You acorn secret meetings ?-p-Yes ; and
there is not a man in England who can say I
attended one, whose word is worth a farthing.
Did you carry banners ? — ^Yes.
Whom did you go with? — With scores of
people.
I know that ; any of the prisoners who are
indicted? — I cannot say but I might have
walked with them in the procession.
I dare say you can give me their names
without any difficulty ?— There are some of the
prisoners whom I do not know.
But there are some of them you do know;
you told me before, you knew Ings f — Yes.
And Brunt ?— And Brunt.
And Wilson? — By person.
And Harrison? — ^And Harrison veiy well.
And Bradbum? — I do not know Bradburn
80 well.
But you know him ? — ^Yes.
Strange? — No; I do not think I know
Stranse at all.
. Did you go to any of the Smithfield meet-
ings in company with any of the persons that
have been mentioned? — ^I cannot say: they
might be there.
Did not you and Wilson go together?— No,
not to my knowledge ; he might be there.
What weapon did you carry to the Smith-
field meeting? — None but the flag which I
carried openly.
What in your pocket ? — ^None.
Had you no pistol in your pocket ? — ^I car-
ried none, nor I knowed of nobody Uiat carried
none.
You told me you carried a flag at each of the
meetings ; how long haye you known Tbis-
tlewood ? — Ever since Mr. Hunt's procession.
Where have you seen him since ? — He has
been in my house repeatedly since, for I took
bome the flags afterwards; for he has been
tUere to fetch them and distribute them to
those who were to take them in the open air
in the meetings.
Have you seen him at any other place since?
•*-Yes; one Sunday evening, at the Black
iDog, in Gray's-inn-lane.
• • Do you know the White Lion, in Wych-
street ? — Very well.
Do you frequent it ?-rI have not done it of
late ; I used to do.
' What is your number and section ? — I have
fot Ao such thing.
You do npt knovr of any such things ? — I
know of nothing of the kind.
What was the name of your society? — It
was no specific name ; they called themselves
reformers, that was all.
Were Harrison, and Wilson, and Davidson,
and Palin, and Thistlewood, all with you at
the Smithfield meeting?-— I cannot say that.
Was Thistlewood there? — I saw Thistlewood
there when Mr. Hunt was in the waggon, and
I was in the waggon; I was always in the
waggon.
Was Davidson there ? — ^I cannot say ; there
were thousands of people.
Will you swear you did not see Davidson
there; he is remarkable in his person ? — I can
swear he was not there ; that I did not seehiniy
at least, when Mr. Hunt took the chair.
You were always in the waggon ?— I do not
think I ever saw him in the waggon.
I did not ask whether you saw him in the
waggon? — There might be other people of
colour there besides him.
Will you swear he was not there ? — ^I do not
think I saw him there.
At this time, when Adams and Edwards
called upon you, about a week before the
Cato-street affair, and told you there was a plan
to assassinate his majesty's ministers, and
Adams said, you must be a fool not to know
what was going on ^No, Edwards said that,
** Edwards asked me. and Adams being by,
asked me too, if I would go along with theniy
that I was not such a fool'' 1 said, '* go
along where,'' and he said, " why I was not suck
a fool as not to know there was something on
foot ;*' J said '* No I did not know there waa
something on foot.'^ '' Well, we are going to
kill his majesty's ministers," says Adams.
Adams said, ''We will have blood and
wine for supper ?'' — Yes; and then Edwards
replied, *' By God, Adams, you are rieht.'^
And you thought they were such ferocious
monsters, they were going to commit assas-
sination ? — Yes ; but I did not consider they
would get fools enough to do it; I considerea
myself a fool, but not so big a fool as that.
But lest they should, did not you go and
give information ? — It never struck me ; but
the reason was, I never thought they would
get any body to do such a foolish thing.
Keeping such company as you did, I should
have thought you might have expected it ?— I
never heard a man say a word against his ma-
jesty's ministers, except those men Edwards
and Adams, in my room, and a drunken man
in an ale-house.
Mr. Baron Garrow. — ^Whatwas the ridiculous
thing that you thought so very preposterous^
that thinVing yourself pretty much of a fool,
(I do not say that) you thought they could not
get a fool big enough to do? — ^To go with
Edwaids and 'Adams ; foolish enough to go
and kill them.
You thought that so monstrous and absurd^
no man would be found monster enough to do
that ?— Not to do that.
14391
1 6B0R6B IV.
TiM eT ''VUm AraUim «<
[tMO
Mr. Gmmey.^^Yovi ntf«r tlicwght of the
wickedness of it, only liie follj? — ^I thought
they would not he ahle to get any one lo do it.
lott nerer heard any bhui say any thine
against the ministers, except a dranken man r
—Except in a newspaper.
And yet you attended the Smithfield mad-
ings T«--That was in the open air.
Will you now swear again, having attended
aH those meetings, that you did not otiierwiie
than from these men and a dmnkeft man in
an ale-house, hear persons speak violently
•gainst his m^eaty*8 ministers F^Never, aa lo
killine them.
I do not suppose they mention sudi things
in Smithfield r-^I never beard them say things
harder than 1 have read in the public papers.
You told me, I think, before, that you ftnt
mat with Ings at a shop near you, where pub-
lic papers were sold ? — ^Tea.
The Black Dwarf and Medusa and Republi-
•an shop f — You siir so^ not I.
You said so ? — That that was where they
were sold, but not I, I said, yes.
The little shop where they are stuck round
doee to your court f — ^Yes, and I will tell you
•n the books I read, and those are Gobbett's.
You cannot read worse?— -I cannot think I
can read better, for they have kept me out of
nU kinds of hobbles.
Mr. fiwwi Gmrow, — You only read the
works you have mentioned, and you apprehend
?>u have been sworn upon the prayer-boQ%t —
es; I never read any thing but Cobbett, I
huA got plenty of them before.
And you apprehend you have been sworn
tA day upon the prajer-book ? — ^Yes ; so I ap-
prdiend*
John BenneU sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. Cmnoood,
Where do you Hve ?— At No. 4, little Ftab-
lane, New-street, Mary-4e«bone.
What are you by trsde ? — A bricklaver.
Do you know a man of the name of Hiden?
—Yes.
Did he at any time caU upon yon» and ask
you to accompany him at any private radical
meetings ? — ^Y«s, he has.
Did he use diose expressions, a private
radical meeting F—Yes, ae has, in my own
Has he endeavoured to persuade you to
oompaoy him onoe, or more than once ?— More
than once or twice, or ten times.
Many times ?---Yes.
What did he tell you was to be done there t
•—He did not tell me any thing was to be
done ; he only requested me to go with him,
that I might sit and see and hear, and say
nothing without I chose.
Did you ever accompany him 1 — ^No, I never
did ; I never moved to any meeting, either
public or private, in my life.
Of course we do not bind you down to other
meetings, but private or public radical meet-
ings ?— 'No, I never did to no meetings.
Mr, AdoMm.'^l am now going to ofi
evidence to Dandsoa's chaneler, mj loii :
lutae Cook sworn. — ^Examined by
Uv.AMphu.
Where do yon UveT— 24, Chailottt^lRf^
Blackfriars'-road.
How long have yon known ths primer
Davidson ? — ^About six years.
In what situation has he been ia thit tine?
— ^About six ^ears ago, he worked ss tjnnef*
man for me m the cabinet line.
Has he continued in that employ rm or
not? — ^I believe he has, but not for ne. i
Have vou continued acquainted m'th Ua?
^-OocaaionaUy he has called at aqr hoo^
when he has wanted any wood.
In the way of business?— Yes.
What character are you able to give to hie?
— At the time he worked for me, he wuaroj
honest hard-woiking indnstrknis nian) nd be
conducted himmlf m a jouneyoaD oigk n
do.
Have yon known sufiiciently of km toipeak
of his charaoter since ? — ^No.
That character goes only to six yem 9^1^
Ym.
Do you know of what tine gf life ^ ^
been in before he came to youM tluBk I
have heard him siqr—
Bfr. Jio^pJko.— I cannot ask to thai
Robert J&P WUliam swora.^ExanuDed Vf
Mr.JaoNJpte.
What are you by prolhssioa ?— AawdiW'
living where P — in Lion's-ino.
How long have you known Ibe primB
Davidson ?— I knew him in the ysiislSOOnd
leoi, 80 far as from readmg mathemtts*^
him at Aberdeen.
Have you had anr aconaiotaooe vitt ■>
since ?— 1 have met him three or fo^'^S!
the streets of London since; the hit « «^
I think wm in June 1610.
Mr. Adolpkm^l am afinid he Im <iitrj»
dmnkyou for your good intentieDs: ^^^^^^
?ou as to his cbancter eighteea J^'^J^
should think not; I was rather nsrpnm #
his sending to me; H is so kH^'^^
have known much of him.
Stahtn Bak$ sworn.— £iaimned^
yix.Adt^lm.
What are you?— I keepafnwi'sifc«f"*
No. 17, BeU-conrt, Gray's4nn4ase.
You appear on behalf of Tidd ?-^ ^
How long have you been swR**f*J'l!. \
him?— Fifteen montlv; duriog ^^^
never mw anv thing in hiseooia«tof «i«*'
now brought before the Court. ,^ ^
You never mw any thing trewfl*"^
which looked like conspiracy?— ™.^^,^
He B^er invited you to my ••««<'
No.
«jH«1
Did he appear an mdrntnoef ..
man?— Yes, be wm always tt k« •*
1441]
Richard Tiddjbr High Tmuon,
A. D. 18^.
1:1443
when he hid nothing to do, took a walk with
his family, or reading.
- He seemed a quiet well-disposed man ? —
Yes.
French sworn. — Examined hy
Mr. Adolpkut,
What are you? — A carpenter and nnder-
taker^No. 18, Union-court, Holbom.
How long have you known Tidd? — Nearly
three years; he was a lodger and tenant of
mine.
What character has he borne in that time? —
The best of characters ; I never saw any thing
wrong ; I called every week for my rent ; he
appeared a very industrious and honest man ;
I never wished for a better tenant, and par-
ticularly punctual to his word.
Samuel Lands sworn. — ^Examined by
Mr. Adolpkut.
Where do you lire ? — ^No. 1 1 , Charles-street,
Hatton-garden.
What are you by business ?— A boot maker.
How long have you known Tidd ? — ^Turned
of three years.
What character has he borne? — A very
good one to the best of my knowledge.
As an honest and industrious man? — He
alwajTS appeared so; Mr. Tidd has woriLed for
me the whole of that time.
Tlierefore you have a good opportunity of
knowing his character? — Yes.
He Imis deserved your good opinion ? — Yes,
he has.
BfObert Wood sworn. — Examined by
Mr. Adoiphm.
What are you ? — ^A tinman and brazier.
Where do you live ?— At No. 5, ElliotVrow,
near Lord's cricket-ground.
How long have you known Tidd ? — I have
DO knowledge of Tidd; I know Davidson,
and have known him upwards of three years.
^ What has been his character during that
time ? — He was a cabinet-maker ; he has ap-
peared a very sober industrious man.
Mr. AdoliplmL — ^There are other witnesses to
character but I will not call them, my lord.
• Mr. Adohhm. — Gentlemen of the jury, the
coarse of tne arduous duty which I have un-
dertaken on behalf of the unfortunate prisoners
"who are named in this indictment, or at least
•ix of them, brings me now for the fourth time
to address a jury on a case which has been laid
before them, vrith the same circumstances
(and except a few variations, such as particu-
lar incidents have required), almost verbally
with the same proof; and, gentlemen, it is not
cmly the distaste which arises from frequent
repetition, but certainly in some degree it is
that enervation of the mind which must result
Irom frequent ill success, whidi makes me
declare that I rise to address you under cip-
cnoMtances, peculiarly painftd. That I have
Iberetofore very much at length, and with great
VOL. XXXIIL
minuteness investigated these circumstances,
that I have done so unsuccessfully, presents
no topics to my mind either of consolation or
of dismay, because I know that I have per-
formed my duty according to the best of my
ability, and I know, too, Uiat if the particular
facts of to-day should present to your minds
reasons which have not occurred to the minds
of any juries before, or to any of you who may
have been on juries before, yon would notf-
withstanding what others have done, or what
you yourselves might have concurred in, give
your verdict this day as if the matter were en-
tirely new, and come to such a conclusion as
the evidence shall require, without regard to
what has been done before. But the enervar
tion and prostration of mind I have described
arises from this, that it is nearly impossible to
tread the same ground again with the same
confidence and vigour as at first ; and it is im-
possible not to believe that that which has
before failed in convincing must fail again, and
not to feel that which is inseparably connected
with ill success, a degree of dispiritedness
which enfeebles the mind even where it feels
deeply, unaffectedly, and sincerely.
My learned friend has stated, that he feels
sensible that all has been said which could be
said on the subject before us. I confess, re-
taining the opinions I entertained at first, I
feel a perpetual jealousy of my own efforts, a
perpetual distrust of the powers of my own
mind, which makes me believe I must have
omitted something, because I failed to con-
vince. I fear, however, that I shall not be
more vigorous than I have been in the intro-
duction of my opinions, but must labour undet
all the inconveniences arising from lassitude
and distrust of myself.
This case is laid before yon for the fourth
time, without any variation of facts, though
with some novelty in respect to the manner of
introducing it, and that is not to be wondered
at, because a number of gentlemen highly po-
lidied and instructed, will each take a some-
what different view of any subject. My learn-
ed friend and myself had no opportunity of
shifting our ground ; — when I say shifting our
ground, I do not mean to use that as a phrase
of any levity with respect to my learned friends ;
but they have some advantage in presenting
the aspect of this case, which is denied to my
learned friend, Mr. Curwood, and myself, for
we have had to labour up tlie same track with*
out relief from each outer. We have never
varied the mode of statement of our argument ;
if we had, it would have been charged upoa
us in reply as evidence of the fidlacy of our
former arguments, and that we had taken to
others stiU more fataL I can only therefore
repeat to you part of that which I have stated
before, with. suchlittle novelty as the occasion
may suffgest. I can only resort to the same
topics I have already used within your hearing,
or at least within your knowledge ; for you
cannot be ignorant of that which all the town
has learned.
4Z
1443] 1 GEOBGe IV.
Trial of WiOiam DmdMom ad [I444
lihu beeBmlreadjstaMd to yoa, by my learn-
ed Ciiend, that the ooospiraoy which eonstitiitas
the treason on the piesent indiclnent ia proved
nainly if not entirely, by the witnesa Adama,
who ia, as a witness, too infamous to demand
implicit credit from a jury. The law with
respect to acoompltces and their confirmation ^
has been discussed so often at the bar, has '
been so often, so clearly, and so forcibly laid .
down by tlte judges, that it is neat to irapossi* 1
We to hope that any obsenration at this time
ean acquire much of your attention ; but I take
the liberty of remarluDg that it stands clearly
as a mle of law, not to be departed from in
practice, that an accomplice must be so con-
armed that his tale must beoome credible — not
merely credible in aome parts, but ^t he shaU
gain credit while he is detailing the whole — by
the credit you are induced to give to his verap
eity in those parts where he is confirmed by
•ther witnesses ; but the confirmation depends
mainly on the manner in which he appears be-
fore the jury. With respect to some witnesses,
a slight confinnation wiU produce credit ; with
lespect to others, very strong ooafirmation will
be required before they are belicTed. I am
not saying in point of law (for it would be ab-
surd and no man who had OTer read a hook of
law would be able to say) that an accomplice
is expected to be confirmed in every point of
his narrative ; for it must inevitably occur to
every man's observation, that if he were ex-
pected to be so confirmed in every point, he
might have been disi>ensed with, tor die case
•ould do as well without his evidence. As^
auredlv no man, from the attorney-general to
myself, would ever, in such a case, bring an
accomplice at all, and we would exempt the
accomplice from cross-examination by bring-
ing at once the man who would make bis evi-
dence unnecessary ; but without going to that
extent, I do humbly insist, that it is necesmry
&at an accomplice, who comes to prove a crime,
should be confirmed in something that is ma-
terial to that very crime, and that it is nc<t
suficient to bring confirmation merely to cer«
tain matters of fact drawing towaid the same
focus.
i will put a familiar illustration ; 1^ will
suppose, that in any part of the country there
existed any set of men, who bad been the bane
of the communitv, who had plundered and
sobbed roosta and orchards, till they had ba-
eome marked by every one ; supposing on any
occasion one of the party were detecud* and
he turned witnem against the rest; supposing
the plans and circumstances were so laid that
be was seen at this public-house with that per-
son, at another situation with other persons ;
and sopposing this accomplice had pointed
•ut the place where oartaia implesMnts, usefol
h€ some part of their pniieet, could be fonnd,
md that they were nmnd accordingly; but
aopposiag he added to dial, that the intention
was not to commit those depredations wUdi
were ponitedat by other. witnesses, hot IhaS
he fixed upon them a charge of burglary, an la-
tent to murder the master cf the booGi: Ike
witness being proved to be so bad a cbnel^
it would go very seriously to the jsry to cm.
sider wheQier the certainty of being coofirmt
in slight, general, or unimportant particolaii,
had Qot encouraged him to the iovntioi of a
charge more atrocious, snd to suggest criaci
of a deeper dye than those which htd laBj
been contem^iated. Suppose too, that tliet
were a reward for one conviction, and not for
another, when it was quite clear that thenbai
been a plan to plunder orchards or hen lonls,
to take away poultrv or fruit, or to do oikr
things which would be a subject of smpkbp
ceny, would it on the evidence of such ivi|>
ness be believed, that the plan went to tknii
heard-of extent of robbing the honae and av-
dering the family, more particularlj if tbaf
was proof that that house was so well dssed,
and that family so well guarded, thtt ihie
persons had no force or means to efleci it, ad
must have run on amured sod obfiooi di-
struction if they made the attempt? Gestl^
men, I say, if that evidence, uanipporttd
where it was capable of being supported, i^
unconfirmed except by particulars whidivai
applicable to one case as well as another, vet
presented to you, would you not besittie a
pronounce the prisoners guilty of the bighf
offence ? By this sort of parallel I wish tin
present case to be tried. Here is an obiioi^
known, avowed intention ; it is that of vrtik'
ing vengeance, which some of those rm verf
rash enough to believe had been merited If
his majesty's ministers, on tlie heads of tlM|
ministers ; vengeance repugnant to eTeryieai
of propriety from whic^ a British nisd noils
but which does not amount (m I sate fioB tki
admission of my learned friend) to bightsi*
son, unless it is taken as the overt act oT 1
further intention; that is to say, to speak 1*
technically, if the beginning and end of ^
plot of these men were to murder his loajestf s
ministers, to fire the town, to plander the 0*
fortunate objects of their vengeance, to do vj
other thing which were within that scop^^
are not to be tried for it under thepreN><>'
dictment. Ihese crimes are ia thenstfvo
sufficient to subject the persons goobb^^
them to the highest and severest punflhao*}
and if in the prosecution of their real iiuxit^
they have committed* other crimes, Ib^**^
leached by the law, without sanpoas|[ tw
those acU form part of the plot ehsigediDm
present case; but unless they intesU aaa|
or all those things which Adams has aw"
to them, namely, to depose Ike kisf^ v^J*
prevent his fiuoaiiy i;om reigning, to "^^
public munitions of the countfy,'to sstsnUB t
provisional govemmeni, which wss ta«tio«i^
where or o&er— unlem they imeaded H tjl
the king's fortreases or palaoes, *i^J^
was against the kiag, they are asc fm^
hightraaaon. That they did inteadssjF or"
of these thinga, you have from the tsmj*"
Adams alone; and it wittbe fery»*g
ata^whaameqcMM-to talk othimt^^^
1444]
Rtdard TuUJor High Treatan.
A.D. 18fa
11446
bow far such a nuui, uDsapporttd m these te^
spects, is to be believed l)«cause he is sup*
ported in that which is avowed, because he is
Qonflrmed in circumstances which apply more
to the meeting in Cato-sireet the objects of
which were precisely defined, but without the
aid of any witness to confirm him in those
other more material circumstances to which I
hate adverted.
It is said by my learned friend who addressed
Sou upon this case, after going through the
St of confirmations which he intended to pro«
duce, that if all other confirmations were ab*
sent, Cato- street itself is a confirmation. It is
a confirmation if the assassination of his ma-
jesty*s nunisters is the end intended ; — it is a
refutation, if it is supposed that the seiiure of
the town, the subjugation of the million who
inhabit it, and the capture of his majesty's sub-
jects who should present themselves in its de«
fence, were the objects ; I say it is a refutatioa
0f that^ even if it should be granted that plans
of an ulterior nature were at one time enter*
tained, of which, give me leave to say, I see no
distinct evidence. Cato-street, so du from
confirming, distinctly repels that inference;
for the large number of ball-cartridges fonnd
ifi a boi: never was carried to Cato-street| bnt
remained corded up, as it had been for w^eks
beibre« ia the lodgings of Tidd, and there it
was found on the following morning by tha
officers ; so that these twelve hundred rounds
of ball-cartridges, which were to produce thoie
Aighty effects, were all locked up in the ar<»
•enal, except a dozen or two which were (bund
in Csto<^reet; so far, then, from this being
any evidence of an ulterior intention, it shews
that the whole quantity, even if these men
knew what that quantity was which was in
diat corded box, was in perfect quietness; and
no man over seems to have thought of taking
Ihem to Cato-street, or of meddling with thent
at all on tbat fatal and miserable night.
Then Cato-street, so much relied npoo,
confirms that which is not denied, but remits
that which is to be raised as a superstruo*
ture upon it« It is said of Adams, that he
has no interest to come here and to falsify
the troth, by over-stating tbat which he pre«
tends to know, or that which he may fairly
be conceived to know; that consideration
depends mainly upon the character of the
man, and upon the circumstances under which
he comes forward, and to these I beg nartico«
larly to direct your attention ; he is tne only
witness to prove the ulterior intentions of these
parties ; their plot, whatever it was, had been
detected, and had failed; the persons of
many of them were in prison so early ae
Wednesday night, and the rest, I believe, of
those now in custody, as eariy as Thursday
morning ; examinations of them, and respect-
ing them, had undoubtedly taken place in tbe
meantime, and ail they had disclosed was re«
lated, so that We may take it, from what ap-
pears in tho cause, that those transactions in*
mediately iimad at by the meeting in Cslto«
street, namely, tbe attack of lord Harrowb/t
house (to which it is said Cato-street was par*
ticularly convenient, Cato*street being near to
Grosvenor-square) were well known on Friday j
then Mn Adams is taken into custody, and on
Saturday, after other eiaminations have failed^
comes his deposition, evtedding the matter,
which went only to murder and to conspiracy,
to the full charge of hi^ treason ; wbich being
in its nature a conspiracy, includes in one ia-t
dictment all the parties, and makes the sa3ringa
of one in the absence of another evidence
against him who is absent, and die distinct
acts of each overt act applicable to tha
whole ; therefore it is, that Mr. Adams on
Saturday comes forward, and becomes a wis*
nem of great importance; whether he had
contcjmplated that before or not, we cannol
obtain a disclosure frdm him; we may fbrra
oonjectures, in me they may be called mistakes
suggestions, but if they enter into your minds^
th^ may be effectual in giving a right cha*
racter to the evidence, and a proper determl^
nation to the case.
Then let us see what Adams is, and what
he comes to disclose ; he has been described
by mv learned friend. And of all the mea
who hate been characterised in court, Mr.
Adams is the last person to complain. Is ha
a traitor to his king ? my learned friend tells
you so, and why? because Adams tells yon
so. Is be a traitor to the friends whom it ap«
peam by other evidence be had attempted td
seduce, and who had intrusted him? nis ap*
pearance before you shews it. Is he a rena*
gado to the blessed faith, in which he had been
instructed in bis infancy, and on which hd
ought to have formed his conduct in life? he
himself tells you so. But it has been said, and
may be said Main, he repents, and become!
converted and reformed; and nothing is so
reasonable as that convenion which the mo*
ment of distress brings upot us, which thd
view of death forces upon us, and which the
near approach of eternity compels us to em-
brace. It is observed by perhaps the best
epic poet the world has produced, that the
detection of hypocrisy does not belong to man*
nor even toangels^-^hat it is a privilege reserved
by God to himself; most true is that observe
ation ; and therefoie I shall be most careful in
calling any man a hypocrite; but in tha
analysis of the human mind, I can only have
recourse to human acts to determine What it
real, and what a fallacious pretence ; and thi&
with as much confidence as becomes me, I
would press upon yon ; to my understanding^
without attempting definitely to pronounce
upon it, all tha evidences of fraud, of guil^
and of hypocrisy, are upon this man, and not
one of the marks of true repentance. Does t
man, in truth, repent of a crime ? he endear
TOUTS to mMie amends far it in the best way i*
bis power; does he repent of deserting his
God, aiid committing the sia against the Hdy
GhosI? ho then, ky contritien and humilitjf^
by seifHoamination and self-abasement, el^
1447] 1 GEORGE IV.
TruitfWUUam Drndum and
[144S
deavours to make aUmement lor it, but not by
the accusation of others, whom bis example
may have misled — not by making a sacrince
of Uie lives of others to sare his own— not by
tendering himself to kiss that gospel to which
he has never been united—by receiving the
sacrament again, by renewing his homage to
his repudiated Redeemer, and soliciting peace
with his offended Maker; bat he woald
rather, if his profession of penitence were
sincere, submit himself to the law he hat
incensed, than take the measure of betraying
others; a measure suspicious in any hands^
but which cannot pouibly be pure in his.
I would not say this, were he a party with-
out any apparent bias to the convtctioii of the
individuals against whom he hu appeared to
give evidence, were he a party whose testimony
had been consistent and uniform on all occa-
sions ; and, above all, were he a party whose
evidence was in itself probable ; but wanting
all these circumstances, and standing self-con-
demned, then I do humbly insist, on behalf of
these unfortunate men whose lives are assailed
by' his most corrupt and incredible testimony,
that credit cannot be given to him unless he
were better supported.
A man has been produced for the defendants,
upon an answer of whom I have no doubt an
observation will be made to you. On being
asked, " On what book have you been sworn r
he says, ** I believe on the common prayer*
book.'^ That such a mistake may have been
made in the mind of a man who never was be-
fore examined in a court of justice cannot be
unnatural, when it is one of the propositions
laid down in our books on the law of evidence,
that a swearing on the common prayer-book
is just as binding on a deponent as if he bad
been sworn on the gospels, and just as open to
punishment ; there may have been theremre in
his mind an idea of that kind. He is asked«
*' Have you read Patne's works, and suffered
your mind to be corrupted by them f * " No,
I never did read any of those books, and I
sever have renounced my fiuth." He is asked
(I suppose it is a question of importance in this
cause or it would not have been asked), When
you knew of these infamous plots going on,
when Adams, whom you have been called to
contradict, and Edwards, who has never been
called, told you this, did you go and give in-
formation before a justice of the peace ? No,
he did not. If there be any thing against this
man from these circumstances (and I suppose
there was by the way in which it has been
pressed in cross-examination, and by the way
in which some such matter has been most im-
properiy mentioned elsewhere), it goes as much
to the disadvantage of one as of the other.
But the man is asked as to his private conduct,
as it relates to parts of his private opinions ;
he tells you he has a drawer full of Cobbett's
works ; I wish his drawer were better filled.
He tells you, he has known several of the
prisoners, and that he has seen them at public
veetingSy but never at private. Does Adams
tell yon the saine, or has he been tbe chief
mover in all their private meetiDp? and doa
he now come forward, at last, to be their M
accuser vrhen he can make any thing bji^
when he could have done so on the fint ooei>
sion ? Chambers carried flags where all ik
world could see them ; Adams compiled ii
private, where none could see him; bit he
has this advantage, that all his victiflisbeiBf »
duded in one sweeping indictment, heeen cone
forward to give evidence against then, vitbMl
a by-stander to confront, or an obsemr to
contradict him. Chambers is asked, 'Did
you in any meetings you attended hen m
thing against his majesty's ministen ?^ ** N^
he says, "I did not;" evidentlv iMniil
by that noe, ^ I did not hear their jdAc
measures and their conduct amigned vd
criticised very severely ; but 1 nerer bed,
except from the mouth of Edwards vd
Adams, any thing like a propositioD touw*
sinate tliem ; when I did near it fron Adm
and Edwards, it appeared to me, nomafla
earth could be found fools oiough to bdievt
such a thing;'' and indeed, gentlemen, thoi^
there were twenty men found fbolf esoil^
it would require a credulity which so mi
can possess, to believe that there vm »
forther design of surprising ^e town, »
trendiing the roads, seixing artillery, b^
sieging the Mansion-ho«se, over-tviar »
military, and causing a great Dumber otpM*
pie to assemble togetlier to assist in en^
ing all this by the single eflbrts of t «*
miserable men, without wealth, without ooo*
nectionsy without talents, without all or aqr*
tiie means of influence.
It is said, this proposition is wm^^
ported by the evidence of Monament, wli
sUtes that at a certain period arms wkJ
be prepared, and that Tliisdewood had »>
that all his friends were to be aimed, w
when was this said? before the neeUBg«
Finsbury ; before those meetings in f^***^
parties mosdy shewed themselves, '^^^
that they must go armed; whyf becsesey
going armed they would overturn the p^
ment? No, that never appeared to»J»
been the intention of any <rf them; aw r*
are left to infer that from such isoWw g
positions as Adams has given yon. '^*'JJ
they went armed, and no doubt thiy """Tju
time of* the meetings, in <»osequwcefl«
transaction at the meeting at MaacJ^J
which they, and others who ^^\^r!fJZ
them, denominated the ™««*<^'* •^ ^JlJTf
ter ; they thought that by going «"?*rj
might prevent their beina pnt down uy "^
who would wish to interfere with their "^
ings ; it arose out of the feeUngof the»o"«^
and no otherwise. . iwtif
If there was at that Ume a thoogM mm
considerable number of the P<>I»7*.'S
join them for the purposes of external oa^JJ
the meetings at Finsbuiy and ^^^rTTZ,
took place towards the ckwe of the »»r|J
and the events which \wk^MKtW»i^
14491
Riehari Tiddjor High Treaton,
A. D. 182a
fl45d
have conviDced them how impossible it was
for them to succeed^ unless they were too
dull to uoderstaody and too incapable even of
mischief to be the subjects of a verdict ; for it
is known to all mankind, that in those meet-
ings they were derided and pelted, their
speeches treated with scorn, and their persons
with insult ; that it was apparent they could
gain neither hearing nor favour. Then is it
to be said, an insurrection is to be produced
by the heads of the ministers being shewn on
poles, the sight of burning houses, and the
proceedings of a night such as never has
been seen in London since the days of
Richard the 2nd, when Wat Tyler paraded
the streets with heads on poles ? far from cxnx^
sing any thing like an insurrection, a violent
resistance and the trampling to pieces of those
atrocious men must have been the consequen-
ces; and those few who had not the courage
or spirit to assist in trampling them down
would have retired to their own houses, weep-
ing and dejected, deploring the fote of those
who had been murdered, and the state of their
country, in the metropolis of which such a
crime could have been transacted.
What confirmation have you that there was
such an absurd plot, does the evidence of what
was found in Cato-street confirm such a plot ?
Let the absurdity of the plot be eviaence
against that ; and if it be said that a dozen of
pikes could be of no use in the assassination
of ministers, let it stand as parallel with that
in the argument, that a dozen pike-staves and
ten hand-grenades would have been of in-
finitely less importance in a general attack
upon the town, and in the general subjugation
or his miyest/s loyal subjects, than they would
have been in their supeAuity in an attack on
the minister's house, and on the persons of
fifteen unarmed men. In wading between
two dangerous masses of absurdity and con-
tradiction to all the rules of probability and
common sense, I should humbly submit to
you, that that which leads to mercy and ac-
quittal is the better courte to take; and unless,
on laying your hands upon your hearts you can
say, we are convinced by other circumstances
independently of the evidence of the infamous
Adams, that there was a plot to the extent he
has described; you will say, being able to
make nothing of it, we have adopted the safer
course, and have come to the conclusion that
4be murder of his majesty's ministers was in
the thought of these men, and perhaps plunder
beyond it ; but there is nothing that leads us
Jto believe, that there was any further intention
.to the extent this indictment charges, and
which we must believe before we can find
these men guilty of high treason.
It is said that the proclamation, or the
supposed proclamation is also confirmatory of
the original intention : that which you have
heard respecting the proclamation, has come
from the witness Adams, but it is supposed he is
confirmed by the apprentice Hale ; my learned
Aiend has made many observations upon the
improbability and absurdity of that procla*
mation ; I wish it could have been possible
for my learned friend to have producea such a
paper, or that an attempt had been made to
produce it, because you would then have seen
from the scholarship of Ings, the butcher,
about which I cannot give you evidence
amounting to any thing like the writing of
such a proclamation, how likely it was he was
to be the secretary to any thing.
Mr. Baron Garrow, — ^There is nothing im-
porting that Ings had written it ; the evidence
IS, tliat he was not even called upon to do the
official act of putting his official name to it^
but that it was done by the author of the
proclamation.
Mr. Adolphm, — It was so, gentlemen ; not
that he wrote the proclamation, which he might
have done in a very good fur hand, and yet
that would have argued nothing as to his
scholarship, but that he was put forward as
the secretary of a provisional government ; but
it is supposed this proclamation was written
three times over, and that the copies were
to be posted near burning buildings, in order
to excite insurrection throughout ue town by
telling the people that their tyrants wer^
destroyed, and that a provisional government
was assembled; no man knowing who or where
they were assembled. Mr. Ings is named as
secretary of this provisional government, and
this is confirmed oy whom ? by the apprentice^
who says, that on a particular day he was sent
out to purchase six sheets of cartridge paper*
Let me suppose there is a meeting of men for
a dangerous purpose, and that there are men
who, upon the very eve of the explosion of the
matter, are disposed to make that of it which
does not belong to it, or that any one of them
wants half a dozen sheets of cartridge paper,
and that one of them sends out to buy it ; who
can prove what }m% it was put to except the
witness Adams himself and he gives an ac-
count of it which is altogether incredible ;
cartridge paper is the very worst material for
such a purpose ; one part of a sheet of cartridge
paper has been found during the search, in the
very apartment in which this proclamation is
supposed to have been written, a plain proof
that the sheets were not put to that purpose,
because if there was any intention to write
the six proclamations, they would have been
all used ; that evidence therefore, either rebuts
the proposition that there was such a procla-
mation, or proves nothing respecting it.
But let us recollect this; all the proclama-
tions in the world, to be of any use, would not
have been in the pocket or possession of one
man, because that one man could not have
been at many places at the same time, affixing
those proclamations, so that they might be
read by different detachments; all the persons
supposed to concur in this proclamation, ex«
cept Thistlewood himself, were taken on the
spot at Cato-street,' and yet not one of those
proclamations was found in the possession of
1451] 1 GEORGE IV.
wny one 6f tbem. Thisdewood was taken the
next morning. It may be said he had destroy-
ed that proclamation, but does his conduct
exhibit any of that foresight which you would
have anticipated } No, he is found with arms
about him, and with cartridges in his pockets.
Then is he to be supposed, nevertheless, to
hayd had the precaution to tear the piece of
Aaper which remained in his possession?
when you examine into conduct, you can-
not examine it with the supposition of such
incrediblie iuconsistency ; yon must suppose
that a man wbo tore the proclamation would
have thrown away the bullets^ and that where
the one remained the other would have been
found, if it ever existed ; but, I think) you will
come to the conclusion, that this was one of
die additions of the unbeliever Adams, who
comes forward to save his own life, by fixing
guilt upon othets. The account which he
gives ot these prodamations, in order to give
Ukem in evidence in their absence is, " the last
time f saw the proclamations'' that applies to
the three, whicn are given in evidence, the
other I will not allude to ^ one was in the
possession of Thistlewood, one in the posses-
sfon of Ings, I know not what became of the
third;" Ings then was the last possessor of
one proclamation ; he was taken without the
power of making away with it, at the very spot
iti Cato-street, and yet no such proclamation,
thoogh they were immediately searched, was
foundy and, as I believe, no such proclamation
so absurd and foolish ever had existence.
M^ Bofvn G^rrew* — It is net of much im-
portance, but probably the gentleman who
suggested that to you, had his mind filled with
t)n former trial ; I have not on this occasion,
any ^^idence in whose possession they were ;
probably your own mind was going with my
reooUection, till it was suggested, certainly
very properly, by the pevsou who conceived it
to be evidence in ihis cttttse.
Mr. Adoiphus. — Gentlemen, I am obliged to
his lordship for the correction ; but you ob-
serve, as tnese trials advance we save time by
not taking down the evidence each time, as
considering the same facts as proved.
Mr. Baron Gorrow.— Let it be considered
as in the cause, it has been stated in one of
the cases.
Mr. ildo^Mtt.-*Oentlemen, I have finished
my observation ; I said to my learned friend
when he was examining to this matter, you
have proved enough to put the verbal evi-
dence of its contents before the jury, and you
may proceed to that ; that is bteraily how it
happened. If I have said it appeared in this
cause, that Ings was in the possession of any
one of them, I have over-stated ; but if This^
tlewood was in possession of only one, the
other parties, and probably those taken at
Cato-Btreet, would have been in possession of
the others, and then if they -were so in posses-
sion they would have been found upon their
Trial of William Davidson and [14j]
persons ; but there is not prodaced a tmc^
not only of those three, but of any one of dN
six ; the three existing in the mtmorj of
Adams ; that three others were written gtaA
on his recollection ; but there is not a ser^rf
those, or any circumstance shewing tbeir a*
istence, produced in proof.
I think I have stated already, thatitsfipeiB
from Monument's evidence, that tbeplaof
arming took place before the meeting in Fns-
bury ; that evidence will come to yonr m^
as evidence founded on some degree of iMpe^
though not founded on any pron^ise | and wfaM
I say that, Crod forbid I should taint asj Mi
with a supposition which does not beloDf to
him ; but we all know how much a Utile «•
pectation will warp our minds; wbenlsaf
his majesty's ministers did not make a pre-
mise to Hiden, I treat them not u minisiali
but merely as English gentlemen, tovliidtifi
every situation of their lives they most be on
titled, even from their most violent oppoMBS;
I concede to them only that which has alvij)
been conceded to them, in saying, that thff
are noblemen and gentlemen of tfie gieiM
personal virtues and individual merits; to nf
that individuals in such situations vooU not
give a man a promise before be htd pveshil
evidence, is to say no more than that they wtft
not the most infamous of mankind, m
God knows I would not suppose of then; it it
the furthest fW>m my heart; bat tosiyttet
the witness expects something, is sot to iti^
matite him; but I say, he takes oiy rm«
with him, when he says that be has a rigj^t M
expect that the serried be renden to theiad^
viduals composing his majesiyli gofe««^
to fourteen persons whom he has {nt Bpji
their guard so as to »te their lives, MA
entitle him to their individnal gratitode, m
that I hope be will i^eivej that I ttke |»
my consideration, not as makni| Utt cow
here as a decided witness of fiiteehood, «■
most of all, eertainly not with the cenWHW^
or even the connivance or any tbisg Jj*
may amountto knowledge of those ahoetn*
I haye been speaking, namely, his wj^
ministers; bnt that it will haveaniaw«JJ
upon the evidence he is to give, and nskeaj
more positire on points on which he WT"
doubtful, and to vrhich he proHWy *<»» ■»
strain his mind, were it not forth* hopew"*
previously conceived. ^
Although it has been denied by ffideSj^
have attempted to prove that he *>w*^^J*:
so much a novice m those "***^ "frrtT
presented, that he was not desiitnte tnoff^
ledge of radical meeUngs, nor qaitc gtfj^
of attempts to induce persons ^ P rZ
Bennett, who states he has never bees »""
habit of attending those meedogs, te»^P
Aat Hiden did come, not only <^_rr2
times, to adc him to attend those ^^^
ings; but I will not disguise or coocetfwj
the whole of the invitation went to th^ JJ
may see and hear what is going ^^J^y^
need not join in saying any thing. ^ 1^
14SS1
Biehmrd Tiddjur MigA Trtatan.
A. D. 18SD.
ri4«4
sIkwi that Hides in^ted him to ro, thou^
he had denied it in his evidence ; but it does
not go to the extent of his having endeavoured
to seduce another man into disloyalty ; it goee
to the extent of his having tempted him to a
knowledge of that which he ought never him-
self to have known, that is the extent to which
Hiden is cootradieted, that is the state under
which yon 9!te to consider bis testimony, cer-
tainly in other respects uncontradicted, except
from the improbability of his story, and except as
to those circumstances, meritorious enough, to
which I have referred. After all we fall back on
iiat which has been so much treated of, the
pcohability or improbability of this plot, in alt
Its extent and bearings. On that sabject I
despair of saying any thing new, and when I
mention one vmid upon the subject, I know
ky anticipation from the experience of three
^mes what-answer is given, and what answer
I may expect in reply, when I say that I aa
not convinced by the answers I have yet heard,
and probably sbiaU not be by any I may here*
efterbear. In private Hfe, I do not profess to
he more obstinate or incapable of conviction
than another man ; but in a caus^ i do not feel
that the improbability of conspiracy is at aU
apologized for ot removed by evidence such at
we have just heard, nor do t feel that it re-
ceives credit from the arguments which have
heen applied to it from any quarter. I do not
fay, nor did I mean to say, that because the
accomplishment of tbe thiDg is impracticable,
therefore the formation o£the plan is not true;
hut when a witness stands forward to teli a
most incredible story, it becomes every jury
seriously to consider wheUier it is not the
fiction of a man who has screwed his mind up
to the purpose of making good a very extensive
ehtrge against others, in order lo saM^e his own
Ijfe. I sAy that is the single purpose for which
Mr. Adasns must h%v^ invented aome parts of
this story, and for wftiich he vaiies it foom time
to time, because if these men are to be charged
with a dangerous conspiracy to assassinate his
majesty's ministers, that ie proved from other
fourcee; if they are charged as principals in the
mttrder of SmithesB the Bov^sftseet officer, thalae
proved from sources, when compared to this
evsdence, of purity in itself; is there any doubt
of the attack upon tbe military who surrounded
them ? That is proved by that brave young officer,
fieutenamt Fitzclarence ; but when we come to
^ matter of this indictment, it is necessary to
bring him forward s^in and again, because
without him those circumstances could never
haif« been brought before yon ; he could have
been confirmed at least by a man of the name
cif Edwards, but he is not confirmed by him ;
he could have been confirmed by others whom
we havebeea asked to call for oonfiirmation^ hut
ist Chambem be an example, whq is not taint*
ed with treason, and let «s see whethec^ mu*
eroising a common d^serction, we *^8^» ^ ^
were counsel in a case of forty shjjl\aga, to
svbieot to cvosa-^amination the persons who
have been preaeQl, or ^re stated to hav^ been
present at those meetings ; had they ever been
present, their cross-examination would have
been snch that I should not have chosen to
have placed them before you ; if they could
slate that they were never present, they might
have been presented before you in a more
fovourable light than the witness Adams, hmt
they conld not have contradicted him in any
particular material to this inquiry.
After the observations which have been
Eressed upon yon by my learned friend, Mr.
rurwood, I am really tired of going over these
topics ; that a plot of sach extent vnd of such
fearful importance should have been nursed iti
the minds, and carried ahnost toits completion
by such men as these, is among the most hk»
credible circumstances that have ever existed,,
even in these wonder-making times. I am told
that similar cases have occurred in former days^
I have been a^ed hy the learned counsel for
the Crown, is it credible that Mr. Thistlewood,.
a gentleman by education, and a gentleman in
some of the movements of his life, could have
oonsorted with perM>ns in the low situation of
the other iNrisoners, for purpofl|es of plundei^
or of the kind described in this indictment?
From the grave solemnity with which the quea-
tion was put I feared that I was misled by
iroagiaation, when I foncied that I was refoa-
xiag to the experience of the past. I thought
my memory had foiled, and therefore I took
to my books, and there I found, as I haid
thought, that, in the year 1794, and for three or
four yean preceding, men of education and
rank in life infinitely superior to Mr. Thistle-
wood had attached themselves to, and associa-
ted with men quite as low in situation as thi^
lowest of those who have been brought before
you on this occasion ; and yet that juries were
reooramended to bdieve, and did find en their
oaths, that other motives than those charged
against these pri^oneiv, had induced that oob»-
cuirence of them together, and the accused
vrere acquitted, upon those arguments and
those gnounds, of such treasons as were then
Imd against them. There ie nothing so ime
peobahle or impossible, that the changes and
chances of human aihirs do not bring to o«r
knowledge and to our experience ; let me sup»i
pose (for I am not at liberty to enter into the
private^'istory of any man) that a man of good
fortune at bis outset in life had ruined himself
by abandoned courses ; that an estate on which
a virtuous man might Vve contented, had
been destroyed by gaming or other improper
pursuits, that that man so reduced, finding
oimself under the necessity of associating with
some .peHoos, goes Co those most ready to i»(-
eeiee him, namely, the lower dass, who- will
fold tbemseives honoured by hisassociatioa^
and thai out of his resentment there should
arise a plan for satiag his vengeance, and for
eeeruiling their meanaof sidMistenoe; is it to be
bf^heved that a gsi^eman ao reduced wouki
rexoli-fooai such a plan as that, ot wonld join
in it ? Or is it (move easily to be suppceed^
that 1^ man whoiiid4)om9ion saoie^ wim ]|ad
1455] 1 GEORGE IV. TrialOj
Been foreign coontries, who knew of what
British society was oomponnded^ should think
by one band of twenty-nve men, which it was
hoped would be increased to forty, to take the
metropolis, to change the government, to de-
pose the king> and to establish a rule quite
opposite to the feelings of the nation ? This is
80 improbable, that all arguments sink before
it into annihilation, I do not want, nor has it
«Ter been my aim or my effort to add one cir-
cumstance of disgrace to the witness against
me, certainly not to the client whose cause t
have suppoited ; but let me not be restrained
by that reeling from giring the rational con-
struction to that which is at present irrational.
It is asked by my learned friend, is the reseut-
jnent of these conspirators against Dudley eari
of Harrowby, as such, or against the president
of the council ? It is asked, is their malice
against lord viscount Sidmoutb, or against the
secretary of state for the Home Department P
Is it against lord viscount Castlereai^, or
against the secretary of state for the Foreign
Department P Is it against John lord Eldon,
or against the lord high chancellor of Great
Britain ? To all these Questions, I return tiie
answer which my learned friend who put them
must naturally expect. It is against not Uie
office, but the official man that the malice is
directed ; it is a misconceived rancour against
those who have concurred in thanking the
yeomanry who did that execution at Manches-
ter, which they denominated a massacre, wluch
made them think that they shewed their sympa*
thy to the sufferers in that transaction, by
bringing to signal, summary, and vindictive
judgment, those whom they were wrought
upon to consider as abettors in the supposed
massacre. This appears to me a rational and
tenable view of the subject, and toward this all
the parts of the case naturally tend. A retreat
into another country, would, no doubt, have
been sought for immediately ; and that towards
that property might be secured, and that there
might be a great preparation of means for the
procuring that, I can easily conceive ; but that
this wretched band of feebly-armed ruffians
should attempt to overturn the government, to
hold the metropolis against any force, to take
the Bank, and all the rest of the nonsense which
has appeared in the testimony of Adams, I
cannot believe; my mind is incapable of em-
bracing it as the proposition of truth, and my
reason rejects it as a foul and baseless fabrica-
tion.
I have now done with these subjects; I
have done, I believe, the last duty of diis kind
that I shall be called upon to perform ; I have
done it, God knows, honestly and laboriously
in proportion to the time that was allowed to
me, with every wish in the worid to do a real
aervice to those who have confided their case
to me ; I have not attempted nor has it ever been
m^ wish to assail the persons of his majesty's
ministers or advisers, or the honourable per-
sons engaged in the conduct of this cause, with
•ay thing approachingtoa reflectioB ; if aoy such
Daitndunai^
[14S8
thing has escaped me, I ahonld be m^ Id
apologise for it, for no such intentioD was enr
entertained by me, however iU-choseo vbj a*
pressions roa^ have been. I am sony fortfaei»
portance which has been given to tbbcaR;
this is not like those cases to which I han i^
forred, when affiliated sodeties, wppvted hf
men of rank in literature, in the state, and is
the country, were formed, not onij all orcr de
metropolis but all over tbekingdosi, andwde
themselves petitioners for foreign aid,bf sod^
ing to implore the asststanoe of ths legida
of France, who united with those vbo Isd
said to G<xl, depart from us, we win none «f
thy ways. It is not pretended that these poor
creatures have ever sent out a letter or a sii-
sionary ; it is not in mv knowletoj that m
of them, unless indeed it was ThiitlewH
could speak a foreign language; there iiaott
belief uiat any thing short of utter diignce
and contempt could attach to Aem at hose;
if, nevertheless, you believe they did fon ib
project, and that the ultimate end or aiaflf it
was to depose the king, or to compel Ua ^T
force to cnange his measures, joa win p(^
nounce them guilty of high treason; and it s
not for me to deprecate that which yoo ooa*
sider to be justice; you are acting npoajw
oaths, and must find that verdict if the evidaKe
makes out the case; I am sore yoa will do^
wkb regret, seeing that a weapon to anttw
to be exerted against those who woold ^
throw aU our national estaUishoo^ »
brought to bear on persons so feeble aad o-
siffuificant ; but the greatness of the texxtm
will not peirvert your understandings, hoveiff
it may aflect your hearts ; but yw ^^
making up your minds to find that w«^
weigh and measure and siftefery circuBStnoe
which has been laid before yon, in older ton-
form your judgment and gi? e it aU the leao^
you can (consistently with your conscieooei) «
fovour of the prisoners. I shall ever Iflow
Uiat part of the history of my own tinrei, w»
records that such a conspiracy as this haiw*
made the subject of so much inrestiga|M>>
but it will not I trust be without its adwntijj
the convictions which have taken piMCt •"
the conviction or acquittal at the V^^^f^
ment, will not be without their use, inj>Jr
pecially if they destroy aU the reHcs « «»
combination of which the seeds wereg^n
from the year 1790 to 17H m*?^'*^^
am sorry to say we had something **^!jj
losion in the cross-examination of the witp»
Chambers. He is asked to what *«*»«»
number he belongs, though the ^^^tZ
that he knew of stK^h a thing; I see nv ^
Crown have some information of the n«»»
am sorry that that arrangement of formtftiiBP
is still in use, and I hope that sayp*'**' ^
may be ready to engage in the wbwP'"'
the government, will see firom theeii«Fg
before us, that if it were possible tbcy^
succeed, they would, like aU inferior coB|fjJ
tors.be soon thrownasideas those whoWfT
tMr part; but if they fcilA «P«^"*^
1457]
l^ehard Tiddjbr High Treason.
A. D. 1820.
[1456
selves, or were betrayed, that they would be
left without support and without protection,
without companions, and without commisera*
tion, to suffer the miserable fate their conduct
had brought upon them ; it is fit they should
know^ and this trial will prove it, that men
more depraved than themselves are only luring
them to their destruction ; that the more timid
are only waiting to inform against them ; and
that he who will conspire against his king, will
not hesitate to betray his brother conspirator
whenever fear points out that as the road of
safety; this important lesson, read through
these miserable persons, will not be in that
respect read in vain, and when they see how
crippled and beggared it is possible for men
under these circumstances to stand, they must
hereafter remain.at a fearful distance, if they have
common sense, from all enterprises which in-
▼olve such immediate danger, and drive them
out of the possibility of receiving any thing
like countenance or support. Above all, let
them learn from the specimen of the witness
Adams, that he who substitutes the writings of
Paine, or of superior authors, in the place of
the bible, will in the end shew himself as faith-
less toward man as he has shown himself faithless
toward his Maker ; that he who rejects the book
of life, will be moved by nothing but the sordid
hope of worldly advantage ; and that where it
becomes his interest he will betray even his
brother ; that he who renounces his fidelity in
that book, shews himself so prodigal of his
soul's health, that there is no belieTing in his
political faith, or any other which can be sub-
stituted for it ; and if there be among those
who hear me, and who are wavering in their
laith^ or doubtful in their belief, by what such
persons have been, let them take caution from
the evident treachery of the man who re-
nounced his religion for notions inimical
to all good ; from that excellent manual our
church catechism let them learn to honour and
obey the king, and all that are put in authority
under him, and never forget the injunction
to learn and labour truly to get their own
living, and to do their duty in that state of life
into which it has pleased God to call them.
It is not the sacrifice of such a number of ob-
scure individuals as may be found guilty, or as
qther juries may pronounce guilty; it is not
tiie sacrifice of such men that can strengthen
government, or do that which is alone the aim
of our laws ; the punishment is intended to
operate not vindictively upon the offender, but
beneficially upon survivors ; and there is great
danger when feeling is excited, of its being
gushed too far in order to punish those who
ave been unquestionably guilty ; but I trust
you will not pronounce the prisoners guilty of
high treason, unless you are convinced they
have' been> guilty of it, because they have
sought, through the road of crime, to effect
that which they falsely considered as the dic-
tate of patriotism. -
. I have nearly coocloded my address :to you ;
you wiUbethe fourth-jqrywhbhav&'pioDOUDC^d
VOL. XXXIII.
upon tliis indictment against wretched men; •
having no means of defence except those which
charity and a proper sense of professional duty
have procured for them; what shall be the
further vieWs of government, it is not for me
to divine, but I hope, if there be a road to
mercy in any degree, that will not be left out
of their consideration ; I am sure enough will
have been done for example ; the further multi-
plication of widows and orphans will not be ne-
cessary, and as judgment has been conspicuous
in the prosecution of those who are now before
you and those already convicted, so will mercy,
extended toothers, contribute to the firmness of
that government which can shew it. While I
am pleading for mercy, let me not forget to
entreat of you so much as can possibly enter
your bosoms consistently with your oaths. I
do not ask twelve firm-minded British men to
adopt those sentiments of puerile pity, which
might make you falsify your oaths and forget
your God ; but I entreat you most seriously,
if you are not so satisfied as to rely upon the
witness, Adams, to give the prisoners the be-
nefit of the doubts to which his testimony is so
abundantly subject. I know you will act ho-
nestly ; I am sure you will act firmly ; to all
the juries who have preceded you the country
is infinitely indebted, and the prisoners too,
for the minute attention they have paid to
every part of the subject. I have observed the
same in you ; I do not ask you to forget your
oaths, but I implore you not to forget any cir-
cumstance which may strengthen the claims of
mercy.
Mr. Baron Garrow, — William Davidson, the
law of England, in its extraordinary tenderness
for persons charged with the crime of high
treason, allows to the person accused an op-
portunity of making full defence by counsel,
and you received the great benefit the law has
extended to you in that respect ; but if, in ad-
dition to that which has been urged to the jury
through your learned counsel, you wish to
make any observations yourself, it is allowed
to you to do so, and this is the proper and the
only opportunity.
Davkkan,^! am extremely obliged to your
lordship for the opportunity you have given
me ; I would call your attention to two parti-
cular instances. —
Mr. Baron Garrow* — I wish you would do
it so that I may hear every word ; if you wish
it, pause for a moment.
Davidson. — ^From ray life up, it wais always
mv study to earn iny bread by honest industry.
I had no friends in England; but I always la-
boured for my family; I have an extensive
family, which is my only grief. As to tha
crime I am charged with, I lay my hand on
my heart, and say that I am not guilty of it.
With regard to the blunderbuss — I; met with
Mr. Williams, who is now gone to the Cape of
Good Hope, aiid he had this blunderbuss very
rusty ; he asked roe where I was going to, I
5 A
1459] 1 GEORGE IV*
Trial of WUiam Davidstm and
[im
said after a job ; I have been working for my.
self for five years, which is the reason I have
had no master to come before you. I used to
sell my goods at aaction rooms, and when I
saw the name of Welford pot down in the list
of witnesses, I meant to appeal to him as be-
ing the cashier for Mr. Deopw, who sold
my goods ; he said, he had bought this blun-
derbuss to take to the Cape of Good Hope,
but that he bad taken it to a gunsmith, and
foimd he would charge him more than it was
worth for repairing it, and if I could get part
of bis money back, be would be obliged to me;
I took the blunderbuss home, and kept it ; it
is not worth much ; I cleaned it, and scraped
the stock, and proposed to raffle it ; I met with
Mr. Edwards, whom I nerer knew till I dined
at the Crown and Anchor, at Mr. Hunt's pro-
cession ; that is the first time I ever went to a
public dinner in my life ; Mr. Edwards pro-
mised to be one of the members, and promised
to get me a considerable number ot persons
more ; there were to be twenty members, at
one shillinff each, and it was to take place the
Best Monday. I saw Mr. Tbistlewood there
the following Monday fpr the second time; I
saw Mr. Adants and sevecal others, but I did
not know them again, except Mr. Adams and
Mr. Tbistlewood ; they wished to commence
raffling for the blunderbuss ; I got up and said
it should not be done without the money was
tendered, for it was not my property, and it
was my duty tq be accountable for it ; I re-
ceived bad language; I found the company
inconsistent with that I expected ; I took the
blunderbuss and went away; Mt. Williams
called the next morning to know the result;
he was disappointed, as he wished to lay out
five or six shillings in the west end of the
town ; I said he might pledge it if he wished ;
he said he did not know any person in that
end of the town ; I said I knew Mr. Aldous, I
had known him for years ; he said, well, you
pledge it ; I said I would ; I then told Mr.
Aldous it was not my property; he said he
would not have lent me more than Rre shil-
lings but for knovring me. The vessel in which
Mr. Williams is gone, is called the Belle Al-
liance. Mr. Williams told me, that he could
not sell the ticket to his fellow passengers, tJ^ey
were so very poor, but would I accept it.
On the 22nd of February, Mr. Edwards said,
he had been to me Mr. Williams, and that he had
told him, that by giving me a trifle, he roigh
get the ticket from me. I said, ** he gave me
the ticket ; but if you wish it, you may have
it ;'' he said, 5< Well, I am going to sell it, %nd
shall get ten shillings more, but J should not
have called for it, but for having a customer
ready;" the same evening he called at my
house again at eieht o'clock ; he said *' Mr.
Davidson, if you have no objection to going
for this blunderbuss, you had better go as yon
pledged it, lest the man should object to my
navitigit." I did not think he intended to
forfeit my life ; he told me where to meet him
tiie next morning in Oxford-street, and I took
the blunderbuss mider a gateway in OiM*
street to him ; he said, " will not yoa vift
in, and have a glass with a ooantiymu tf
your's?** I said, ** what do you mean by a
countrvman ?*' I was not much tcoBaiiMd
with him ; he says, ''a man of oobor.*' IM
an objection to going in, for though I am « mi
of colour, I have never associated witb vf
of them. I was very well brought up. liW
them all very ignorant ; who this laan of ooba
was I do not know. Mr. Edwaidt ^nami
to meet me the next day, but that aigbt I m
apprehended.
Kow^ my lord, we will pass to the moouI
of the sword. Goine about my own coocm,
I met with a person I knew at Liverpool, i
the name of James Goldsworthy ; he expmni
his surprise at meeting with me ip UniM,
and after inqnirinc «bo«t my ianilyi I toU
him I was very badlj off, and that it was vojr
bad to be a master, unless he has fiiU *«k»
for that other masters do not like tocapiof
him ; he told me he had set up a Vuiociii
few miles out of town ; it was a plessul «4»
and he would employ me if I liked; I nU
him, with the greatest pleasure; I asked ha
what wages I should have ; he said, wkitdii
I expect; I said, thirty-two shillioss a week;
he said, he would give me thirty ehilliop; k
sj^id, call at the Horse and Groov- I did Ml
at that time know that Mr. GoldswoniifM
Mr. Edwards were acquainted. I sowkia*
they lodged in one house. As theoffiecrM
I stopped at the comer, but as to the hm
ments I was in, I never had cross beksoa; n
it possible, that if they had been so tce^
ous, Adams would not have sees the« »iki
suble ? however I went into the pohliO'^KM^
and did not see Mr. Goldswordiy; I v«t*
bit of a walk, and when I oame ^'J—
an hour, I saw several persons pa^i'V^
wards and forwards; I saw several •cylaos'
ing at me, but I did not see the peisee I Ml
looking for ; I went again and stoMl ^ ^
comer ; at a little after eight e*cloek 1 .***
going down the £dgware*road ; bat pi^^
to that, the landlord asked me, whether I f*
looking for any particular peraan I "j^ ^
I, '< a gentleman I appointed (Q n><^ '"*'J
h# has not kept his word ;" I fm g«y|*g
the Edgware^road, and I saw Mr. Omi'^^
near Queen-street; he said, ''I'VPV^J?
are tired of waiting r •• Yes," sap 1, ^
was not for an anxiety to get weik, I ^^
not have storaed eo long ;'^ he Mirs,*'|^*!J^
get a pint of beer, I hav<e Ip ahaki ^^
a friend ;** and he gave me a swefdssdeM*'
die ; I said, «• what do you want «5«»'jf*2
are you going to cut my head oir7'**-|^f^^
wc have many thieves in oiar part, »w|^/7
my own proteetion.^ As I ap to ^^'^lyL
fore God, I never me^nt any had. l^P*":
ing the stable, I wtf penbns vu/^'^^JZ
fbolishlT vent in, ^d I was >«t*^^!g
away ; 1 never cut at any one^.I *^^}f;^
belt on ; I would netcr plead for ^b^^V!
IbrI have wentiued my life w^ '^
t
1461]
ttuAard Tiddfor High Treason.
A. D. 1820.
L1403
my coontrv and my kin^, and how can it be
supposed I would join wicked men, who would
attempt to overthrow so well-founded a con-
stitution as the British constitntion, and from
the little acquaintance I have had with any
men, save those directly in my business, it is
not likely that I should be in any plot. I do
ikot mean to say that I was not apprehended
in Cato-street; bat I still contend, my lord,
that the carbine was not in my possession di-
rectly nor indirectly; it was picked up at a
distance, and brought to me, and I was asked
whether it was not mine ; I denied it, but ano-
ther person said, •* oh, it is surely his, why do
you ask him V I was carried into a chandler's
shop ; I never vras in a public-house ; and
Captain Fitzclarence cleared up that point,
though one of the officers swore that I even
addressed the people ; and said, that the man
who would not die in liberty's cause, ought to
be damned. I was left in the custody of the
officer who took me; and I asked captain
Fitzclarence, whether he did not take me di-
rectly to Bow-street ; what time had I then to
address any persons, or to go into any public-
house when I was a prisoner; even the land-
lord of the public-house I would appeal to, to
know whether I was a prisoner in his house.
I do not mean to say that an existing plot
might not have been, but I pretend to say I
knew of no existing plot; I was accidently
brought into Cato-street as I have laid my
Btory ; but I knew nothing of a plot for plun-
der or massacre.
If my colour should be against, me which per-
haps, gentlemen of the jury, you may suppose
it to be, and think that because I am a man of
colour I am without an understanding or
ft feeltnff, and would act the brute ; I am not
one of that sort; I would wish to wipe off those
impressions from those learned gentlemen
whohave so prosecuted me. When not em-
ployed in my business, I have employed myself
as a teacher of a Sunday-school, and in that
capacity have rengiained; and I would draw
your attention to a simple mistake — ^there was
a person, a man of colour, nearly my stature,
insulted one of our female teachers in the
Walworih-road ; I then lived at Walworth ;
and though this young lady was a teacher in
the same school I was, she so far mistook the
person as to make a complaint of me ; I found
some of them looked cool upon me, and I sent in
a letter of resignation, consequently the whole
committee waited upon me, and called me
from my wife into the front parlour, and ex-
postulated with me upon the impropriety of
any conduct^ and persisted in it; it struck me
with such horror, that I had nothing to answer,
but I determined to investigate it, and I sent
my wife to the youngs woman to ask a little
information ; J traced out the person that had
insulted her, brought him to the committee^
and he acknowledged his fault, and she came
ashamed to look me in the face, and hid her
face, and offered me her hand. If anything
I could say would do away these impressions
t would proceed, but I would as lief be put to
death, if I thought your lordship or the learned
gentlemen for the Crown, believed I was that
monster that for a moment I could harbour a
thought to murder any human being directly
or indirectly ; if you believe that, I hope your
lordship will not shew me the least mercy, for
my conscience acquits me ; I can stand before
my God, and I will stand at his tribunal to
assert, my lord, that I am not guilty of doing
such a thing, nor deserving it. If your lord-
ship will permit me to have a drink of water.
Mr. Baran Oivroio.— Oh, certainly, take your
lefreshment, sit down and compose yourself,
and address the jury again, if you desire it,
when yOQ are composed, there is no impatienco
on the part of the Court, take your own time.
I woulo observe to yon, upon that which you
have said, that you may rest most perfectly
assured that with respect to the colour of your
countenance, no prejudice either has or will
exist in any part of this Court against you ; a
man of colour is entitled to British justice as
much as the fairest British subject that ever
came into a court of justice, a^d will always
be sure to obtain it, and this case vrill be de-
cided upon the facts given in evidence ; God
€9vbid that the complexion of the accused
should enter, for a single aioment, into th«
consideration of the jury.
DavidKm. — My lord, it is but very few
words I have got further to say, for as to po-
litics I never troubled my head with it. I have
a family of very little children, and a wife that
never earned a penny for me since I have had
her ; it is only the distress of my family I feel ;
were it not for that, I should quote a passage
in Isaiah, '* He was oppressed and he was af-
flicted, yet he opened not his mouth;*' but
when I think of the case of my family, for the
love I bear my children, I should use the ut-
termost of my power to prevail upon a British
jury, if it were possible, to dear up those black
charges which are laid against me. First of
all, here is Mr. Adams, he can positively swear
that he has not seen me in any warlike appear-
ance whatever. I was down stairs when Mr.
Thistlewood numbered his men; he said
eighteen and two below ; when he was asked
whether I was by, he said no, I was down
stairs, but my name wasput down immediately
the officer came up. The next witness, Mr.
Monument, comes forward and says, that I
addressed the congregation, and told them that
any man that was afraid of his life might vralk
off, and that in a few minutes afterwards the
officers came up ; now your lordship and* the
jury must see there is some exaggeration of
these things. I do admit I was in Cato-street,
by passing through the street, but as to admit-
ting any thing else, it would be against my
conscience, it would be wrong in me to say
that; I knew nothing of their plans; I now
know that Mr. Goldsworthy was an accomplice
of Mr. Edwards, ther might be the plotters ;
but I did not expect that he would be that base
1463] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of William Damdson and
[1464
character, that having been a journeyman in a
shop in "which I was an apprentice be would
have entrapped me. I have served my country,
I have done all which an honest man can do ;
I have supported my family by honest industry,
and I can appeal to fifty gentlemen I have
dealt with since I have been master, that they
never have known me to go to public meetings,
except one meeting in Smithfield, as a common
spectator. I knew nothing at all of these men
till I found myself a prisoner along with them.
I had seen Mr. Thistle wood, but I never saw
him the night I was apprehended, till I was
apprehended ; if I had seen Mr. Thistlewood,
and Mr. £d wards, it might have led me to
suspect, but none spoke to me nor I to them ;
if I was one in their concern, being such a con-
spicuous character as I know I am from my
colour, can it be supposed that I would stand
in a gateway to be seen and identified above
all others ? It is not for me to say any thing
further on my own behalf, my learned counsel,
on the points of law have done me justice ; and
as for tnose learned gentlemen, the counsel for
t:ie Crown, I have nothing to lay to their
charge; I admjre the way in which they have
done their duly, according to their judgment
upon the evidences; if those gentlemen knew me
better, or it was possible I could have shewn
them my former conduct, they would not have
pointed me out the character they have done.
X never, my lord, have done any m<in an in-
jury, but I have supported an honest character,
for by an honest character I intended to live,
and nothing but that ; my family was all my
society that I kept, neither politics nor laws
ever troubled me ; as for any thing further that
I have got to say, it would be useless.
I would only call the minds of the jury to a
few passages I have selected out for that pur-
fose, if it^ would not be insulting to the Court;
would select this passage in the indictment,
in which it is said that I had not the fear of
God before my eyes, but was moved and seduced
by the instigation of the Devil ; now, my lord, I
always had the fear of God before my eyes,
and it was my constant prayer, and I always
used those passages which I have read in some
of Mr. Pope's writings :
** If I am right thy grace impart,
Still in the right to stay ;
If I am wrong, oh I teach my heart
To find that better way I
''Teach me to feel another's woe,
To hide the faults I see ;
That mercy I to others shew.
That mercy shew to me.''
These were always my constant impressions,
ipy lord, and those passages in the indictment
may better be applied to those gentlemen who
stand there to swear my life away, to the de-
struction of myself and my family ; but here,
in the Bible, it is said, " One witness shall
pot rise up against a roan for any iniquity, or
for any s)n in any sin that he sinnetb, but at
the mouth of two or three witnesses shall ilie
matter be established . " It goes on to the void
which is above your lordship's head, ^ if i
false witness rise up against any man to testi^
against him that which is wrong, then both tlie
men between whom the controversy is sball
stand before the Lord, before the priests lod
the judges which shall be in those days, aad
the judges shall make diligent inquisition; nd
behold, if the witness be a false witness, and
hath testified falsely against his brother, tha
shall ye do unto him as he had thought to hate
done unto his brother ; so shalt thoa put tbe
evil away from among you, that innocent bkod
be not shed in the land which the Lord %
God giveth thee for an inheritance." Tbese
things I would wish to impress on the juy's
mind ; I am a stranger to England by biitfa,
but I was educated and brou{;bt np in Eng-
land ; mf father was an Englishman and m;
grandfather a Scotchman; I certainly hart a
little prerogative for claiming to be an Eng-
lishman, being here from fourteen yean of
age ; but I have not a friend in England, aod
it is hard that my life should be taken avif,
not knowing any thing of the plot made oat
against his majesty's ministers; the eail of
Harrowby I knew for years, when I worked A
Rugely, in Staffordshire, for Mr. BoUocL I
have worked at his lordship's house, and fcc
the regard I have for his lordship, &n
knowing him personally^ I should haie
shuddered at the thought of taking his m;
and if any man would have mentioned ss«»
flan to me, it would bave turned upoomher
should have turned a public infonna, *
have privately informed his lordship; botvy
conscience does not accuse me of any thtns
improper, for if I am to die, I can die wth a
clear conscience, that I know nothing of my
assassination plot, nothing of any plunder or
burning of the city, for those things I det^j
I would get my living by honest industiyi wt
I never was a man known to associate «
keep any bad company. ^.
1 would have called your attention to ie»^
other witnesses, but they did not attend at w
time they were called upon. All I haw f*
to say is this ; I hope the gentlemen ««*
jury will weigh the matter well in ^^^.
seeing it stands only between life and d«Wi
and should they harbour an opinion, ^jj^
guilty of treason, though not guilty of mo^
though that has been a crime charged--if Wj
think I am a culprit that would stand h««tt
acquit myself against the force of conscieo«.
I am very willing to abide by their jodgo®''
Mr. Boron Gflmw.— ftichaid Tidd, if «_»
your wish to add any thing to what ^«* °?r
urged to the jury by your learned counsel,
is the proper time for you to address them.
rirf(i.— Thank you, my loid. ^c &nim
I have got to say is, that I had the mwwrtoae
to become acquainted witli Brunt aoo"
month before Christmas, by his f«QW
going to see Adams, who Und iiwft dw
14651 Richard Tidd/or High Treason. A. D. 1820. L1466
me ; our windows nearly join each other, and together, we can always get arms/' lie pulled
by that means we became acquainted ; he out a pistol from his pocket, and said, '* I am
frequently came up to my house, and during not without arms, for I have a stick sword,''
the Christmas holidays, he and I kept the shewing it me ; he left that, saying, *< I will
holidays together ; after the holidays, he intro- see you again ;*' in the course of that afternoon,
daced me to a man of the name of Edwards, he came up again, and says, ** do you know
whom 1 did not know before, though he chal- where the meeting is to be held r I said,
lenged knowing me before. I went out with , ** No ;'* he said, " here is a direction,** and he
them at different times on the Sunday ; it is gave me a direction, which I have in my pocket
well known that I every other day in the week now ; but I suppose the direction is not ma-
worked fourteen, sixteen or eighteen hours in terial. [The prisoner handed in a small poperJ] )
the day, and that I never went out but on a ', ■»*« u /^ t\ • u .l
Saoday Mr. Edwanls and Brunt together, ^^J'JlT^ ^^''^--^ly'^^^'^^^'^S'
told me there were certain meetings, Xh I '*"^ "^ "^ P*P«' '^""^^ ^ »»»»«» ^7 ">« <>«-
knew of before, but I never attended any
meetings. .After this, acts of parliament pass- Ttdd. — ^No, my lord, it is only the direction
ed which signified that these meetings were that £dwards gave to me where the meeting
illegal, and that persons who went to them ■ was to be held.
were liable to be prosecuted ; but Mr. Ed- j^ ^^ Carrmo.-Do you wish it should
wards told me, he had got some connexions in . , j j i*-«
a higher scale of life, that were determined ,
that meetings of a similar description should ■ Tidd. — ^Yes, my lord,
be held privately ; that he himself had got ] ^ ^ortm G«m«r.-« Horse and Groom,
full aulljonty to signify that to all those who j„h„.,treet, Edewaro-road."
were wilhng to meet to procure redress in par- . * -
liament ; I was satisfied ; I thought there could { Tidd. — During Wednesday, my lord, while
be no particular harm in such meetings as I was out, 1 went to shops for work, and
those, and 1 went to the room taken by Ings, Brunt came up ; and while they were tiiere, I
in Brunt's house. I did not see or hear any came home, and Edwards brought up a brown
thing particular that day, but I was solicited paper saying, you must bring this paper up to
to go another day, on a Sunday, the day spoken the meeting, for all those things that we have
of here ; and in the course of some appoint- will be wanted, in case of a revolution taking
nient between Adams and some other persons place in this country, which is very likely in
in the room, I was nominated as a stranger to the course of a very little while, for the people
take the chair. There were certain propo- are very dissatisfied, and very numerously dis-
sitions made on that Sunday, on which I de- affected in the country ; you must bring this to
clared positively, if that was their intention I the club in the evening ; and Brunt observed,
would never attend such kind of meetings ; I that he had several different acquaintances that
was fully determined not to keep company ! were coming to the same club in the evening,
with them afterwards ; but prior to this, Mr. ; and as I should be at work late, be would give
£d%vards comes up to me, and he says, ''We , them notice that they should come along with
have got certain materials, and Mr. Thistle- me ; my lord, about seven in the evening, I
wood's compliments, and he would be obliged j left off work, and no other came than that young
to you, if you would let them remain here a ; man Monument ; I went up, according to their
day or two, till we can remove them." I told directions, to the Horse and Groom, and I do
them I would not permit things of that kind , declare before you, that I never specified nor
to come into my place ; with that answer he ^ ever knew any thing about any cabinet dinner,
went away; on the evening of that day he- orany thing of the kind; it was never mention-
brought that trunk, which you have there, and ed to me ; I hope, my lord, you wiliexcuse my
afterwards, when I saw him again, says I,
'' why did you bring that, when I positively
said it should not come into my place ?" he
vulgar ignorant way of expressing myself.
Mr. Baron Garrow, — You have no apology
^^ .^ . . ... , - ^ .^ ^ to make upon that scale : whatever you say,
says, "It IS not material, we only want it to , ^^ -^ ^^^^^^^ language and mannef, will 6e
stop a day or two ;' then on the Sunday, as I attended to.
before observed, 1 went to this meeting, where.
as I hsLve said, these propositions were stated ;
I never went again, but on the Tuesday, £d-
Tidd.-'l went with Monument up to the
place, expecting to go to the Horse and Groom ;
yrards and Brunt came up to me, and asked j I met a man, whom I did not know, and he
me, whether I still kept in that determination ; introduced roe into this sUble ; I had not been
I said, ** yes, I did ;" he said, " well, all those ; there for ten minutes, before I was taken by
proceedings are entirely frustrated,— there is a the officers ; that is the matter, my lord, I
^nion in Mary-Ie-bone, but for self-preservation assure you, as nearly as I can recollect it.
^▼ery man is reouested to go there with some reply.
mplement of defence ;'* I told him I had no
■ _ , _^J_r 1. _x £e .v. f»
;npleine«t of defence whatever; *' then," says
Mr. Attorney General, — Gentlemen of the
le " I have plenty, — ^for through those gentle- jury, painful and irksome as is the task I have
aen who support roe in calling such meetings . now to perform, and tiresoroci at least to many
1467] 1 GEORGE lY.
Trial tfWilSam Dnidton and
[t4«
of you, as must he the repetition of a narratiTe
already told, of arguments already stated, and
of observations already made, yet I am sure
you will feel with me, however irksome that
task may be both to myself and to you, that in a
natter of so much importance, not only to the
prisoners at the bar, but to the public at large,
BO time devoted to the fair investigation of the
oaae is mis-employed ; and in the few remarks
I shall feel it my duty to address to you, my
only endeavoor will be to bring back your
recollection to the real state of the evidence as
it now stands, and to direct you to those points
upon which, as it appears to me, the verdict
you are to pronounce must ultimately depend.
It would be an idle waste, indeed, of your
time, if I were ^ delay you by any laboured
observations with respect to tfie law of this
case. Little discussion has taken place upon
that subject by the learned counsel who have
addressed you on the part of the prisoners ; and
I may state to you, without hazard, that if the
acts charged upon this indictment, as estab-
lishing the treason imputed to the prisoners al
the bar, are substantiated to your satisfaction,
the crime as alleged in the difierent counts of this
indictment, at least in some of them, has been
completely proved. The charge, divested of
all technicalities, is simply this, — that the pri-
soners at the bar, in conjunction with others,
bad formed a plan to overthrow the constitu-
tion of this country ; that, in furtherance of that
glan, they had held those consultations, and
ad provided those means, and had con-
templated that assassination, about which you
have heard so much ; and the only question
for you will be, whether these acts have been
made out, or not ; because, if they have, they
at once prove that these men have been guilty
4>f ooropassing to depose his majesty from his
imperial dignity, and of conspiring to levy
war against him to compel him to alter his
measures and councils.
My learned friend who sits by me, in intro-
ducing this case to you, told you (and I must
beg leave to repeat the observation), that in a
oharge of this nature it is impossible to prove
to the full extent the nature of secret deliber-
ations and conspiracies, but by the testimony
of one who has engaged in them. He stated
to you, that in the examination of the testimony <
of such a person, you should exercise consider-
able jealousy and caution, and that unless jovk
find him confirmed by other testimony, against
which no imputation can be raised, you will
not be advised by the Court to find a verdict of
guilty. Almost the whole of the able address-
es which have been made to you by the learned
counsel for the prisoners has therefore been
directed to the examination of the testimony of
the first witness Adams. They have submitted
to you (but I beg leave wholly to differ from
them) that the case, as far as it relates to the
charge of high treason, rests solely upon his
evidence ; that it does not so rest, I am sure I
shall be able to satisfy you, if at present you
entertain any doubt upon the subject, when I
come to examine t!ie other parts of the cm;
but, fbr the present moment, I will codiK
your attention to the testimony which h« bit
given, and to the confirmation which it has re-
ceived. In the discharge of the painfel ud
anxious duty which my Teamed fnends hid lo
perform in the defence of the prisonen at the
oar, thev have of course kept all drcamiUooei
of corroboration out of sight, feeling tiat vim
once brought under your review, they nat
satisfy the most sceptical mind of the tntkof
the testimony of Adams.
Before I come to the confiimadons, let m
consider for a moment some of the ck^jMrn
which have been urged against his teftimoajf.
That he is an accomplice, that he has paitid-
pated in the guilt of the prisoners at the bar, I
mlly admit; but it is said he is onwortbjrf
all credit, because, on his cross-exsmiDatioB,
he has confessed to you, that fbr a time be had
been led astray by those pemicioos pvhliea-
tions which have been too succeasfuliy ditx-
lated, and that he had withdrawn his belief
from the Christian religion. Gentlemen, ta
what cause does he ascribe that unfoitnaik
lapse of faith ? Sorry am I to sUte, that, bf
the evidence, it appears that he owes it totk
conduct of one of the unfortunate men oov
standing before you ; for Adams telb yXt
that it was tldd who furnished him with tboff
publications which, fbr a time, sapped and
undermined it. Do not let that dreunsonce
operate more than it ought against the prisooer;
but you cannot forget that the fact has been
proved to you ; and if Adams has ened fm
the path of the true faith, I am aftaid ihalyja
will be obliged to attribute his oftnce to ihe
unfortunate man at the bar.
It is said by my learned friend, that its
ouite incredible that one who has so sww
ftom the belief tvhich he professed shooW^
the moment of calamity and distress, ha»e da-
covered his error, and have returned again »
the Christian faith.
I see nothing improbable In it ; on the «••
trary, it h our daily wpcricnce that it ««
the hour of afflictioti that the mind b «*
strongly impressed with the sacred tratWM
religion; and I for one, can '«»*)/ °**J:
that after his escape from the appalling «?*
in Cato-street, during the days of sectafloo,
when confining himself to his house be »-
deavoured to elude the vigilance of thepoW^
this man reflected seriously on his P^^
duct, and on his providential escape, and Mjg
again to feel the force of those doctnnes wni»
folly had, for a moment, obUtcratcd, »» ^
turned to that fiiith in whidi he ^^J^^
mfancy been educated ; but whether ttoioew
or not, he tells you that at presOTj wjsai^
impressed with the belief ohhe Christian ^^
gion, and that he acknowledges ttc SJH^
sanction of that holy book on which ne »»
been sworn to give his testimony. ^^
Let me ask you what contradidionlWPg
given to his evidence ; one has been atWW^
by putting Chambers into the bof, W ^ ""
14991
Bieh4ird Tiddjbr Higk Trtatm.
A. D. 18S0.
[1470
not find that his evidence is brought Qnder
your consideration bv my learned friends, for
they felt, that after bis cro6S*examination» it
would be a vain attempt to impose on the cre-
dulity of twelve honest and intelligent jurors,
by endearouring to persuade you to think
that that man told one syllable of the truth.
I pass over Chambers's acquaintance with
many of the prisoners, his attendance at the
Smithfield meetings, and other circumstances
of Uiat nature ; you recollect that (but I must
call your attention to apart of his examination)
he was asked on what boqk he was sworn ; he
told you that, instead of that sacred volume on
which alone a person in a court of justice in
this country is to be sworn, he belicTes it was
the Prayer-book. My learned friend who last
addressed you, feeling the effect this disclosure
was likely to produce on your minds, has
vainly attempted to get rid of it by sayings
that in some work which he has read, but
which I was never fortunate enough to meet
with, it is laid down that an oath taken on
th^ PrayeNbook is as valid in a court of jus*
tice, as one taken upon the New-testament.
Undoubtedly if a Prayer-book contains the
four Gospels, such an oath is binding and
valid ; hot it did not appear tliat such was
the conception of the witness; he thought that
b^ was sworn upon the Prayer-book alone; but
pass that by— what 19 the acoount Chemben
gave of the conversation he stated to have
passed between himself and the witness Adams,
and a person of the name of Edwards ? He
says, tnat a few days before the affair in Cato-
street, they came to him, on a very slight ac-
quaintance, and at once asked him to engage
in a plan to assassinate all his m^esty's mi-
nisters, using language which I will not repeat
to you, expressive of the exultation and triumph
they should feel after that act had been
completed ; and yet that man. Chambers, with
all this information imparted to him, buries it
in bis own bosom — lays it before no magi»-
tTtit^ — makes it known to no individual, and it
is nfil till this day that any communication
upon the sul^ect has ever escaped his lips.
Can ^ou believe such testimony? He un-
blushingly tells vou that he felt no horror at
th? project. If he had felt as he ought upon
such a scheme being communicated to him, I
«^ you whether it is credible that he should
hftire kept such a secret in his own breast, and
not have imparted it to a magistrate, or to soma
of those noolemen and gentlemen who were
to be the objects of the assassination which
Adams and his companion meditated. He
do^ no such thing, and therefore, without de-
laying you longer on his testimony, I confi-
dently expect, as the conyersation is altogether
denied by Adams, that you will have no hesi-
tation in dismissing from your minds the whole
of the evidence of Chambers.
I do not find in the course of the addresses
of .00^ learned friends, that they made any other
obsisrvati^n on the manner in which Adams
hea jsiven his tAstimonyi or pointed out. any
other supposed contradiction in the case. That
being so, let me shortly call your attention to
the story which he narrates, aod to the manner
in which he is confirmed in every part of it. It
has been said by my learned fnends on the
other side, and they have argued upon it at
considerable length, that though they admit
Adams to be confirmed in some facts, nay even
to the extent of the plan of assassinating all
his msgesty's ministers, they contend, that be-
yond that point there is no confirmation what-
ever, and that all he has told you of any ulte-
rior views is fiction and invention. Now let
me ask you in the outset, what possible mo-
tive, what interest has Adams to add to the
guilt of intended murders the crime of hig)i
treason? It is said he is an accomplice— an
accomplice in what ? Would it not nave been
sufficient for him, when he was apprehended,
and when he declared the whole which he
knew, to have said, it is true I am an accom-
flice, it is true I was in Cato-street, and thai
was embarked in a conspiracy with Thistle-
wood and Ings; but criminal as we are,
though our plan was to assassinate his majes*
ty's ministers, it was there to end. According
to my learned friend Mr. Adolphus, the only
motive he could have would be to destroy hie
own credit altogether. Let this remark, if you
think it deserving of consideration, weigh upop
your minds in determining upon the credit of
Adams. The admissions of my learned friends^
adtnissions not improvidently made but ex-
torted by the facts in the case, place the plan .
for the assassination of his majesty *s ministere
beyond the reach of doubt. But the counsel
for the prisoners say, that there the confirma-
tion ends; give me leave to inquire, if thai
lugumentis well founded (and I put it s^
riously to my learned friend) what proof it
there even of the plot of the assassination, ex«
cept the preparations and the meeting in Cato-
streetP They have no other evidence ^haii
that of Adams on which to found the admisr
sion they have made, and shall not his testis
roony be admitted to prove the ulterior pur-
pose these conspirators had in view ; if it is
credible in one part, it is to be believed in all
its parts ; if it establishes the plot of assassina-*
tion, it equally supports the conspiracy to overr
throw the government.
Adams states to you that a room had been
hired by these men, in the house in which
Brunt resided, for the purpose of holding their
consultations, of devising their plans, and of
preparing the means of executing them. Is
that (act true, os is it false ? It is proved to
be true by £leanor Walker, Mary Rogers, and
another witness, whose credit has not been
attacked, X mean Hale the apprentice of Brunt*
You wiU recollect the pretence under which
it was taken ; it was, that it was to be a lodg?
in^ room for Ings, and he said that he would
bnng his furniture into it ; no furniture waa
ever brought in, and the only uses made of it
were meeting there, and preparing the mis*
chievoitf %nd d«itructiiv« uMtrwuenU yQikh%vf
1471] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of H^iam Davidscm and
[1472
seen. I may here observe, Ihat it has beeb
argued by my learned friends, that the direct
purpose for which it was hired, is proved only
by Adams ; the three witnesses I have intro-
daced to you, shew that his testimony is true
in that respect ; the facts in the case corrobo-
rate him ; no one ever lodged there ; the only
persons who resorted to it were the prisoners
and others implicated in this conspiracy, and
the only things found there were such as were
prepared for, and are well calculated to carry
It into execution.
' There are other facts in which he is con*
Urmed by Hale, I mean as to the meetings in
that room, and the persons attending those
meetings ; he tells you, that on the Saturday
they had determined that a blow should be
■struck on the following Wednesday, and that
4hererore on the Sunday morning a meeting
was to be held at Brunt's room, to elect a com^
mittee to devise and organize the plan ; that
meeting, Adams says, was larger than usual,
"and he is confirmed in that by Hale ; Hale
has informed you it was the largest meeting
he remembers, and was attended by upwards
of twenty persons : the confirmation does not
stop here ; what did they do in that room ? you
remember Adams tells you, that a number of
staves were brought there, green sticks for the
purpose of being prepared to receive pike-
heads ; that Bradbum had been employed to
put on the fermles, and that he did not perform
the work properly at first, having weakened
the ends or the poles so much, that it was ne-
cessary to saw them off, and put on larger
ferrules ; Hale heard at times noises, as if there
'Was sawing and hammering in the room, and
he saw pike-staves there. He is confirmed in
another singular fact ; Adams must have been
more than a prophet if it did not really take
place. Ybu recollect that at a meeting on
Tuesday the 22nd FebruaTy great agitation
was excited, in consequence of Adams having
communicated to them something that had
occurred between Adams and Hobbs of the
White Hart, from which Adams concluded
that their schemes were not altogether un-
known to the police ; Brunt, to satisfy their
doubts, and to ease their minds, proposed
that on that evening a watch should be set
in Grosvenor-square to observe lord Harrow-
by's house, to see whether any soldiers were
introduced into it, concluding, that if no such
thing took place, they might be sure their plans
were' undiscovered, and they might proceed
with security ; the watch was set, and the first
men to perform the duty were Davidson and
another, who were to be relieved by Brunt and
Tidd. Davidson, with his companion, were
to take their stations at six, and continue till
nine. The watchmen of the parish have been
called to you, and they proved that on that
evening they saw a man- answering the de-
scription of the prisoner Davidson, and ano-
ther person with him, lurking about the square
between six and nine o'clock. You remember
(hat in consequence of Tidd having to com-
municate with some penon who wu th(ii§|i
to be essential to the success of their pkuis, k
#as on that evening prevented acoomfMojiif
Brunt, and Adams was fixed upon to sopplj
his place, and that he accompanied Broolit
nine o*clock to Grosvenor-square. He states
that he went there with Brunt; that, ate
watching for a short time, wanting refreahiDcid,
they went to a public-bouse at the back of
lord Harrowby's house, and that there Bna(
played at dominos with a stranger. Ym bm
the very person, Gillan, who played villi
Brunt, produced to you. Then Adams is eoi-
firmed in all be has told yon as to that put rf
the transaction. It is impossible he sImSqU be
confirmed in any other manner. Bruatisi
prisoner, who has been already tried; he
could not be called. The only pencn vb&
could be brought to corroborate the ies^imtij
of Adams was the young man who met bia
and Brunt at the public-house. The vatcb-
men confirm him as to persons being see&ii
Grosvenor-square ; his evidence is tbetefore
supported, in this part of the case, beyond ihe
possibility of contradiction.
His narrative is shown to be true in aootb?
particular. He informs you, that as they p»'
pared their arms they thought it unsafe to ben
them all in the room in Brunt's hoese, ani
that the house of the prisoner Tidd, was cob'
sidered to be a fit d^t for them. If ^'
mation of this part of Adaiis*s evidence ^^
wanting, it has been supplied to yw by tie
unfortunate young woman, the aaogbier of
Tidd, who has been called ; for she bashed
to you that hand-grenades and other instra-
ments were, from time to time, deposited ia
her father's house ; that the box produced lo
you, containing the ball-cartridges, had beea
there for a fortnight before the afihiriaCattK
street; that some of those things weretakei
away upon the very morning. of the 23idrf
February, and that some were ^™"8*'^Jjj
on the following morning. It was a MjffJ
thing that some of those instruments «vi
were lodged at Tidd*8 should be reisovedoi
the morning of Wednesday to Cato^treetK
is an occurrence to which Adams did notspeiif
but Mary Barker has proved it
The next confirmation (and a very n^
able one) is given of what Adams ^^^ JJ
have taken place in the afternoon of the «»
of February, on his arrival at Brunt's bo««;
while he was there. Strange and anodier pei-
son, whose name he does not know, ca»e »*
they were engaged in flinting their pistols, «»
finding themselves likely to be obsenredwb**
they stood, they retired to the room ^^V
Ings. It was impossible for Adams alttj
time he told you that, to know that he sboiw
be confirmed ; it was not a ^'^""*®*^'f*i?!I
be was likely to invent, inventing it rai^«'2
subjected him to contradiction. H*{?*I
you, that on that very afternoon be saw SWF
and another person flint their pistols aWjJ
room, and afterwards withdraw into »• "J*
room. That is oot all, Adams inlb»»r**
Rtdianl Tiddj(br High TreMtm.
147S1
that dfeemrd^ttpMi theani?al
md th» otlMT penODS on tbat aftemooD, and
befora thaj pffoe«eded to Cato-fltreet, Thiatle-
wood ifa» daiiTonsof writiag certain prodama-
tiODSy wliich were to be exhibited in different
parts of the town, in oider to rouse the dis-
affected to join tbe slandaid of revolt; he
states to youy that there not being any paper
in the rooa ftt for the purpose, he siigtfested
that they should be pot apoo cartridge paper,
and Brunt was fequestea to procure some.
Hate was on that afternoon sent out by Brunt
to purchase sa sheets of cartridge paper ; he
brought them to Brunt, who carried them
into the room where Adams says the piodama-
tfoae were prepared. Recollect also what
Adams tells you occurred upon that occasion ;
thiee proclamations were written by Thistle-
wood, when he became agitated and conM
write no more. Hall was requested to assist
him, but refused. Thistle^raod then desired
another to do so, who at fint declined, but at
last did write one, the contents of which I will
not stoke to you, because they are not properly
iir evidence. See then, how far Adams is
confirmed, and see still further how he might
be contradicted, if his account were not true.
My learned friends admit, that the cartridge
paper was purchased and taken into that room,
out they contend that the contents of the
Srodamation rest on the credit of Adams alone.
f^w he is not only confirmed as to the fact of
the cartridge paper being sent for, but also as
to a part having been uMd. Hale states that
there was some cartridge paper left in the
room, but not the whole he haa brought ; I do
not recollect that he specified the quantity.
Now let us consider how he might have been
oontradioted. Hall was there. Hall is a pep-
son whom it was in the power of the prisoners
at the bar to produce before you. It is said
Hall is an accomplice, and that by bringing
him forward as a witness, he would have been
exposed to destruction. If he be an ac-
complice, and this fact took place, undoubtedly
he would have been placea in jeopardy, bat
then my learned friends must assume that
what Adams has sworn is true. Then un*
doabtedly if Hall were produced, he must con-
firm him ; but their supposition is either that
Hall was not there, or that the proclamations
were not prepared ; if Hall were not there, he
might have been examined to prove so ; if he
were there, he might hate been called to shew
that what Adams has sworn is false, and that
tlie proclamations he spooks of were never
written. If Hall had been made a vritness,
and any questions had been put to him ^
the counsel for the Crown, to implicate him in
the conspiracy, my learned friends know ex-
tremely well that he might have refused to
anvwer, that he might have said I am not come
here to criminate myself, but to prove certain
fiicts ; I have a right by the law or England to
protect myself, and not give evidence which
maf involve me in crime. Hall is not called,
bemiae being there, he most have stated, as
VOL. xxxiir.
A. D. ISdK
11474
my learned iviends know, tbat the proclama-
tions wertf so prepared and written by TfaistlO'
wood. His absence, therefore, corroborates
the testimony which has been given to yon.
Another argument has been used by the
counsel for the prisoners; they say, Hall should
have been called by the Crown ; but see how
ill that observation squares with the rest ; they
state that ten accomplices would not make
the proof stronger; that one accomplice un-
connrmed cannot be believed, and that there-
fore the case would not be advanced by calling
ten such witnesses, unless their evidence was
corroborated by unimpeachable testimony.
Without adverting to Palin and the other perw
sons, who also^ aecording to my learned
friend's hypothesis, are innocent, it is enough
for me to have shewn, that there is one witness
whom it was in their power to have produced,
and that they have not called him; and I re-
peat, the absence of Hall eonfirms (if further
confirmation were necessary) the story told by
Adams.
What is the next matter in which he is sup-
ported ? He tells you, that when he got to
Cato-street, Tidd had not> arrived r you will
remember some alarm was expressed in con-
sequence of his non-appearance. It appears
that Tidd, after Brunt was gone, and after the
rest of the party had set out from the lodgings
for Cato-sireet, called at Brunt's house, and
saw his wife, and she told him there was a
pike-head and a sword in the cupboard, and
asked him what was to be done with them.
Tidd knew well how to dispose of them ; he
received them from her, took them into the
back room, and left the house. Yon have no
evidence of what was done with them after-
wards; but Adams has informed you, that
TidcT arrived at Cato-street some time after
the others^ Hale gives you the reason why
Tidd was so late; he Was at the lodgings as
before stated after his companions were gone{
and Monument also (who is called an aocom«
flice by my learned friend) accounts for \U
will not at present detain you with the
events in Cato-street, because in a future stage
of the observatione I shall be under the neces"
sity of calling your attention to them ; but as t
have mentioned them, permit me here to ob*
serve, that in my humble opinion it was eor-*
rectly said by my learned friend who opened
the case, that if there were no confirmation of
Adams's testimony, but that which the meet"
ing and preparetions in Cato-street afford, the
charge upon this indictment is irrefregably
proved, and that you can have lio doubt of
the plan of these men, and the design they had
conceived.
There is another witness who I admit to
my learned friend was an accomplice in the
crime of these men, but undoubteol v not to the
extent to which Adams is proved to be in-
volved, I mean Monmnent. He came late
into the scheme, and se^ros to have been-
kept in ignorance of the full extenrof it until
his arrival in Cato-slreet. You observed iho
*9
14751 I OBORGC IV.
Trial qf WUUam Darmkon and
[UN
tnanner in Which that jwmg »ui gave his
evideocA ; and I think if any thing dtpendv
upon deneanonr, you cannot fail to agiee
ifith me, that his deportment entitles him to
credit; he is home out in every pari of his
ntorj in which it was possible for hia to
receife confinnation ; he told you the manner
in which be was called upon at two sereral
times by Thistlewood and Brunt^ and after-
wards by Brunt and Tidd, and in this he is
confirmed by his brother, on whom there is no
imputation of being concerned in the plot.
The cTidence of Monument aifecting the
prisoner Tidd is most important. He was
Tuited by Brunt and Tidd, on the morning of
the 22nd of February ; they endeavoured to
prevail upon him to become a party in their
plans, ana as at that time they hina not procured
the room in Cato-street, ii was proposed that
Monument diould come to Tyburn-turnpike,
where he was to meet the other parties en-
gaged in the conspiracy. Brunt asked Tidd
whether it would be safe to give the counter-
sign to Monument ; Tidd thought it would,
and the word was imparted to him; but
having before the next day procured this loft
in Cato-street, Brunt eame to Monument, and
required his attendance at an earlier hour than
he was able to give it, and in consequence of
that, desired him to call on Tidd^ and go with
him to their place of rendesvous. The witness
called at Tidd's; Tidd armed himself with a
pistol, and then accompanied him to Cato-street .
He tells you what passed alter their arrival, and
completely confirms Adams in that part of his
account; he mentions the alarm which some
of the party felt at their numbers being inade-
quate to their olnect; that that alarm was
quieted by the address of Thistlewood, who
told them they were too fer embarked to
recede, that their force was sufficient, that
they had twenty-five men to oppose only
fourteen or sixteen unarmed servants of lord
Harrowby.
There is a third witness, moreover, who is
neither an accomplice, nor one against whose
character the least attack has been attempt-
ed. I allude to Hiden; and if all the evi-
dence given by Adams were blotted out
from Uie notes of his lordship, I submit,
that Hiden's testimony, uncontoadicted and
unimpeaehed as it is, coupled with the fects
which afterwards occurred in Cato-street, proves
the treason charged upon this indictment.
First consider the previous character of this
man ; next look to his conduct on this occasion ;
and lastly, weigh the evidence he has given,
and how it has been borne out by the subse-
quent transactions in the case. Against his
previous character there is not the slightest
imputation; it has been attempted indeed to
be proved, that he had not only attended
radical meetings, but had invited Bennett to
attend also. He admits, that he was present
at two meetings of a society called the Shoe-
maker's club, but held for political purposes ;
and, unless he had attends those meetings.
Wilson most piobably would net hive tkoQgH
he was a person to be tnisted. He coefcim
too, that he did ask Bennett to sceonpay
him; and all that Bennett hu ststed tint oi
by any possibility afleet Hidea is, tfait k
asked him to go to a ladieal mseting, nd
Hi^n does not recollect that the aprenuB
radicsl was used by him ; you hare, thenfaR,
every right to believe, from his fomerind
still more so from his subsequent coodoeii
that he is an honest man, on whose taHOBBtj
you can place the utmost reliance. Whit
interest had he to make any disdosme Is Ind
Harrowby on the 22nd of Febiuaiy ? My km-
ed friend says, he cannot butthiBk theieiiMne
expectation of remuneration operatiBgipci
the mind of Hiden, some hope of re«sidi»be
bestowed on him by those whose lives he Isi
saved, for the testimony he has given vpop thi
trial. Did any suck motive intoencthiBii
the time when he made dke commeniiuioi H
lord Harrowby f What possible ioterestosdi
he have in telling that which wst sntne!
He must have been a prophet indeed if Wibn
never imparted to hm the plot is agilS'
tion. How was he to know aaydiinftfi
conspiracy to destroy the ministen of theki^.
Of hand-grenades, or fire-balls, or puliei
sutioned in different parts of the tm i*
seize the cannon ? Of the inteotioa ti kt
houses, to take the Mansion-house, tad o-
tablish a provisional govemmeot theitF fit
could only know these things fiem sone ces*
spirator deep in the plot,, and he tells ywtla|
conspirator was Wilson. When it ii ufM
before you, that there is no vlterior okjcrt
of the plot proved but by the lestonooy*
Adams, do my learned friends ihink, tkA
Hideo's evidence has been erased fn'T'f
recollection ? If it be not, what gwMid »
there to impeach it ? Do not the fcclsika
occurred bear him out? In Hides, thwjW
jrou have a vritness neither impeadied m
impeachable, and upon whose '^"^
submit to you, you may safely rely. 1"^
with his testimony before you, lei oeceU]^
attention to the occurrences that took pbtt>
Cato-street, and to the preparatioos ii*^
there, which are supposed by siy k**^
friends, to have been merely intended kr oc
assassination of his majesty's miMSie*J|^
this part of the case, I will take the opportj^
of examining the reasoning of one of iiy 1^
ed friends upon a supposed eonspincy J^
an inferior nature, a c<>«*'P'"*yJ%^
hen-roosts, and commit burglary, '^v^
aocompliee a|>poasing as a witness end m
upon nis* associates the whole ^"""^i^
pare such a case with the present. Vy P^
position is, that the plan was, not <>^jj^
derhb majesty's ministers, hot »«®?*|*t!
the government ; the supposition on the mbp
side is, that the sole object of the plot «» ""
assassination. ^
To return to my learned friend's ^'^jj^
pose, says he, the accomplice to '^ ?Lj
be connimed in many fiicts whidi *•*"
i4Tn
RiiAari Tidd/mr High Trtaton.
A. D. 18S0.
1147'8
• 4hai the Intention of the accated wn nndoubt-
•edly to Tob the hen-toosts, bat that there was no
. ^oorroboiatiDg testimony to support him in his
• assertion that burglary was also meditated ;
•coald youy he asks, as a jury, find the prisoners
guilty of a conspiracy to commit a burglary ?
•certainly not* 1 freely admit it to my Imned
Iriend ; but let me in return put this question
to him, and let us see how he will deal with
it ; if in addition to preparations which were
necessary to accomplish the first purpose of
•robbing hen-roostSy there were found crow
bars, f>icklock keys, matches, phosphorus, and
'Other implements, applicable only to house-
breaking, what would my learned friend say
4o this confirmation of the accomplices account?
• Would he then deny that there was evidence
to show that the prisoners were guilty of the
^greater ofience?
What were the preparations made by these
conspirators ? were they such as were adap-
ted to the sole purpose of assassinating his
• majesty's ministers, or were they of a
nature calculated to effect more estensive
destmetion ? were fire-balls, were pikes
necessary? but, above aH, were the twelve
hundred rounds of ball found at Tidd*s and
<the /cartridges for loading cannon, inteoded to
•be used against my lord Harrowby*s house, or
his miyesty's ministers assembled there P For
what then was all this ammunition provided
•by these men? You find that their preparations
^were not only equal to the perpetration of
, •the deed, which my learned friends suppose to
be the whole plot, but fully adequate to the
^completion of those plans which Adams tells
you they had in contemplation.
What was the object of assassinating his
'majesty's ministers? Had these prisoners
^nd .their associates conceived any particular
feelings of revenge against the persons of those
noblemen and gentlemen who compose the
cabinet? Was private enmity the motive
which, compelled them to the commission of
the bloody act ? Or was not rather the blow
•aimed against these unoffending victims be-
-cause they filled the ostensible characters of
ministers of the Crown, and directed the go-
vernment of the country ? It is beyond human
credulity to believe that this plot was intended
to stop at the assassination of the illustrious
quests of lord Uarrowby ; no reason can be
assigned which could have operated upon the
minds of these men to induce them to destroy
at one moment fifteen individuals personally
unknown probably to many of their murderers,
unless you believe they had in view other and
to them momentous objects, to the attainment
of which the destruction of the advisers of the
king was, in their wild and heated imaginations,
considered a first and necessary step. You re-
.nsember they were found armed. Yes, say my
ieamed friends, they were armed, but the pro-
ceedings at Manchester had compelled them
40 protect themselves. But were these pikes
procured in consequence of the Manchester
transactions? Were the cartridges provided
for their pvotection when thejr Held their
meetings? It is only by the desperate cir-
cumstances of the case that my learned fiiends
are obliged to have recourse to such an hy*
pothesis; once believe the testimony given
by Adams, and confirmed by Hiden, and
the whole difficulty must vanish from your
minds.
Why did they meet in an obscure room in
Cato-street? why was that place chosen? It
vras doubtless selected because it was a con-
venient spot to proceed (rem to lord Harrow<«
by's house. Were no other parties assembled
on that night? My learned friends say there
is no evidence of any attack at Gray's-inn«lane
or the Artillery-ground. It is true there is
not; and for this plain reason, the parties in«
tended for the execution of those duties, were
of course directed to wait •till the blow was
first struck in Grosvenor-square : bnt, thou^
no movement was made, you have it in evi-
dence, from Hale, that persons did assemble
who were not destined to go to Cato-street ; I
allude to Potter and his companions, to a man
of the name of Palin who was to head some
incendiaries in the Borough, and to another
band that has been mentioned, and which
clearly was not meant for the seixure of the
cannon in Gray's-inn-lane, as that task was
assigned to Thisdewood and his followers,
after they had perpetrated the bloody deed at
lord Harrowby^s. When the meeting had left
Brunt's, it was thought that the room would be
vranted for Palin's men ; but it was afterwards
determined to send them to the White Hart»
and directions were given to Hale to do so*
Hale tells you, that three persons came to his
master's house, who were strangers, and that
he desired them in consequence of the order he
had received, to go to the White Hart, and
they not knowing the way, he accompanied
them. Potter afterwards called with others,
to whom Hale gave similar instructions. Here
you have the most direct evidence that many
others were engaged in the plot of that night;
recollect, too, Uie observation of Thistlewood,
when fear was expressed of success ; he said
that they need not be apprehensive, for that
there were numbers ready to join them, who
waited only for some decisive blow to be
struck. Need I refer you to the language of
Thistlewood to Monument: '^ Great eventf
are at hand ; people are every where anxious
for a change ; I have been promised support
by numbers who have deceived me ; but now
I have got men who vrill stand by me." The
only answer given to this by my learned
friends is, that the plot is incredible ; that it
was impossible it could be carried into execii^
tion, and that you are on that account to dis-
miss it from your notice. You are not to con-
sider whether or not it coald have been effected
by the means these conspirators possessed.
The only question for you to decioe is, did
they harbour in their minds the desiffn imputed
to them. If they did harbour that design, and
acted in furthenuu^ of it, then are they guilty,
1470]
1 QC(»tfiE IV.
Trui of WUUmn Dtmdtt* mid
[1480
'however mi\d and ^Monary it nuqr h»re been
and however inadequate their means to its
execution.
Look at their fiondaet in Cato^straet, when
they were apprehended; if they bad aasemUed
for an innocent purpose^ why was the desperate
resistanee raade to the officers? uhI here I
cannot help making an observation upon the
defence made to yon by one of the prisoners
at the Jmx ; it is painful to me 4o do so, but
justice absolutely requires it. Davidson has
^ -SKftempted to make you believe that he was
not in the stable at Cato-street ; that he was
accidentally in the street in its neighbourhood
iipon that evening ; and that he was by mere
•chance in possession of the carbine acnd swoid
vrhich were found upon him. But how does
the fact stand ? The officen tell you, that on
4h€ir entering the stable, they saw a man of
colour, .whom they believed to have been
-Davidson ; that he was accoutred, tint he had
'on crots-b^ts, and a sword by his side, and
that be was walking up and down as a sentry.
It was proved by Hiden that he saw him there ;
and Aoams swears that Davidson was there,
ftlthongfa he did not obseme his dress, David-
eon being engaged vrith some otheni in pre-
^>arinff the pikes. Monday, on the evening of
that day, noticed him gomg into the stable,
imd on bis stooping down, perceived under his
coat pistols and a long sword ; he saw him
light a candle at an adjoining house, and carry
it into the stable ; but the proof does not stop
there, be is actually pursued from the stable;
he is observed to discharge the carbine, hie
makes a cnt at his ponuer, and is at last taken
with those belts upon him, and with the sword
and carbine in his band. It would be sup-
n'ng you did not attend to the evidence, if
sre to enlarge upon this topic. I have felt
these remarks necessary, because he has in the
defence endeavoured to make you believe that
he was no party to this plot, and that he was only
tliere by accident. ISfly learned friend, finding
that Davidson had been clearly proved to have
been present at other times, at the meetings
and consultations, and to have been active
throughout the oonsfHracy, did not think it
necessary to make any observations to you on
that part of the case to which the prisoMt has
thus particularly addressed himseli.
Tidd too was ibond in arms, and made a
desperate resistance; he levelled lus pistol at
lieutenant Fitsclarcnce on his aniviJ at the
bead of his soldiers; a ifentleman who had
offered him no personal v^ence; and but for
the interposition of that galUpt man Legg, who
stepped in to the protection of his officer, it is
not at all unlikely that lieutenant Fitadarenoe
might have lost his life, as the unlbitonaie
Smithers did in an eaxlii^ part of th^ traoaae-*
tion.
I have not troubled you <with ikke {nrticidar
facts affecting each of the prisoners, for I am
sure, watching the proof as you have, yga roust
lia?e seen that they were both active through-
jm Ibe whole of Om conspiracy. Tidd was
present at ^leir nsetings; was chui
more than one ocoanon ; he approved of Aor
aehones ; smd though in Cato^fltreethsMi'
ed whether they were sufficiently noBeroiB a
attack lord Harrowby's house, sgaimttbepfai
itself he felt no abhorrence, his only fs^wtt^
their means-were not equl to cairying it isto
execution ; when his fears were (foioted bf ik
address of Thistlewood, all he objeolioBi voe
removed. The only real questioo is, te
which is raised by my learned finend osAe
other side, as to ^e intention attiibttid40dK
prisoners by this indictment. I sobniit te it
is proved not only by the testimony of Adai^
but by Monument and Hideo, and still aae
by the feces thems^ves which oceoned Mfte
fetal evening of the t9td of Febmsiy, bf Ai
preparations in Cato^ttceet, and by the wm^
nition found the next morning at Tidd^ uA
at finint*s.
If you entertain no doubt of this, yoor dal|r
points out cmly one fine of condoct, and fa
are bound, however painlul it may be, lopn-
nounce a verdict of guilty against tiese mk'
tunate men. It has been siud, by ooe^tf ay
.learned friends, that he laments tbst Iks flit
has been made the eubject of so anicb ii^
tigation ; he thinks, or affects to thiak, tbt i
was hardly worthy the attentiea of twfj
constituted as this is. That it bsi otospM
so much of die attention of voorMlfis m
others, is owing to the lenity of the la«) mi
has enabled the prisoners to sever u te
challenges, each of them having ikepinhis
of objecting to a certain number of jof^ . j|
tlttrefoie bacttne indispensable, thsttfawtmi
should proceed separately; and to liii> g|
eumstance alone is (it owing, that thisff9»
has for so long a tinse occupied the ^^^'^
of the Court But the time eooffOMdiB m
investigation ought not, and I am ssR «>»
not, operate upon your minds, or ^^^
verdict you are lo pronounce. Xhoogb m h
the fourth trial, yet, if the facts P»^J51j
they have been stated to be by ^Jf^
counsel for the accused, identically «^*^
as those proved on the former ocmsiOB^ *|
only question in this and each '^^^^^PJ^
will be, whether the prisoners who "l^. ?!
bar for their ddiverance are i>"P^^*^
guilt of this conspiracy. Howsfg ^^J"^
regret the repetition ^ these iayertig*''^
is absolutely necessary for the sake of f^^
Justice that they should take place. ^^
With respect to the conseaueDGCS Bw**
follow these trials, and to which •*"^,]l
been made, they ought not to ha»e, -Pf*
satisfied will not have wiy »*»«^jl^
on your verdict. You are now to dacw ^
the fate of the two individnals ^|^f?^
will dismiss from your minds •^\_'f*j5
that any persons have been ^^Jzi^
knowledge that any others reasia ^t1
The only question you have to ssk^«»^
is, whether the evidence ^'•■.'■j'j^
that the prisoners are guilty. ^^^^^
sure yon will fed ao difficulty or hsaW"'
1481>
likhard Tiddjur High Tnaun.
A. D. 18Sa
I148!i
Ike dotf yon owe to youndvealtlie third, ifhich cbarges '^tbat they eoin-
•nd the public, in immooneiiig thct verdict
whioh akm can eatisfy the justice of the case.
SUMMJNO-UP.
Mr. Bmrm Gamw.---Geatleinen of die
Juty ; -The two prisonen at vour bar are
ttiraif^ed before you for that highest and most
eompUcaled crime which the commumtv in
any country can possibly tiave to animadvert
vpOD, the crime of High Treason, involving in
its probable consequences the crimes of mur-
der, the destruction of propertv, and every
other consequence i^iieh can follow from the
'perpetration of other single crimes committed
by other oiehders. Yon have been kept from
your various abodes and occupations f^r a
considerable time past, in order to engage in
the investigation of the tikis which have
arisen upon the present indictment, a task
•devolving upon you as members of ^e com-
munity, painful in its execution, and attended
'probably with circumstances of a domestic
nature not agreeable to you, but which you
win not have any hesitation in performing
according to Uie best of your honest jud^ent,
whatever those consequences may be, m the
persustton, I am satisfied, that whatever may
DC the result of the present or any •o^er trial
entered into upon this occasion, it was indb-
pensaUy necessary that these cases should be
brought before the tribunals of the country,
in onier that the guilt or innocence of the
persons accused *might be •ascertained, and if
guilty, up to what extent the guilt had arisen.
The chai*ge ogainst the prisoners is that of
lii|^ (reason, stated in four several counts of
4his indictment. One of those counts charges
the actual levying of war against his majesty,
another, a conspiracy for Jhe purpose of de-
priving his majeatv of life, and if you are satis-
fied that the evidence which has been laid
before you is in its material and substantial
parts correct, if it brings home a satisfactory
conviction to your minds, so that when you
retire to deliberate on your verdict, vou should
say, I cannot as an honest man hesitate or
doubt upon it, then it is my duty to tell you,
that in point of law the crime of high treason
is cleariy and unquestionably established. I
should have been prepared on the first trial to
have told you so, in the language and on the
authority of the greatest names that have
adorned the legal jurisdiction of our country.
Having been prevented by circumstances of a
domestic nature from attending at the very
commencement of these proceedings, I was
deprived of the advantage of hearing the same
thing better en>re8sed by the tot md highest
authorities in Westminstei^htdl.
I now call your attention to two other
counts to which, if you believe the evidence
to be true, you will probably be of opinion
that it more particulaity applies. I mean the
first, which charges tlutt *' the prisoners with
other persons did compass, imagine, invent,
device and intend to depose the king ;" and
passed, imagined, invented, devised, and in-
tended to lei7 war against the king, in order
5 force and constraint to compel him to
ange his measures.'' The indictment, as
the law of high treason requires, states thA
the purposes charged in these several counts
of tne indictment are established by certain
overt acts, eleven in number^conspiring to
devise plans to subvert the constitution ; con-
spiring to lev^ war, and subvert the constitu-
tion ; conspiring to murder divers of the privy
council ; providing arms to murder divers of
the privy council ; providing arms and ammu-
nition to levy war, and subvert the constitn-
tion ; conspiring to bum houses and barracks,
and to provide combustibles for that purpose ;
preparing addresses to the king's subjects,
-oontaining incitements t<ythe king's subjects
to assist in levying war and subverting the
constitution, and containing particularly the
address stated in one of those overt acts ad«
dressed to the people, stating that their tyrants
were destroyed, and that the friends of liberty
were invited to come forward, as the pro-
visional govemment was then sitting — and if
these or any of these overt acts shall have been
provably made out to your satisfaction— I use
now Ihe language of m law — that is, in other
words, shall to your plain common sense and
understanding, as you exercise it in the ordi-
nary transactions of life, have been brouj(ht
home to your conviction by evidence on which
you cannot doubt, in that case it is your duty
to pronounce the prisoners ffuilty ; but if you
ontertain any serious satisfactory doubts of
the truth of the evidence, or if it does not
amount to proof of the feets charged in the
indicttnent, you will do that which will be
more agreeable to you, you will pronounce
them not guilty.
Tlie evidence has occupied a great number
of hours ; I am prepared to state it to you
vei%atim, from the beginning to the end, and
with your permission, knowing you will fe^
no time can be too much that is occupied in
such a detail, I will proceed to read it to you ;
it win occupy much of your time, but you
have given me a pledge thai yon will not re-
gard the time, for your attention has been
unremitting from the time you entered that
box.
In order to make out the facts of high
treason, the first witness called before you is
a witness of the name of Robert Adams. It
may not be necessary, by way of information,
for you have heard it uom various quarters,
but it may be proper to state, that he stands
in the situation of an accomplice. Severe
animadversions liave been made upon him.
It lias been said, that he is not only a traitor
to his kine, uofkithftd to his friend, faithless
to those who have reposed .in him their guilty
secrets, but an apostate from his Ood, lostus
sight of every interest which can be attained
here or liereafler. For the purposes of the
present inquiry, it would be enough to state
1483J 1 GEORGE IV.
Triai of IVilUam^Davidsott and
11484
(not that; I ceosore those obsenratioiiSy those
who made them did well to impress your miod
with his want of credit, hut it is not necessary
to go higher to the unsupported testimony of
any man, than to state) that he admits himself
to be a party to the treason which he imputes
to others ; so it is in Ihe case of murder, and
yet the accomplice of the murderer is heard
every day, and verdicts are pronounced upon
the testimony of the accomplice of die mur-
derer, on his sole confession, if the testimony
of an accomplice so deep in the guilt himself,
receives such confirmatiOB as to induce the
jury to believe that his story is not the inven-
tion of fiction, but the narration of truth; and
this is to be collected by the fact of his being
confirmed or not confirmed in his narration ;
it may not be unfit to observe to you here,
that the confirmation to be derived to an ac-
complice, is not a repetition by others of the
whole story of the accomplice, and a confirm-
ation of every part of it, that would be either
impossible or unnecessary and absurd ; impos-
sible, as in the case of a murder committed,
where probably there are no persons present
but the deceased, the murderer, and his asso-
ciate in guilt ; and therefore you are to look
to the circumstances, to see whether there are
such a number of important &cts confirmed as
to give you reason to be persuaded that the
main body of the story is correct; I state this
not on any authority of mine, but on the
authority of two of the most humane and
learned and excellent judges, that have adorned
our bench, within the memory of man now
living ; I allude to the prosecutions at York,
of Swallow and others, where the late lord
chief baron Thomson and that most humane
and excellent man Mr. Justice Le Blanc pre^
sided, the first of whom was called upon to
state the law, which he laid down most cor-
rectly.— ^ I do not mean then for the first
time, it was always the unquestioned law, and
has been acted upon in innumerable instances.
Upon the occasion to which I allude it was
explained to the satisfaction of every one ; you
are, each of you, to ask yourselves this ques-
tion— ^now that I have heard the accomplice,
and have heard other circumstances whicn are
said to confirm the story he has told, does he
appear to me to be so confirmed by unim-
peachable evidence as to some of the persons
affected by his testimony, or with respect to
some of thQ facts stated by him, as to afford
me good ground to believe that he also speaks
truly with regard to other prisoners or other
facts, with regard to which there may be no
confirmation? Do I, upon the whole, feel
convinced in my conscience, that his evidence
is true, and such as I may safely act upon ?
With this key and with that view, you will
attend to the testimony of Adams, with which
I will proceed. •
He states, that he comes here in custody ;
* See the case of Swallow and others, 10
How. Mod. St. Tr. 980.
that before he was io that custody, ke M
at No. 4, Hole-in'the-wall-psssage, BrookV
market ; that he was fonaeriy in the royal
regiment of horse-guards, aad left the imy
ab^t eighteen years ago ; be nys, ^ I fiA
knew a person of the name of Bniot,** nhoii
one of the prisoners included in this iiidictiMBt,
** in the y^ 1816, at Camhrsrr, ia Fiasce; I
then knew him by the name of Thoms Monos;
the head-quarters of the army wen it M
time at Cambray, and I was with the mi
carrying on my trade of a shoeniaker;'' thii
occasions the acquaintance and intimacy vUck
led, as he sutes to you, to the commsniaiioi
I am now about to state; he says, *<eu1f ii
the present year, I called at Bmnt's lodpp
in Fox-court, Gray Vinn-lane, be wss at te
tim^ carrying on his business of a boot-doiei
on the 12th of January he introduced ne tt
Mr. Thistlewood, in Stanhope^treet; (iioie
were the lodgings of Thistlewood; logs in
with us ; on our entering, Bront said toTliisd»'
wood, this is the man I was speaking to yoi
about ;" referring to some former confeaaiioo
Brunt had had with him, about soDennk
was to bring; " Thistlewood said, 'yoobeloDgA
did you not, to the life-guards!' IioUUb
no, I belonged formeriy to ihe Oxford Bha;
he said, * I presume youareasoodsoldiciiad
can handle your sword well r I told binj
once was a good soldier, but I had oot w
occasion to use the swerd or any wewoo nr
a considerable number of yean past, t owid
use a sword once, and should beablstooe
my sword again in my own defeaoe. TtoUe-
wood then turned the discourse, and begin to
speak on the subject of the abop4eepea «
London, particularly sayinsr they were a tela
aristocrats all together, and that they veie w
working under one system of goferoncnt^jw
he should glory to see the day when ill^
shops should be shut up and well phDdoid!
then he says, " Thistlewood turned w *»•
course upon Mr. Hunt, saying, Mr. Hunt ^
a cowara, that he was no friend to the people
that he had no doubt, could he get into wW
hall and overlook the government book^ *
should there find the name <t Mr. Hant, ait
spy to government;" he next turned tofl*j
course upon Mr. Cobbett, and said, ''tteibe
did not consider Mr. Cobbett, with aj »
writings, as any friend to the people, a»™J
he had no doubt, if he could getasghi"
those books, he should find Mr. CobbeUsuse
inscribed with Mr. Hunt's, as one of theip*
to government; then Brunt alluded to two
men that he had to call upon in Caxmj^
ket, and asked Thistlewood if hewooidttke
a walk to see the men ; he refused ^ 8^ ^
ing, he had somewhere to call ; ^"^^^ i?!
the room, Brunt told Thisdewood of a »w
for a blunderbuss with a brass barrel, «*
have since heard some conversation «^J^
intention to raffle for a brass-barrelled WniwJ
buss ; " Brunt asked Thistlewood if he ^«^
be there ; to the best of my re<»^«*^|!2;u,
said he would, I am not quite certain wW"
1485]
Rkhard Tiddfor High Treason.
A. O. 1820.
LI 486
Mr. Thisdewood said he woald or would not
go, bat we all left the room together ; Brunt
told roe that there was a plan drawn up, and
be had. no doubt, if I would consent to join
in it, it would meet with my approbation ; he
said the plan was, to assassinate the ministers,
the first time they met together to dine ; he
said, we have information where they keep
their money ; the thieves have three million in
hard money; after we have done this, we
intend to go to that place and plunder it ;'' he
says, this was before they arrived at Thistle-
wood's lodgings.
Then he says, " sometime after this I was
conlined for debt in the Whitecross-street
prison, and remained there until Sunday the
30th duy of January, that was the day after
his majesty's death. On the next dtiy, Monday,
I saw the prisoner, Brunt, at his lodgings m
Fox-court ; Brunt lived in the two-pair of stairs
front roomy and there was a meeting in a back
room on the same floor. Brunt told me he
had hired that room of the landlady for Ings ;"
that was the room taken by the recommenda-
tion of Brunt for Ings, and where the people
we have heard so much about used to meet ;
he says, ^ meetings were held there twice a-day
from that time up to the 23rd da^of February,^
which you all know was that important date
on which this conspiracy, such as it was, was
detected in Cato-street, ''except that there
were none on Sunday evenings , the Sunday
evenings appear to have been occupied in other
ways, in readings in public houses, and con-
versations not of the most useful tendency to
keep men out of scrapes of this sort, but for
some reason tlie meetings were not held at
this room on the Sunday evenings. He de-
scribes the room as several other persons have
done, as having no furniture in it but a fixed
stove ; then he says, ** the persons who usually
attended those meetings were Thistlewood,
Brunt, Ings, Hall, Davidson (the prisoner now
It the bar), Harrison, Wilson, Bradbum, Tidd
>ccasionally, but not so constantly as the
others, and Edwards. I do not recollect tlie
lames of any more at tliis moment ; I was at
tie meeting on Monday the 31st of January,
Hit nothing particular passed then. I was
.here on the followiue Wednesday ; when I
iveot to the room I round Thistlewood and
larrison there, and in the course of the even-
^Zf Ings, WiJson, and Edwards came ; when
! went in Thistlewood and Harrison had been
n deep discourse respecting some information
hey had gained, that the life-guards and
DOt-guards were to leave London for the
purpose of attending the funeral of his late
oajesty. Harrison said, that a life-guards-
lan had told him, that every man in the life-
aards that could be mounted was to attend
lie funeral, as well as the foot-guards that
ould be spared, and likewise the police
fficers. -Harrison said, he thought it would
e an excellent opportunity to kick up a row
I London that night ; Thistlewood agreed to
le plan, and proposed, that it should be done
by collecting together whair men they could
among themselves, and taking the cannon in
Oray's*inn*lane, as well as the cannon in the
Artillery-ground, and likewise to make use of
the fire-balls in setting fire to different build-
ings/' He said, he thought it would be a
favourable opportunity, as the life-guards and
foot-guards, and the police, and a great many
other persons who attended the funeral of his
late majesty would be out of town. The noble
lords, constituting his majesty's cabinet, could
not fail in the solemn duty of being present
upon that melancholv occasion. It has been
said, in the course of one of the eloquent ad-
dresses made to you, that all that was intended
here was, " the kicking up a raiv in London ;"
one is disposed to ask, what sort of row could
be intended to be kicked up in London ; they
choose the opportunity when all the horse-
guards, and all the foot-guards, and all the
police were out of London, and when, as they
express it, there is nobody in London to pro-
tect it ; oddly enough, during about a fourth
part of the trial in which we have been en-
gaged, it has been admitted, that to be sure
there was a conspiracy to assassinate all his
majesty's ministers, but it is said that that was
all; these persons were all very poor, and
wished to kick up a row ; but it appears it
was to be a row of such a size, that it was
thought desirable they should avail themselves
of the absence of all troops, and all police
officers from London. That is the effect of
the testimony of this witness; he communi-
cated this to Mr. Thistlewood, and Mr. Thistle-
wood approved of it; but Mr. Thistlewood
immediately improved upon it, and proposed,
that the two pieces of cannon in Gray's-inn-
lane, and the six pieces of cannon in the
Artillery-ground should be taken all on the
same night (this is the row that was to be
kicked up on the night of the king's funeral)
and that they should use fire-balls to set fire
to the different buildings. Thistlewood then
said ** it would be necessary to send a party
to Hyde-park corner to prevent any orderly
man leaving London for Windsor, to commu-
nicate at Windsor" What? why, that there
had been a row in London ; that it was neces-
sary to take care that no persons should come
bade to prevent the effects of this idle row ;
he likewise proposed, ''that the telegraph
over the water should be taken to prevent any
intelligence being communicated to Wool-
wich," which, we all know, is the deposit of a
considerable proportion of the artillery ; '' this
plan met with the assent of those persons in
the room ; after this Brunt and Ings came in,
and the plan which had been in agitation was
communicated to them by Thistlewood ; Brunt
and Ings both declared, that there was nothing
short of the assassination of ministers would
satisfy them ; in consequence of this, the pro-
ject which had been mentioned was given up."
Now, gentlemen, every thing I am stating to
vou, will be subject to your believing or not
believing this narrative ;. but as we pass along,*
1487J 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of WiUiam Davidson and
[ua
I cannot kelp obttnrhif on the diuactar of
this proof M it is dereloped. It wiU be for
ywif when you ha?e heard this evidence to its
end, to ask yourselves, was this a plan which
had nothing for its object but the destniction
of fifteen men, however elevated by rank or
station, or by their virtues } was the thing in
project that which no one has the hardihood
to deny, the destmctioB of some of his maiesty't
cabinet ministevs, and the destniction of some
houses, and to end there, or a more melancholy
object, to effect a revolution in the countiy ?
Vol to subdue, as it is said, the millions resi*
dent in this metropolis, but to endeavour to
efliBct all those objects which are stated upon
this indictment, however wild and imprac-
ticable such projects might prove.
Then the witness says, ** I recollect a meet-
ing which took place on Saturday the 19th of
F^ruary; there were present Thistlewood,
Harrison, firunt, Ings, and Hall ; on my going
in they seemed to be in a study between
themselves ; they got up and Thistlewood said,
well, it is agreed on, that if nothing happens
between this and next Wednesday night, we
then go to work ; he said that they were all so
rr, the^ could not wait any longer; and
gave instructions that there should be a
meeting the next morning, to draw up a plan
to see how they should act.''
Then he says, ** a meeting took place the
next morning ; it was a larger one than usual :
the prisoners at the bar were of the party ; we
met about eleven o'clock. Thistlewood on
looking round said, there are twelve of us, it
is time to proceed to business. Tidd took the
chair with a pike in his hand, and Thistlewood
said he had come to a determination, if nothing
transpired between that time and Wednesday
night to go to work ; he said, we have been
waiting so long expecting the ministers to dine
together, finding they do not, we intend, if
they do not dine together between this and
then, to take them separately ; he then began
to propose his plan about taking the cannon in
GrayVinn-lane, and the Artillery-ground, and
that Palin was to take upon himself to set fire
to different buildings, and he was to have as-
sistance from the men that he had collected
himself, Adr. Thistlewood said this was the
outline of the plan at present, and as Mr*
Brunt had a plan to propose with respect to
tlie assassination of ministers, he shoold drop it
for the present* Brant then came fbrvrard to
explain his plan, and Thistlewood said, let my
plan first be put from the chair, and if any one
has any thing to say upon it, let him speak ;
it was put from the chair, and agreed to by all
present; Tidd being in the chair. Bninlthen
came forward and said, as we cannot get the
ministers together as it was proposed, I pro-
pose to take them separate^, and that the
men employed for that pufpoee shailfbe sepa-
rated into so many parts, and firom eanh allot-
ment a man shall be drawn to do the deed, a
man 'for the purpose of committing eaehinnn»
der, and if he attempted it and did natsne«
eeed, and there wat any sign of covniioe, hi
shoald be run through upon die spotdinedj."
Then the witness says, ''apoD this 1 got vp
and asked him if a man attempted it nd
failed, was he to be run throo^ npoo thi
spot f Brant said no^ if there were no 9^
of cowardice ; this motion was pet fron the
chair as before, and agreed to. AAer dii^
Palin, Potter, and Stnuigs, came ia; the d^
enmstances that had passed were eoBumnt*
eated to them, and they agieed to then.
After Thistlewood had communieated tbe am
to them as they had to aU the otkeis ia tk
room, PaUn got up and said, that he bad paid
due attention, and that he among tbe restU
agreed to what bad been pro|K)9ed, bot he
wished to know how the pUas were to Is
executed, at they had so many olgecntobe
carried at the same time." Tbe pias of asm-
sination was called the vrest-endjob; he aid,
** you talk of the west-end job taking ibrtj or
fiihr men ?** which number had been mentiaHd
before by Thistlewood; <<you tali[ of tahsf
the pieces of cannon from 6ray's-ian4iiey
and six pieces of cannon from tbs Artiliet}*
round ; and my setting fire to tbe baildiit|i)
wish to know how this is to be doae; ^
ought to know whether you have men to d^
pend upon sufficient ; I cannot give yea wj
satisfaction on that point till I see whitneni
can speak to ; and 1 wish for instniotioasvhfr'
ther I may communicate to them vbel ^
passed here this morning.'' Thistlevood lod
Brant said, that diere was no donbt tha Pain
might communicate it, if he was satisfied vims
himself that he had got such menaihecoau
depend upon ; upon that he sat dewa sitii-
fied. Thistlewood then turned round to Bmt
and said, '<0h, Brant, as Pabn is here, |W
may as well take him to this spot dose by, tf*
he will be able to judge forhimsdf nhetbei^
thing is practicable or not;'* that place ^
FurnivalVinn-buildinffs, which were at «»
time in* a promss for being completed fcf
chambers ; I believe not yet quite «^PJ^'
in a commanding situation in the ^^^^"^
and they would make a very great firer ^
attract much attention ; he then says, "<^"^
near the back of Fox-court ; Braot and ^
went out and returned again, and Mr. 1^
said it was a very good j&, and a ^J!^
one^ and would miJce a very good fiie. ^
tlewood said it would be hi^^necesnTi^
it was possible to get the men togeAer^
ooaamnnicate thar intentions and gi^e ^
a treat, but he did not know howit«»*
be done, they wiere all so poor. ^^^
said he had a one pound note, he b>^'^|)^
for the purpose, though he had <i^^|^?l
no work lately, bot he would he ^^^^'^rZ
woold not spend it upon his men. ^"^
wo^ said, he did not know «bsK they eM»
take them to, to give them a titat; I >*PP^
he said, we can have the bacfc-TOCWn »v
White Hart, at Hobbs^ where d»"^
on 'former occasicma had been held. ^
said he did not mBch like< it' Yi>n »^
i4m
Richard tiddfor High Treason. A. D. 1820.
ri46o
what that arose from ; that Adams had stated
that Hobbs had tlirown out some circumstances
of the oflScers having called there, as if they
had information that there was some radical
meeting there ; and Adams had got into some
disrepute with the party, for throwing cold
water upon their designs. Brunt said " he did
not much like it, after what had slipped from
my mouth ; hut never mind we can go there
armed, and if any of the traps should come
Into the room, I do not see what occasion
we have to fear them; he said he would
call on Hobbs and hear what he had to say ;
on second recollection, he said he would give
his boy a holiday, send his wife out, and have
what men he could collect together in his own
room; after this we separated.'* Then he
says, '* I have seen arms in that back-room at
different periods, and among other things,
pike-staves in the rough just as they were cut
fiom the tree they grew on; Bradburn sawed
the ends of them off, and ferruled them in that
back-room ; there were boles made in them, it
was then considered that they were too weak,
that they would not support the pike ; in con-
sequence of that the ferrules were cut off again,
and bigger ones got and put on ; this was done
in the same room; there were some hand-
grenades brought in there ready made, and
some that were made there ; I saw Davidson
and Harrison there, making a kind of thing
that was wound round a tin case first, apa
some pitch that was melted in an iron pot,
and aher this was put in there were some
nails bound round ; they were both engaged in
making a number of them; they were after-
wards carried to Tidd's lodgings in Hole-in-
the-wall-passage, which was called the d^p6t.
Thistlewood assigned as a reason for removing
them, that there should be nothing found in
that room in case any person came there who
might give information.''
'' I remember the meeting that was held on
Tuesday the 22nd of February, in the same
room at Brunt's, about ten o'clock ; there were
present Thistlewood, Brunt, Hall, and Ings,
and soon after Edwards came in, and said he
bad been looking into the newspaper, and
there was a notice that the ministers were to
t>e at a cabinet dinner on the following Wed-
lesday at lord Harrowby's in Grosvenor-
tquare ; in consequence of this, Hall fetched a
lewspaper, and it appeared by that, that the
nformation was true ; upon this being com-
nnnicated. Brunt said. Now, damn my eyes,*^
t is a roost horrid expression, I am obliged to
ead it to you — being the manner in which
his person treated a superintending Provi-
lence, as a superintending power only for
le purposes of mischief and oestruction, and
ot as we have this day reason to believe, a
'rovidence for the protection of worthy men
gainst the plots of the wicked — the horror of
le statement almost disqualifies one from
ating it ; he said, " Now, damn my eyes, I
elieye there is a God, I have often prayed that
lese thieves may be called together, that we
vol.. XXXllt.
may have an opportunity of destroyinjj them,
and now God has heard my prayer." Re-
joicing in the opportunity which had occurred,
of offering the throats of these illustrious per-
sons to the daggers of the assassins, or tneir
persons to the effect of these hand-grenades, at
the moment of relaxation from the more active
cares of public life. Ings was equally alive
to it. '^Thistlewood then proposed that a
committee should sit directly, to alter the plan
of assassination, which had been agreed to on
the Sunday morning;" the plan on Sunday
morning, you remember, had been the dividing
the men into so many parties as they knew
they could take off ministers by individu^
assassination, but now the golden opportunity
having presented itself of ministers assembling
at a cabinet dinner, a further mode was to be
had resort to ; for which purpose he proposed a
meeting should be held, and a meeting was
held aecordingly ; the witness says, *' I took
the chair, and called to order; Thistlewood
was going to speak, but I interrupted him
saying, gentlemen, I hope from what I said
yestenlay morning, you nave given it a due
consideration; that was what had been said
to me by Hobbs, the landlord of the White
Hart, respecting the police ofHcer having in-
quired at his house. Upon this. Brunt put
himself into a passion, and so did all of them,
particularly Harrison, who walked about the.
room and tnreatened the first man that attempt-
ed toflingcold water upon the concern, he would
run him through directly with a sword ; upon
this I opened my breast and said, Harrison if
you think that I am not a friend, do it now.
Palin and Potter and Bradburn were in the
room, Palin got up, walked across the room,
and insisted on my being heard; Hall was
also in the room at that time. Brunt then, in
order to obviate any difficulties that might
arise, supposing Hobbs's information to be cor-
rect, proposed that lord Harrowby's house
should be watched, to commence at six
o'clock that evening ;'^ thus they proposed to
ascertain whether there was any truth in the
idea of a suspicion being entertained by go*
vemment; "Davidson, and another man^
whose name I do not recollect, were to be the
first, and Brunt and Tidd were to relieve them
at nine o'clock; Davidson and Tidd were both
present at the time ; the reason why they were
to watch, was to see whether any police offi-
cers or soldiers entered the house, and if so, it
was to be communicated to the committee, and
if nothing of that kind occurred, Brunt insisted
upon it that the business should be done the
following night. If they saw any police offi-
cers or soldiers enter, it would be natural to
suppose that the suspicions of government were
raised, and they were to give information to
the committee. After this proposition of
Brunt's was settled, Thistlewood directly pro-
posed that Tidd should take the chair, in con-
sequence of my interrupting the business ; and
Tidd took the chair accordingly. Thistlewood
then came forwards, and proposed a fresh plai*.
:>C
14911 >■ GEORGE IV.
Trial of WUiiam Daiadtm and
CUM
for the assassioatioa of ministen; he proposed
that he himself should go to lord Harro why's
house with a note in his luindy and tell the
servajit to deliirer it to his lordship, aod to
state that he must have an answer ; at the time
he got io, the others were to rush in directly
afler him, and to secure the servants, present-
ing a pistol to their breast and threatening
them with instant death if they made any re-
sistance ; others were to take the command of
the stair-casesy one party to take the command
of the stairs, leading to the bottom part of the
house, and another party to take the command
of the stairs leading to the upper part of tha
house ; and two men in tbb area, in order to
prevent an^ relief being afforded to his ma-
jesty's miusters in the dining-room, they were
each to be provided with a hand-grenade, as
well as pistols and blunderbusses, and if any
servant attempted to retreat from the upper or
the lower part of the house, or the area, a
hand-grenade was to be thrown among them,
with a view to their destruction; then the
others were to rush into the room at the same
time ; Ings proposed himself to take the com*
mand to lead them into the room in this kind
of way ; as soon as he entered the room, he
was to address their lordships by saying, Now
my lords, I have as good men here as the
Manchester yeomanry; enter citizens and do
Your duty. The t|ro swordsmen were to foU
low in after him ;" they were to be the witness
Adams, who had formerly been a soldier, and
Harrison, who had been in the life-guards;
** on the swordsmen entering the room, they
were to be followed by the pike-men. Ings,
who was a butcher by business, declared he
would follow, and cut every h$ad off as he
came to them. Ings had two bags with him,
and he proposed to bring awav the heads of
lord Castlereagh and lo^ Sidmouth in the
bags ; he said he would have one of lord Cas-
tlereagh's hands, and he would cure that;''
which I understood from the witness, to be
preparing it in some sort of pickle ; '^ as it
would be thought much of at some future time.
At a former meeting, Ings had said that he
would exhibit those heads on poles, aod carry
them through the streets ; after this should be
done, Harrison undertook to go to the Kiiag-
street barracks, and set fire to the shed where
the straw and hav were deposited, and to de-
stroy the whole buUding.'' Then he is asked
whether any further use is to be made of the
heads when thepr were brought away, and he
said yes ; that it had often been talked of, and
that diis discourse finished on the Wednesday
afternoon. " After Ings had proposed to ex-
hibit them on a pole, Thistlewood said, no, the
best way of carrying them would be to put
them each on a pike, and carry them behind
the cannon to terrify the people, and to make
them belipe that tliere was somebody of more
consequence than was then visible, at the head
of the conspiracy. It was proposed after this
by Bradburo, that after tney had been ex-
hibited about the streets of the metropolis for
two or three daff, he voqld stake a box, tf4
enclose them in it, and send it to Irekuid, «
take it over himseU^ to be exhibited there ;"!»
said, *' then it was proposed that after they
had done at lord Harrowby*s, HarrisoD urn to
go to the horse barracks, supported by WHm,
to set them on fire by ^ ball prepared £» tfaat
purpose; others were to proceed to GmjV
inn4ane, to the City-lightrhorse hamcki" is
trutli the barracks of Uie lighlrhorse rolu*
teers ; " and if they met with any iBtem^ai
from the people, it was proposed to ran tbepiliei
through them, and to fire upon them ocasoe-
ally ; and after they met the party in Gay's-
inn-lane, to assist them in taking the tie
pieces of cannon at the light-horse sribJUes, ad
to proceed from thence to the ArtiUeiy-grasaif
to take the six pieces of cannon there; ihii
pBLrty was to be beaded by Cook, asd afta
Cook had got the six pieces of cannon, iie we
to load them, and bring them into the stncL^
Now, when you are by-and-by taking iolo
your consideration whether the conspinqf
had for its object only the taking offihe bhs*
isters, and to end there, or to endesfov is
produce a revolution in the country, by fiat
beginning it in this town; you will recoiled,
that there were found among the artides diese
conspirators had provided for the oocasie^
cartndges made up in bags of flannel, appli*
cable to six-pound cannon, and in foct lued&f
no other purpose; not in the state ii vivch
they were likely to be in the possesses of aoy
deider, or other private individual ttliQlefflf
gunpowder, ** the cannon were to be IwH
and brought into the street, and if then vv
any interruption. Cook was to fire ; if be fow4
the people come over to him to enaUsbinto
advance, he was to take them to the Maosioi*
bouse, and when they got to the ManwW'boiie
they were to djivjide the cannon into two pvt^
place three on each side of the Mansion-botf^
and demand an entrance ;'* they weie to m^
mon the inhabitants of the building to $v#
render, ** and if it was refused, if they did aal
surrender, they were to fire upon it on bw
sides, and when taken, it was pvoposfiii ^
Thistlewood for the seat of the pit>¥isioBi)|»'
vemment." If this is believed, gentkees,
what becomes of the doubt which has bM
suggested, as to the extent of the plot viuffl
was in contemplation ? is this cobsu«c&«
treason ? is this constructive levying of iV
against the king ? If the testimony is lOt m
the prisoner is not guilty of Uie crime ektff*
upon him. " Cook was not to be ^^^^
at lord Harrowby's, he was to copmasd tai
party thgt was to go into the city; and tb«»
was proposed that tl»ey should take tbe Bw*
of England, and plunder it, but the books ^
not to be meddled with, as Thistlewood ibosgw
by preserving them they would oomnaw^*
to uiem somewhat more than they *«** >'^
of. It was proposed, that the P««"* !J^
should go round for tbe purpose of «>atf»*|
eating what they had in view to ^J'L
ciales ; Harrison proposed that the word W*"
1493]
JbdatH Tiddjvr High Trtatan.
A. D; 1899.
i:i404
•
ihould be tW coontanign ; a station was to be
procQfed oear Oxford-street, by Tyborn-turn-
pike; Uiemati appointed to stand tberewas
to pftMKraace the letters 6, u, U the other was
to answer f , •, n. and on his doing that, he was
to be considered as a mad liiendly to their
•bject; after making this arrangement, we se-
parated for the purposes of preparatioa; Da-
vidson and another man went upon the watch
at six o'clock; it was proposed, originally,
tbflt Udd and Brant sbomd go upon the watch
at nine o'clock to relieve them, and they started
for tfiat purpose but Brunt came back in about
five minutes, saying tliat Tidd had called at a
house, and found a man that he had appointed ;
tiiat he was of too much consequence to be
left, and that therefore be oonld not go upon
the watch."
Now^ that there was a watch at the house of
lord Harrowby, is proved not only by the tes»
timony of this witness, but by the two watch*
men, who saw persons looking about, and by
the gentleman's servant who |£aiyed at dominos
with Brunt, so that there has been no attempt
mde to shake that part of the testimony.
llien he says, ** in consequence of that it was
proposed that I should go instead of Tidd, and
aoconiingly I went with Brunt; we saw Da^
vidson there, and relieved biro; we did not
continue in the square all the time, but in the
course of our watch, we went into a public*
house at tne comer of die mews, at the back
of the square ; there Brunt played at dominos ;
I went into the square again at eleven o'clock,
add stopped till the torn of twelve ; I found
all quiet, and I then went home ; I reeelleet
going into Fox^^conrt on Tuesday aftomoon or
enreniog ; on going up stairs, I smelt a strange
smet), and on going in I found Edwards, Ings,
and Hall there ; logs and Hall were employed
in making ilhnnination balls to set fire to the
buildings with, and Edwards was employed in
making touch- paper for the grenades; Hall
was laying the paper on the floor to receive the
balls, to prevent their sticking to the band ; I
went away almost directly/* He then pro-
ceeds to the transactions of the Wednesday ;
lie soys, ** on Wednesday I went to Fox-court,
alMMit two o'clock ; I found Brunt in his own
room ; soon after I went Strange came in, and
two or Uiree strangers afterwards ; I saw some
pistols lying on the floor in Brunt's privade
room; they began to try to put flints into
tkem ; on the last men coming in, Bnint pro-
poeed to go into the back room, which they
did." Now, you will bear in your recollection
wfiat I stated as to the confirmatioii of tho
accomplice ; have you any confiimation of titis
most important ftict ? Have you not Hale the
apprentice of Brunt, who almost in words and
syllables (though he has had no opportunity of
hearing the testimony of Adams) speaks td
persons being in Brunt's private room, to one
of whom he gives the name of Strange, and
states that the rest were strangers ; that they
were ftiating the pistols ; that they conceived
they were not in a place of proper security, and
that they went, therefore, idto that place
which had been made more secure by putting
up Mrs. Brunt's apron ; in this he is confinned
by the circumstance that they removed to that
room in consequence of being engaged in some
transaction which was not to be known^ and
which it was wished should be concestfed:
there is not the slightest imputation attempted
to be thrown upon that young man, the ap-
prentice of Brunt, who gives this (probably
you will think) most important connrmatiou
of the testimony of Adams. Adams proceeds,
^ we went accordingly there with the pistols,
there were no other persons in the room at
that time, except those we brought from Mr.
Brant's room; Thistlewood came in soon
afterwards ; Ings came in in the course of the
afternoon, and within a very little time after
he came in he began to equip himself; before
he came, the strangers were busy in fixing
flints to their pistols, and slings to the cut-
lasses that were in the room ; when TbistlC'*
wood came in, he looked round and said this
looks something like as if you were going to
work ; he clapped his hand on my shouMer,
and asked me how I did ? I said I am rather
unwell, and very low in spirits ; in consequence
of this^ he proposed to Brunt to send for some^
thing to drink to put me in spirits, and di^
rectly after he proposed that there should be
some paper fetcheo, as he wanted to draw op
some bills; Thistlewood gave Brunt some
money, and said he wanted such paper as the
newspapers were printed on ; I proposed to
him to have s6me cartridge-paper, which was
agreed to, and Brunt said that his apprentice
or his boy should fetch it; he went out fo^
that purpose, and the cartridge paper was
brought ; a' table and c^air vrere brought iii
from Brunt's room, and Thietiewood sat down
and wrote three bills. The words writCed in
large writing letters on those papers, were
these, Your tyrants are destroyea; the friends
of liberty are called upon to come forward*;, the
provisional government is now sitting*-— James
Ings, secretary, February 23, 1820.*'
As I pass along, let us ask ourselves, I ought
rather to say you will ask yourselves^ can you
receive any eonfirmation of this part of Adsim's
testimony, of the scene he describes as to per-
sons assembling and midung preparations, for
which purpose they commence in Brunt's
room ; that is not considered secure from ob^
serration ; they are advised to retire into ano-
ther room, and they do so. Hale gives you
the same account. Adams teHa you, that it
btcame necessary that something should be
written, and Hale tella you that he was applied
to for a piece of paper, and that he carried
that into the room> and that then he wao de
sired to fetch some cartridge paper, and that
that was carried into the room ; tnat something
was wawted— a table and chair— they were
carried in ; he cannot give you any forther ac-
count of what was done with the paper in this
room. The learned counsel for the prisoners
says, I wish we could have seen this procla-
14951
1 GEORGE IV.
Tria ^JFtOtam DandtoH and
[im
mation, I could tl^en have told you it was only
a riot to set a few houses on fire, or destroy
the ministers. The language of Uiis, if it is
correctly given, is unequivocal ; it is, '' Your
tyrants are destroyed ?" Whose tvrapts ? The
tyrants of the country. '^The friends of li-
berty are called on/' all who can read the
English language, ''to come forward;" for
what ? you will answer that question for your-
selves ; but if you want any thing further that
is answered, " The provisional government is
sitting.*' You do not want Hale or any body
else to come and satisfy the requisition of the
learned counsel that he saw this proclamation,
which I should apprehend would be submitted
only to the confidential and supposed safe eye
of a oo-conspirator. Would they unfurl these
till the fires were lighted, and persons began
to inquire what was meant by fires being light-
ed in different parts of the metropolis ? Is
there any requisition for the means of prepar-
ing something of that kind ? the testimony of
Hale is that to which you must look for the pur-
pose of answering, whether you have received
Upon that important point confirmation of the
testimony of Adams.
Hien he says, ** Thistlewood was writing the
third bill; and on my looking at him, I per-
ceived him to be very much agitated, ana he
eould not write any more ; he wished some-
body else to take the pen, and proposed that
Hall should do it, which he renised. There
was a strange man in the room, who refused
at first to take the pen, but afterwards took it,
and proceeded to write other bills ; these bills
were to be stuck up at the side jof different
buildings that were to be set fire to, in ^order
to inform tlie public of what had been done."
What necessity was there to take means to io/"
form the public with what had been done, if
the object was only to cut off fifteen ministers,
without any ulterior purpose 7 the public would
know that much too soon, by finding some of
the first families in this country in mourning,
in consequence of the dreadful explosion which
was intended to have been made. For what
was it to be communicated to the public (ex-
cept for the ulterior object) that the friends of
liberty were desired to come forward now,
that the provisional government was sitting ?
Then Thistlewood described himself incapable,
from agitation or indisposition, to go on, but
still there was something more to be done, and
Hall having refused^ another person took it and
wrote soroetliing by the dictation of Thistle-
wood, which I understand, on one of the ear-
lier trials, it was ruled, could not be received
in evidence, and therefore is not offered upon
this ; that is therefore entirely a blank. Tnen
he says, ^' Ings accoutred himself by putting
his belt around his loins, another hanging upon
his shoulder to support a cutlass with, and a
couple of bags, like soldiers haversacks, one
over each shoulder ; he put on his great coat
afterwards ; the belt round his loins, which
was to contain a brace of pistols ; on viewing
^imsel^ he perceived that he had forgot to
bring his steel vrith him ; he prodneed spos
that occasion a large bntcher*s knife, round &i
handle of which he had wound wax-end, wUck
he stated was for the purpose of preveBtiDg
the handle of it slipping when be was doia;
the job; he said he bad prepared it for tint
purpose;" that is, the purp<»e of cattiogflff
the heads of lord Casttereagh and lordSid-
mouth. " Bradbum came up, saying, be vidb*
ed Thistlewood to send some penon to the
men he had collected together at a spot vhoi
they might be more handy. Tidd wu ip*
pointed for that purpose ; he was not roj
willing to go ; he said, as they were Imhnea,
he thought it would be better for one of tUr
ovm country to go, as he would do bettervkk
them ; but it not being convenient to sendooe
of their own countrymen, he went Palis cane
in, and as Thistlewood and Brunt were ootio
the room he began to address himself to the
people in the room, saying, gentlemen, I hope
all present know what they are met berew;
I hope you all know what it is, and (hat m
will give it due consideration ; in the first pbo»
inform yourselves whether the assassinatincf
ministers is likely to be of consequence to jmr
country ; if you think it vrill, then in the sen
place you ought to come to a detenninadoo to
stick true to each other, for unless yoadoso
you can do no good ; and if any man ii leea
after the work is begun to show the least sifBi
of cowardice, that man ought to be inn tkn^
upon the spot.'' Here, he says, he wtsister*
rupted by a tall man in the room, wilORBiBie
he does not know, saying, '' he coshi fvetty
well see the meaning of his speech; bat, sayi
he, yon speak as if all that are in the nan
knew what we are met here for; that is aot
the case ; that is what I and some of as viat
to know ; I am not afraid of my own life, psr
should any man that turns out on sncfa a thiag
as this be afraid of his Ufe; I wiU be the fist,
if I see any man a coward, to run him throigk
Palin was going to speak again, hot at tin
moment Brunt came in, and obsenriagy "J
suppose, an alteration in the conntenancesof
the men in the room, wished to knov the
cause ; the tall inan replied, that there sen
some in the room who aid not know whit t^f
were met there upon, and they wished tolawr
what they were going to do. Brunt dnaay
said, this is not the room to know ^^[^
along with me to a room in the EdgewaiMOVf
there I will tell you ; and any man that g»
along with me I will treat him with aooethiBJ
that is good to drink, in order to put him ijto
spirits for what we are going about. *« ^
man replied, I hope whoever is going on tw
business will not get drank, for adninkw »•
in such a business is not fit to be tn»tM; »
will run Mmself into the hands of his cnemes.
Brunt then began to put his men into iBcr»-
ment to go to the Ed ge ware-road, sajffljJiWj
Palin would want that room to bring bis «»
to. I did not sec Davidson at fo^-^^V;
the lime I am speaking of, but he was J^
quently at the meeiings there; he was*??
1497)
Richard Tiddf&r High Tnaton.
A. D. 1820.
[149«
meeting on the Sunday when this meeting was
arrang^. The first of my knowing him was
on the 10th of January, before I went to prison.
After Brunt had put his men on the move, I
went up Oxford-street, and met Thistlewood
in the £dgeware-road ; Brunt and another man
were with me at that time, and we all went
together to the stable in Cato-street. When
we went into the stable, on the ground-floor,
I saw Davidson and Wilson, apparently doing
something to the pikes." Then he says, '' I
went up into the loft: the number I found
assembled, including those that were below,
were about six or seven, or there might be
more. There was a bench, like a carpenter's
bench, in the loft, and on it there were pistols
and cutlasses ; there were more men came in
the course of the evening, and Thistlewood
counted them ; there were eighteen up stairs
and two below. I had a blunderbuss, which I
took off and laid upon the bench, and a broom-
stick that had been prepared for the reception
of a bayonet for Brunt ; I delivered them ooth.
Tidd was not there at that time ; Brunt was
up in the loft when I went up, and Thistlewood
went up before me. When I went up, This-
tlewood and Brunt were in discourse together ;
Thistlewood seemed rather agitated for fear
(as it appeared to me afterwards), that Tidd
would not come ;" you will recollect that Tidd
had, according to the testimony of the other
witnesses, imaertaken to conduct some other
persons who were not arrived ; that according
to the testimony of Hale, other persons were
expected to call, and did call, some of whom
were conducted by Hale to the White Hart,
and others who knew the White Hart had been
sent there ; and it appears on the evidence of
Monument, and according to the evidence of
his brother, which is unimpeached, that he
was to meet him, and did meet him ; and that
when he arrived, he told him he had other
men to wait for, but would not wait longer
than seven o'clock ; but the pledge that he
would come there, you 6nd redeemed by his
appearance soon afterwards, attended by the
witness Monument ; then he says, *' Ings be-
gan to stamp and swear, saying he hoped they
would not stop now for if they did, he should
either hang himself or cut his throat; and
just after this, Tidd came ; before Tidd came,
Brunt turned himself round to the bench,
and said he would venture his life that Tidd
would come; that he was confident of it;
and shortly after Tidd came into the room. I
afterwards saw Tidd talking to Thistlewood ;
they both seemed a little agitated ; Thistlewood
seeing me look at him turned away; and Tidd
earoe towards me, and I said to him, Tidd, do
not you think this is a pretty set out ; do you
think it is possible for toe men here to do that
which is talked of; Tidd said, no, it never can
be done; Thistlewood said, I hope, for God's
sake, you will not think of dropping the con-
cern now ; if you do, it will turn out a second
Despard's job." Gentlemen, upon the subject
0i wliat the ultimate object of the conspiracy
was, take this declaration, if they dropped
the concern, then it would be another Despard's
job ; if you believe it was made it is of^g^eat
importance at this period; if all the police
officers in London, supported not only by that
gallant officer lieutenant Fitzclarence and his
piquet, but by a regiment of hussars had come,
they might have said, why, what do you want
with us? but take us into custody if you
please ; but Thistlewood said, if you retire
now, it will be another Despard's job. If the
sole object of that conspiracy was to kill the
ministers, and to plunder houses, that would
not be high treason. What was Despard's
job? that was a project and intention to
summon London from St. James's to Tower-
hill, constituting the crime of high treason ;
this is, if you believe the testimony, for I have
said to you more than once if you do not
believe the testimony it all vanishes; but
I desire you to ask yourselves, what the
character of the conspiracy is; is it a
conspiracy only with the intention that they
talk of? Is it to destroy the ministers only,
(not that that is a light offence) or was
it from an idea that the people, as they repre-
sented, were desirous of a change, and that if
they could strike that blow they should succeed
in their ultimate objects f If they could carry
the beads of the ministers through the streets
at the tail of their cannon, did they propose to
themselves any thing short of that the accom-
plishment of which I know they had no
rational ground for expecting ? For I hope
to God, the constitution established in this
happy land stands too much in the conviction
of blessings enjoyed, for such men to succeed
in the extinguishment of the government, and
the bringing about a revolution ; but you will
have to ask yourselves, whether this was not a
desperate attempt to effect that most desperate
plan. ''Then Thistlewood said, there are
quite men enough in the room, but you seem
to be frightened for fear of not having strength
enough ; he said supposing lord Harrowby has
sixteen servants in his house, they will not
be prepared as you are ; but not only that, but
they will be terrified, and from going into the
house to coming out of it again, will not
exceed ten minutes; he said then, that he
thought fourteen men would be enough to go
into the room ; it was put to all in the
room whether they were willing to go,
and on their consenting, there were four-
teen men picked out for the sole purpose
of going into the room to do the murder,
the other six were to secure the servants,
to guard the stairs and the area;" then
he is asked, whether any thing was done in
the way of separating the fourteen from the
rest ; and he says, *' the men stood where they
were, and Brunt produced a bottle ; the four-
teen agreed to go into the room ;" he then
mentions several of them, but I am not sure
that he mentions them all. ''Thistlewood
was one, Ings was another, Brunt was another,
Harrison, Wilson and Davidson alto were pro-
1499] 1 GEORGE lY.
Trial of WilUam Davidson and
[1500
posed ; Davidson wm not at thai tine isk the ! pose of altering his maDoer, isd do nek
rooUy be iraa down below ; Bradbnrn alM ' adWoe had been given to him ; then be mjt^
was one, and othen whose names I cannot " I never miied ia political ndety ii wf
now recollect ; those were then separated to a life before I saw ThisUewosd ; I hare hi wf
different part of the rooA from the rest^ and political opinions^ bat never joined a pnt^;
while the sepaiation was foing on an alanrm i never thoaght it lawful to sweep off iStm
was given below ;" beiore tto time, Brunt bad men in eokl Mood ; I thought it was i vs;
addressed those who did not exactly know cruel act ai the first proposal ; it was fiiM pro*
what their preparations weie; he says, Iftr. ' posed to ase on the 2Dd of Januazy^ and not'
Brunt made an address to the people; he , withstandiBg that I consented lobe introdieed
turoad round to the bench again, and said, > to Mr* Thistlewood, ten days sfterwuds^tid
** yon seem to think there is not solBcient i from that time to the 33rd of Febniaiy,lsi
strength to go there ; he declared that if there , continued^ attend meetings where thitontta
were not more than eight or ninoi he himself , was debated settled and detemiaed osi ai
was determined to go ; he directly said, if ! even was chairman once at one of the cb»
there were not more than five or sii men, he mittees; the committee had no nane; Ike
would go ; and if be fonnd himself in danger, he . body that vras together in the roosi at CaiSi
would blow the house down over their beads ; , street was tbe largest number I eier nv
then'' be says^ ** I beard a sort of bustle below
stairs ; directly after this, at the bottom of tbe
ladder, the word was given, halloa! shew a
light ; and on this Tbistlewoed turned to the
bench, took a casklle and held it at tbe head of
the ladder ia the room; he looked down^ and
saw persons ^ooming, «nd then turned ronnd
and set the candle upon the bench again ; on
this, they began to sidle off into the little
loom ; he says this waa the first time I saw the
little room ; oflkseis came np the ladder, and
look the comDHmd of tbe room with tbeir
pistols presented; Smithers was killed, and
the lights were pot out| e pisiel went off, and I
made my escape ; when Thisilewood said that
fourteen men wonld be sufficient, Tidd was
present, but I am pretty sare that he was not
one that waa to go into tbe room; he was
Present also when the assent was given to
bistlewood's proposal, thai they should go
on with the measure, and likewise when Brant
made his speech ; that was after I had made
the remarii, that I did not think we could ao*
conmlish the work. I was first apprehended
on Friday the 25tb; when I made my escape^
I went back to my own place, and remained
there till I was apprehended. I was after*
wards examined at Whitehall."
Then on his cross-examination, he says,
^'I abandoned m^ religion and became a dis-
believer in Christianity ;*' he had been • eda-»
cated and passed his life up to the age of forty-
five, as a Christian; he says, ^I am now a
Christian, I came back to the belief of Chris-
tianity about the 34th, but I was convinced
before ;*' the 34th was the day after he found
himself at home, after this meeting in Calo-
etreet ; he says, ** though I had been convinced
before, I did not come back exactly till the
^th;" then he is asked, and I do not mean
to deny that the form in which the question
was put was proper, whether the fear of the
baiter had not some effect upon him ; he says,
-'^ I do not mean to deny that;'^ then the coun-
sel asked him, whetb^ since his last exami-
«alion, he had not bad some advice given
to him as to tbe altering his manner ; he
said ao» ha was out of heJth, be had been
Inqaenlly examined, that he had no pur*
collected together to my knowledge fhuft
^ there was a talk of a vast many acre mm*
Uiag ; I could not have brought any nm iilo
theMd; aM I agreed to do was, tecoatiibM
myself; IhOee in the comiMttee kaev whi
was going to be done, but there ^eie sone
that attended the meeliags, who did aetkaiv;
I knew what was inteoded lo be done; ike
saaae party that were to do the wasted jd^
weee to go to Gfa/s-iim lane ; when ikecA*
end job was done, which wm not to takeip
abo^ ten mionles, the same party eeic to p
to Gray's-ian-kne; Cook was to Jwid tta
patfty to take the cannon at the AitilloT'
gromd, that was not the west-end-jobpsrt;,!
did not know where Mr. Cook's psitf «tf lo
come from ; I have seen Mr. Cook tedf ;
Mr. Palin and otbers were to fire thetomt
but I do not know who they were, dm ^
they consisted of; nobody ol^ccted to the
pioclamations ; it was proposed by ^^''^
wood, but not pat from the diair, tkat w
hand4iiUs should be stock up agaiait m
houses; I do not know what beesme of thmr
nor who were to stick them up; Idoaotkoov
Thomas Chambers, I never called oa bin,
this was with a view to the contradidioB bf
Chambers, who was afterwards examiaed. 1
do not know that ever I was aoqaaioted vitt
such a man.*' In answer to a qeestioD,^
ther on the night of the S3rd, he and Edvon
celled on Chambers, and desired to 1^**^
arms with him; he says, ^' I never a*J«j
wards after the Wednoday tne™'^» ,x[
will swear I did not call on Chamben; I d»
not know Umt I erer was in his house; ee in
not solicit him to be permitted to les^e n^
there ; I do not even know Healhcod-covt,
which was where Chambeis lived; •Iw*
omitted a great many things in my w^
to^^ay; I stated befotre, that laenwg
were to be sent to the out-fwrts, topr^
any gentleman leaving the kingdom ert^
am order fimm the provisional go*<e^le<B^
and Brighton was to be taken t^fo"** ^
the seaports were X6 be pbmdered, if tber p0^
mitled any person to ga out of tbe kiagd^i
I cannot si^ where the force wss to ejJI
from to do thisi but they expected tbe pesp
1501]
Eichard Tidd/or High Treason:
A. D. 1820.
C1503
t» join them ; I was not A Jeftder, I had not
. tbiit aiabiiiofi iboJti vie ; I did not expect that
they MTould bring thiafs ito sueh % pass ;*' tiien
b«i0 asked, what were his motirtt$; a«d be
4fiy9, '' I bad a reason for it« my ^jeet was, to
acarch fofther into tbe principles of Brunt;''
t^t was a blaweable curiosity ; lie sRys, ** I
bad a fooliab a«d curiotis i4e8, and every naan
may ran himsoU' iolo dasiger by that ; that was
my motife; I bad not been long acquainted
^ith Bnint, before X thous^ Uiere was some-*
UuDg wipng in huD ; llhat was my reasfon for
jtfaaiag ia this plot ; I do not know a person of
the name of Whatman;" that turns out to ba
correct, at least no sncb person is called.
Then he is asked, whether the priscmer Tidd,
when apjne one said to him here is a pretty
bttsiaeas, do you think there are enough here
to do such a job, did not reply that he had
baen deceived in the business, and that he
woaid have nothing to do with it; and he says,
^'Tidd vnadfi »o such observation, but his
answer wu, no, it never can be diooe, and
that was all that \ie said ; " he says, ** David-
aon was not at the meeting on the 23rd ; I do
not recollect semng him armed when he was
in Cato-street, I saw him there both in ^e
fttable and up in the loft ; I did not observe
that he had any arms ; I saw that he waa very
busy amongst those who wme preparing thea^*
selves with arms.''
On bis re-examination, he saya, ^* I remem«
ber a person bringing 500 bnlleis to the room
in Foz-<ourt ; I became an infidel from reading
Paine's Age of Reason, which I received from
the priaoner Tidd ; Potter and Palin wese not
in Cfato-street ; there were men there whom I
knew nothing about; I did not know Cook's
party; Hall was in the room at the time the
proclamations were written." Hall is not a
prisoner now under indictment, and the ob*
;ervation mjsant to be conveyed to yon on
:he part of the Crown is this, that if the ac-
count given by the witness Adams is incorrect,
ind that there was nothaafc written on this
lartridge paper in the form of proclamations,
fall DDigst have been called to prove these
seta ; and as it has been urged to you by the
ttonioy-geperal in his reply, it is undoubtedly
1^ ; be could have been called to prove that
• was not one of the party so assembled, or>
dmittiog that he was one of the party
> aaseisbled, that no such prodamation was
rittfOo, and he would, aathe Attomey^general
aa aaidy have subjected himself to no con-
^quencea such as were supposed ; be mig^
Lve objected to any such question as would
Lve .a tendency to criminate himself, if pro*
>eed9 and it would have been the duty of the
ourt to have cautioned him.
Tbia being the evidence of the acoomplice^
be receivod as you have been told on aU<
rmer ocoaiions, with all manner of jeah>u8y,
th conatderable doubt, to be acted upon
th care» they now proceed to call witnesses,
im wh<nD they submit, that it derives most
landant confinnation*
The next witness is Eleanor Walker, the
servant and nieoe of Mrs. Rogers, of No. 4,
FoxHsourt, Gray's-inn-4ane. She says, ^ Brant
lodged there, and occupied the two fnowC
rooms on the second floor ; there was a back
room on the same floor. In the month of
January last, Brunt introduced Ings to take
that room, and it was afterwards taken un-
furnished, ai three shillings a week ; Ings said,
perhaps he might bring his goods in in a week ;
out he never did bring any goods in.'' Tlds is
the whole of her evidence.
Mary Rogers, the mistress and aunt of the
last witness, says, *^ In January last, the two*
pair of stairs back-HroosB was Let to a penMm
who tamed out to be Ings ; he occupied the
room four or five weeks, leaving one week
unpaid ; in the course of that time I made in<3
qniry of Brunt, who and what Ings was, and
he told me that he was a butcher, and that he
knew nothing more of him than seeing him in
a poblio-honse, and hearing him ioquire for
a lodging ; he never brought any furniture in.'^
She says, ^oa one evening, I saw three men go
up stairs, one of them was a black man ;" she-
was not asked, nor did she suggest that perw
son was the prieoner Davidson, hot merely
that a person of his oompleaion was one of
the man who went up.
Ibe next witness is that important one ta*
whom in passing along I have repeatedly
called your attention, Joseph Hale, the a|>»'
prentice of Brunt. He says, ^ I lived witb-
Bmnt in Fox-court; he occupied two rooms,-
one as a workshop the other to live in ; i slept
ia the workshop; I remember the backHWoom*
on the same floor being occupied in January
last by Brunt and Ings ; alter they had looked
at it together, Brunt said to Ings, it will do,,
go down and give them a shilling, and he'
went down ; I had known lags about a fort-
night before ; I saw him twice with Thistle*
wood in Brunt's workshop in the course of-
that fortnight; when Ings had taken the room,'
in the evening he came and asked Mrs. Brunt'
for the key, and she gave it him ; he and Hall
cama togather, and I believe other persons
came thare that night ; my master was taken
up on the 24th of February ; from the time '
that the room was taken till that time, there*
were meetings held in that room ; they were
mostly held about seven o'clock in the
evening ; at those meetings I have seen Thistle-
wood, lags, Davidson the prisoner, Brunt,
Bradbom, Adams, Stmnge, Potter, Hall, Ed-
wards, and Tidd. Tidd often came there. I
was once at his lodgings in the Hole-in-the-
wall passage. Brook 's-market ; the door of that -
room at Brunt's was sometimes open when
I passed it; and upon one occasion, I saw
some long poles like branches of trees, rongh ai
they came from the tree about twenty in num-
ber ; daring the time the room was used ia '
that way, I have heard hammering and sawing
in it. On the Sunday before my master was
taken up, there was a meeting in that room
in the morning ; I believe it was a larger one
1503] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trial of iViUiam Davidson and
um
thtn usual ; the persons whom I have named
were there, and I am particularly sure that
TIdd was there, and Davidson also ;" you will
bear that in your recollection, not only as it
goes to confirm the testimony of Adams, but
as it will assist you in taking into consider-
mtion that which you have heard to-day from
the prisoners at the bar in their own defence ;
** they went away one or two at a time ; my
master was in the room with them ; and aAer
the meeting broke up, Strange came out with
him, and they went into my master's room.
There were meetings on the Monday and
Tuesday in that back room, and on the Wed-
nesday there were a number of persons there.
About two o'clock, Strange and a person whom
I did not know, came into our workshop; they
were fiinting five or six pistols, and there were
persons oreriooking them; the stranffer ob-
served that. Brunt told them to go into the
back room, which they did." Now this witness
has had no opportunity of concerting any story
with Adams ; you will ask yourselves, whether
this b not a most important confirmation, not
only as it respects the general story of Adams,
but as it respects the parties engaged in this
conspiracy, and the share they were takine in
it in the course of the night, when proceeding
forth to the rendezvous in Cato-street, for that
mat work they had called the west-end job.
Then he says, ** in the course of the afternoon
there were several persons in the back-room ;
and Thistlewood came out and asked for a
Eiece of writing paper, which I gave him, and
e went into the oadc room with it. After
that Brant came out, and told me to go and
get six sheets of cartridge paper. I went and
bought them, and gave them to him, and he
took them into the back room; my master
went out about six o'clock; after this my
mistress wanted her table for tea, which vras
ordinarily in our living room." They had in
that room the table out of Brunt's living room
which on ordinary occasions they had not, and
you will recollect, that he tells you that Thistle-
wood asked him for writing paper, and that
tliey had at that meeting cartndge paper also.
** After some of the men were gone, my mis-
tress sent me to the back-room to get the
table." He did not go in and get it, because
he knew there were people still there. ^ I
knocked at the door, and Potter opened it,
and gave me the table out. After this, Tidd
called, and came into Mrs. Brunt's room, and
Mrs. Brunt shewed him a pike-head and a
sword, which hung in one of the cupboards,
and asked him what she could do with them ;
he said, if she would give them to him, he
would take them away, and he took them away
from the front living room into the back-room."
He says '* after that I heard persons go down
stairs from that room, and after that a person
came and told my mistress, that if any persons
called, she was to send them to the White
Hart, which is a publ icehouse close by ; shortly
after that, three persons came, and my mistress
directed them to the White Hart ; they did not
know the way, and I went and shentd tita
the way ; when I came back, and had becoat
the door about two or three minutes, Potter
came up, and I directed him to the White Hut
also; there were other persons with him; 1
did not go with them, as Potter appeared t9
know the way ; they went away.'' 'Hus ii
the whole of what he states previoQs to thit
which we now know to have been the tnsi-
action whidi took place in CUMtneL
** About nine o'dock in the evening," be w^
'* Brant came home, the tail of his great cnt
and his boots were very muddy ; he said tokis
wife, it is all np, or vrords to that effect; be
appeared confused. He said, he bad nved hii
life, and that was all ; that where he bad ben,
a lot of officers came in. Afterwards, anotber
person, a stranger to me, came in, and Bmt
shook hands with him, and asked bio, if be
knew who had informed ? and be replied, No,
he did not. From the manner of speaUigte
each other, it appeared to me that thej bii
been together. 'Ibe stranger said, he had bid
a dreadful blow upon iiis sidc^ and tbathevii
knocked down ; and my master said, then i»
something to be done yet. After this coore^
sation, they both went avray together;" it«a»
apparent that what had happened to eaeb «f
them had passed at the same place, and ibK
the conversation as to who had iafonBed re-
lated to the same transaction, in vhick tkef
had both been parties, so that this nao bid
been knocked down and injured at the phc^
where he. stated that the officers bad cone iiv
•and he had only saved his life. Theobesiys,
'* after they were gone, Mrs. Brant and 1 «at
into the back room, and I saw in thecopboiid
some rolls of brown paper, with tar in thest
and four large balls made of striafr tarred, h
big as my two fists," some of those tbiop
which have been presented to yon by seijast
Hanson. ** I have heard since that tbfftfc
hand-grenades. I also saw some flanoel ba^
two of them were full of something, dieetbai
were empty, and some cartridge Py^^J^J!"
iron pot oelonging to Brant," for die pwpj*
of heating the materials. '^ Mrs. Bhut asd I
left them where we found them. Braote'**
home about eleven o'clock at night; hefiMbe
went to bed, he told me to get up ai «««
I could in the moroing and deao hii bo^
and I did so ; he aftenvards asked ne^ « J^
knew the Borough ? and I told him, ya; ■!
then asked me if I knew SnowVfiefds? twi
said, no; he told me, to go to KirbjHrtitrti
SnowVfields, to a man of the nameofPMlff;
he said, I was to Uke the things thatweiew
the back room ; we went into the nwij ^
gether, with two rush baskets ; and he iwdj
to put in the things that were in the ^^V^
and that I had seen there before, >ntt>"®*r
baskets, which I did. After that, wjeofT
baskets was tied up in a blue apron ^^•'^JSJ
to Mrs. Brant, which had for some ti»« J'JJ
been used as a curtain to the window ot
back room ; the other basket was not ti»J
in any thing ; we went into Bni»t'>w**»
^
14061
tOthafd Tiddjby Mtgh 7V«w*ii.
A. D. ISSOi
[1S06
«hil» we were thei« looking out for some-
thing to ti6 the other basket in, two oflBcers
came in and took Brunt into custody , and took
possession of the two baskets containiog the
things ai)d the iron pot." I think that is the
whole of his evidence in*chief.
On bis cross-exaMination, he is asked, if he
knows a man of the name of Dwyer? atid he
says, no ; then he says, <* I know Adams and
- Edwards ; they were often at Brant's ; bnt I
was not near enough to hear their voices when
they spoke. When the others addressed Thistle-
wood, they sometimes called him T. and some-
times Arthur ; the rest used to call each other
by their names. I have often heard a man
e^led by his christian name, and sometimes
by the hrst letter of his surname. Edwards
was there oftener than Adams."
This is the whole of the testimony given you
by this person : and no attempt is made to
break in upon h^ credit, by shewing that he
had been let into the dangerous secret ; but
being employed iit his master's business as an
apprentice, he became from that circumstance
acquainted with the feet that there had been,
tot a considerable time before, secret meetings
In that room, taken for Ings the butcher; that
at that room there were such implements as
those found afterwai^s at Cato^street, and at
the lodgings of Tidd ; that there w^re pikes,
band-grenades, and pike-staves, and that there
were swords, which might well proceed ftom
some persot^ engaged in the preparing them
in a further state of manuftictnre to make them
fit for use ; the sawing off their ends, and pre-
paring them to receive the pike heads, wnich
nave now been produced before you, and which
appear applicable to those staves; besides
that, he shews you that on that very afternoon
cm which they were proceeding to that ultimate
obfect, whatever it was, these persons were
proceeding exactly in the manner in which
Adams has stated. Adams, you know, was
examined not in hie hearing ; has been in cus-
tody ever since the Friday ; and who, there-
fore, has had no intercourse whate\'er with
tilis ^iHfness. He has confirmed, almost in
words, some of the most important tmrts of the
traiidtfclion stated by Adams to nave taken
pface flft Bruntf 9, on more occasitm^ than one ;
111 Will be ibv you to ask yonrtelves, whether, if
tbe dase rested here, and the qtiestidtt to be
propounded to you was, whether you believed
the stery told by Adams, it had- of had not
received such confirmation from unsuspected
^fnarters, from the mistress of the house and
her servant, and from the apprentice of Brunt,
air to itiduce you to believe that it was true,
and tftat it was not invent^ -^invented for
t]topuff|M]8«of implicating in guilt eli^en men,
sHnd' tfab}ectittg them to the forfeiture of their
\hM» : \t\9 fot you to consider, whether it be,
Bir it is presented to your minds and con-
sefetaces, a fiction and an invention, or tiie
ncirratien'of tmth, though communicated to
f ott by the mouth of an accomplice. It is fit
Lo-omerv« on that, in passing, that unless by
VOL XXXIII.
softie spirit of intuition, it seemd impossible
diat Hale should have been found in such a
coincidence as to the persons present—^the
things exhibited-^the transactions on the va^
nous days on which those persons met — the
instructions with respect to other persons ex-
pected to call, persons calling afterwards, and
the instructions given to them accordingly—-
the conducting some and directing others td
the place at which they were likely to Bnd
those for whom they were inquiring: it id
impossible, as it appears to me (but it is fo^
you to exercise yoiir jud?m^nt upon it), that
this story of Hale's shoum have so wonderful
and extraordinary a coincidence with the facts
narrated by Adams, not' communicated to Hale
down to the moment of his examination before
yon on trial, unless each of those persons were
teHing that which each for himself observed.
They then proceed to call to you other wit-
nesses, in order to give confirmation to the
te^imony of the accomplice, Adams ; the first
is a person of the name of Thomas Smart, a
watchman in St. George's, Hanover-square ; he
tells you, that on Tuesday the 22nd of Fe-
bruary, in taking bis walks in Grosvenor-square,
about half-past eight, he observed" four men ;
he says, ^ they were looking through the pa-
lisades ; they stood at the corner, when I went
up to them at Mr. Maberie/s house ; they were
at that time looking abotit, and I went up to
see what they wanted ; they asked me what
o'clock it was, and I told them it was near
nine. I thought they were Very suspicious
characters, one of them had a stick, one was a
man of colour ; I called Bissix, who was also a
watchman there, to make observation, telling
him I saw some suspicious characters." This
witness does not affect at all to ha\e any
knowledge of the prisoner Davidson ; there-
fore, it might be for any thing this witness
knows, any other person of his complexion.
Bissix vi then called, and he tens you that
he was a watchman in Grosvenor-square on
the night of the 22nd of February ; be says
** Smart was there at the same time ; I saw
two men in: the square that attracted my notice,
thev passed us and asked what time it was ; we
told them it was near ftine o'clock, and they
passed along; they took particular notice of lord
Harrowb/s house, and some other houses in
the square; and one of them, a man of colour,
bad a stick in his hand, larger than persons
usually have."
The use' that is made of tfa!^ is to confirm
the narrative given yt>u by Adams ; that in'
consequence of his communication of the im-
pre^ion whidi Hobbs had instilled intd him,
that tlierewere suspicions afloat in the minds of
the police officers and the secretary of state,
that somethtng* was wrong, it was dertermined a
watch should be set and relieved from time td
time ; Adams tells you, that the prisoner Da-
vidson was one of that watch ; the two watch-
men tell you, not indeed that Davidson was
one of that watch, but that tliere were persons
there whose appearance, whose conduct, whose
5D
15071 1 GEORG£ IT.
TruU^WUIumDrnmbMati
CIS08
denetnofy created suspicion in their miDds,
and was of a nature indaciDg them to beliere
that they were persons watching lord Harrow-
by *s house and other houses, to see what was
going in and comine out of those houses, cor-
responding with the account given that a
watch was set to enable the committee to come
to a determination whether they were betrayed
or not, by perceiving whether soldiers or police
officers were introduced into that neighbour^
hood, aye or no ; these witnesses prove, that
one of the persons on that watch was a man
of colour, who might have bee'o, but is not
proved to be, the prisoner Davidson ; I say,
though it would have gone higher, if they
could have identified Davidson to be one of
that watch, yet it is a strong confirmation of
the witness Adams, that there was a watch,
and that one of the men so watching, was a
man of colour.
The next witness that they call to you is
Heniy Gillan; he says, he lives at No. 15,
Mount-street, Berkeley-souare ; and nobody
has urged an observation tiiat is discreditable
to him ; nobody suspects tliat he has done any
thing which ought to bring his testimony into
discredit ; jie stands before vou then a person
as well entitled to credit, for anv thing that
appears in this cause, as any one otyou. would,
it you were to be sworn in court. "[Uie account
he gives is that he sometimes at his leisure
went into a public-house called the Rising Sun ;
be says, *' 1 was there on the 22nd of February
last; the house is situated at the comer of
Adams-mews and Charles-street : I was there
in the evening between nine and ten o'clock ;
I saw Adams and Brunt come in :** Now you
will recollect what Adams has said about this;
Tidd was to have gone with Brunt to relieve
Davidson and the first watch ; but Brunt came
back, and said, that Tidd had met with a man
of too much importance to part with, and that
therefore somebody ebe must be substituted in
his place; I was the man substituted in his
place, and I went with Brunt ; we went to our
watch, but not thinking it necessary to be upon
the watch every moment, we relieved ourselves
from^the fatigue of that watch by going into a
public-house, and not only that, but to avoid
neing ourselves too much the objects of ob-
servation ; we had some refreshment, bread and
cheese and beer, and Brunt played two games
of dominos with a young man in that house,
who was a stranger to Adams, down to the
very moment of his being examined here.
Those who had the care of the interests of the
public in conducting this prosecution, probably
went to the public-house and so traced out
this young man. He says, ^ I saw two men
there ;" Who were those two men ? " Brunt
and Adams.'' Did Brunt go there as a watch-
man that night? Did Adams go there as a
watchman that night? Were they there during
the period which Adams speaks of? Ask this
young man, an unsuspected witness ; " I play-
ed two games at dominos with Brunt; I left
the house at near ten o'clock, leaving them in
diathouse.^ They submit to yoa on the putof
the prosecution, that this is a most impntiiit
circumstance, in order to giveconfiimttkiitB
the testimony of Adams, not in some diai-
stances quite collateral to the subject of w
present inquiry, bat intimately conoeclcd vdl
one of those transactions of that night, vhid
had for its object to enable the coaspintMsto
determine, whether they should go on to the
completion of their object, or should retire (na
it, on the conviction that they were sospecHdt
and that precautions were takeo.
They then call to you a person of the bum
of John Hector Morrison ;---he tetts ]pwi thttk
is a journeyman to Mr. Underwood, of Drof-
lane, a cutler; he says, ^ lags biooght aivod
to me to be ground, on Christmas eve ; be gui
me directions, that it was to be grooiid inn
the heel to the point, and also the back to be
ground, which was done for him ;" be siji,
*' he fetched the sword away 4iifflseif ; be cn>
ployed me again afterwards ; he biongk k
another to be ground as the first was, vhkh
was done and delivered to him ;'' it vaiibaip
to the extreme, and that which a cutler's art
could put upon it appears to have bees ande
still more destructive and more miscbievoasby
having been sharpened highly upon a stoae, ir
a steel, after it passed out of his hand. Tbe
Crown submit to yon that thb is a stroag or-
cumstand to support the testimooy of tbe
accomplice ; he has told yon lags «ai umI
with such an instrument as this, and tbe eatkr
tells you, that he received it from lagit ^^
this remarkable instruction, and that be after-
wards brought another, which has bm beea
identified before you, but probably yovwB^
have been directed to that by a purt of die ae-
lancholy transaction. You may, perfaapSi cob*
jecture, that the sword used in the deitnictiQi
of the officer, in Cato-Atreet, may be that vbkb
was thus sharpened, and you nuiyt ImH>^
think it not difficult to account for tbe aoa-
production of it here to day, bysupposiof tbat
It was the instrument used on that ocoaoa;
it is not, however, proved to yoa that it iMi
nor is it of importance, and therefore yoa "9
dbmiss that from your oonsideratioB.
They then call to you £dward ^'H'^'fT
he says, *' I am corporal-major of theieflood
regiment of life-guvds; I know the pnxiBtf
Harrison perfectly well ; he was in tint k!^
ment upwards of five years; his "l*?'*^
duty made him acquainted with tbe Kins*
street barradcs ; there were five viadovt n
those barracks looking out of the loft "^^
Gloucester-mews; they are Btopped np aoir;
they were stopped up two or three days »*
the affair in Cato-street; the ktfks cootaw^
hay and straw chiefly, and by throwiag vtf
thing in at the windovra, particularly ^W^
where the straw was lodged, it was posB»J
to produce a fire; there were two***
loaas of straw there at that tiaeattbeMiS
in a situation which might have been lascbN
by a fire-ball going in at the window, asV9
were situated about four feet from tbe winds^*
15091
Richard Tiddfor High Treason.
A. t). 1820.
ri5io
It is stated by setjeant Hanson, that one of
thoM fire^renades thrown into the window
of this room, which would have bnrnt for three
by a great many who had deceived him, but
that now he had got men who would stand by
him. He asked me, whether I had any arms.
or four minutes in a blaze, and afterwards have • I said no ; be said, every man ought to have
deposited upon the hay and straw a red-hot ' arms, all of us have arms, or to that effect ;
body of fire, would have been vastly more than some have got a sabre, some have got a pistol,
sufficient to have destroyed all the contents of ' and some have got a pike, every one has got
the lofts of that barrack, and probably to have
effected that purpose which is stated to have
been recommended by Harrison, and to have
been adopted by the conspirators.
Then a witness of the name of Aldous, says,
*' I am a pawnbroker; I have known the pri-
soner Davidson for two or three years; he
pawned with me a brass-barrelled blunderbuss,
something ; he said, I could buy a pistol for
about four or five shillings. I told him, I had
no money to buy pistols with; and he said,
well, he would see what he could do. He
then said, that the man he brought with him
was in the same line of business with myself,
a boot-closer, and that he lived in a court in
Gray*s-inn-lane. We returned into the room,
and he took it out of pawn on the 23rd of Fe- | and found Brunt there, and Thistlewood and
bniary in the morning," the day to which your Brunt shortly afterwards went away ; I lighted
attention has been so constantly addressed, them down stairs, and Brunt gave roe his ad-
^I have since seen it in the hands of Mr. dress. On Tuesday, the 22nd of February, Brunt
Kuthven, the officer.** It is produced among called upon me withTidd, the prisoner; I said
the articles found in Cato-sueet, or by some of to Brunt, 1 thought I had lost you;*' he had not
the officers ; he looks at it now, and he identi- seen him for a considerable length of time, a
fies it. Tliey desire you, upon the part of the couple of months or more. *' He said, the
prosecution, to ask yourselves, whether this king's death had made an alteration in their
affords to you any probability that the testi* plans ; I asked him what plans ; he said, there
inony of Adams is true, and gives any corro- ; was to be a meeting the following evening up
boration to the narrative he has given you. at lybum-turnpike, and we should hear ail
When you find that a brass-barrelled blunder- about it ; then he turned to Tidd, and asked
buss, which had been pledged by the prisoner him, if he should give roe the word ? he said,
Davidson, in January, and redeemed by him yes, he supposed there would be no danger in
on the 23rd of February, formed part of the it ; and then Brupi iraid, when I came to the
magazine intended for the exploit of the 23rd place, Tyburn-turnpike, if I saw any people
<»f February, proceeding from Cato-street, I about, I was to say, 6,tt,f, and if they were
think you will probably consider that a strong friends they would answer, <,o,n ; he said, be
confirmation of the narrative stated by the should be at our house the following moniing
to tell me all about it, and at what time it was
to take place, and went away with Tidd, leav-
ing me and my brother together.'' He says,
^ Brunt came alone, about half past four the
next day; my brother was with me ; he called
me down stairs ; he said he wanted me to go
in half an hour ; I told him I could not, for
that I had some work to finish, which must be
done before I went; he asked me what time
it would be done ; I said about six ; he said
he could not wait so long as that, but that I
must go with the person whom he had brought
the day before ; he told me that his name was
Tidd, and that he lived at Hole-in-the*wall
Passage, Brook's-market ; I went to Tidd*8
lodgings about half-past six, and found him
there ; he said he had been waiting for some
more men, whom he expected to go with him,
and that if no one else came before seven
o'clock, he would not wait any longer; he
accomplice Adams.
They then call to you a witness of the name
of John Monument ;~he states that he is a
prisoner in the Tower ; and the observations
which have been made (and which cannot be
too often pressed in favour of prisoners stand-
ing in this situation) applv likewise to the tes-
timony of Monument; tor though you vrill
perhaps think, he was not so deeply embarked
in the conspiracy as Adams, yet still he must
be taken, tor the purposes of this inquiry, to
be an accomplice, and therefore not to be re-
ceived but with jealousy and suspicion, and to
be attended to only as the evidence he gives
IS corroborated and supported. The account
he gives is, that he is a shoemaker, living in
Garden-court, Baldwin's-gardens. He says,
*^ 1 know a person of the name of Ford ; I re-
collect seeing Thistlewood at Ford's, it was
about three months before I was apprehended ;
in consequence of seeing Thistle wood at Ford's,
be afterwards called upon roe in company with
Brunt ; my brother and my mother were in the
room at the time; after he had been in the
room some short time, be said he wished to
apeak to me ; in consequence of that intima-
tion, I went out of the room with him, leaving
my brother and Brunt in the room ; my bro-
ther's name is Thomas Monument. When we
got ont, Thistlewood said, great events were at
hand, die people were everywhere anxious for
a change ; that he had been promised support
says, no more did arrive, and I asked him,
where it was we were going to ? He said, to
a mews in the Edgeware-road ; Tidd went to a
comer of the room, and took a pistol out of a
box, and put it into a belt which was round
his body ; he took also about six or eight pike-
heads, wrapped up in paper, which appeared
to me to be three square, like bayonets ; then
he took a staff of about fqur feet long, with a
hole at the end of it, as if to put a pike in ;
after he had thus provided himself, we went
out together; we went down into Uolborn^
151 1] 1 GEORGE IV.
Trud of WUHam Dmddsm md
11513
and froM thence ioAo Ozford-itraet ; is we
Were going along, I asked him what we were
going about ? and he said I should know when
we got there. 1 then asked him, whether we
wfere going to the House of Commons f He
said, No ; there were too many soldiers near
there. I asked him again, where we were go-
ing to^ And he said, to Gfoaveaor-aquare.
1 asked him, whether any one in panioular
lived there? And he said, there was to he
a cabinet dinner there that erening } I under-
stood what he meant, and I asked no mere ;
we then went on towards the £dgeware««oad ;
we came to an archway that lea<ki into a nar-
row street ; we went under the archway, and
found two men there ; TIdd had some conver-
sation with them, and then we went into the
stable; there were three or four men there;
at the further extremity of the stable, there
was a ladder, which I went up, after Tidd ;
in the loft above, I found about three or four
and twenty persons ; there was a carpenter's
bench in the l6ft covered with swonds and
pistols. Thistlewood vms among the per-
sons I found there ; there was a man in a
brown great coat, standing on the other side
of the carpenter's bench, who spoke of the im-
propriety of going to lord Harrowby's house
with so small a number as five and twenty
men ;" then he is asked, if the number had
been mentioned befoie ? and he says, *' Yes ;
some person was going to count them, and
Thistlewood said there was no occasion, —
there were five-and- twenty. I saw the prisoner
Davidson there that evening; 1 do not think
he was there when I first went, but he came
in afterwards ; I had seen him at one or two
public meetings in SmithfieM ; I am sure that
Davidson was the man." He says, ^vpon
the remark being made of the impropriety of
going to lord Harrowby's hoase, Thistlewood
said, he only wanted fourteen men to go into
the room, and supposing lord Harrowby had
si)[teen men servants, that number would be
quite sufficient; upon which, the man in the
brown great coat said, when we come out of
the room, there will be a crowd round the
dt>or, how are we to get away?- Thistlewood
said, you know the largest party are already
gone ; upon which, Davidson told the man in
the brown great coat, not to throw cold water
upon the proceedings.'' This man undertakes
Dositively to state, that Davidson was present ;
he says, he had seen htm at some of the public
meetings ; and it is proved by some of the
wttnesites, that at one public meeting at least
he had been present; that is proved by a wit-
ness for the defendant. Then, he says, that
" Davidson said to the man in the brown great
coat, if he was afraid of his life, he might ko,
— they could do without htm ;• and Brunt smd,
that sooner than they should so from the busi-
ness they were about, he vrould go into the room
by hiihself, and blmv them all up, if he perished
with them. He said, ^ou know that we have got
that iliat can do it. After this conversation, pa^
ties were separated fiiom the rest to go into the
room. Hie man in die brawn gyeatccatmdi
answer and said, as they all seencd foi it,
thoadi he did not like going witk ss mmHi
mimber, he would not be agaimt it; asdk
prcMposed that they should all pot theMdm
under Thistlewood's orders ; upon vlMh| Bih
tiewood said, every one engaged ia thiibni-
ness would have tlie same hoaoar at Uaidf ;
then he proposed thai thefborteenmatsiB
into Che room should volunteer fieoi tkfo*
sons there assembled, and that thef iboiM
place themselves on one side of tke lom;
about twelve or thirteen voloBteered, aidK-'
parated themselves for that piiT]»9e, and
among them were Tidd, Braat, Oaridsostti
Wilson, that is all that I recollect; TMh-
wood went down stairs and cane vp l^
and said, he had just received inteUigeBic,
that the duke of Wellington and lenlSidMab
had just arrived at loid Harrowby's.* Tta
probably arose from there being conpny go-
ing to the house of the Archbishop of Yed,
who resides next door to lord Hamywby. T\m
he is asked, whether shortly after tkat m
alarm took place below ? And he ^tj
did not hear any alarm at all, till I pcwW
the men at the top of the stairs; they slid dief
were officers, and bade them surieodef ; !«•
taken into custody ; there was an officer UW;
but I did not know who it wasliWefteJWiA
You have, no doubt, during the coone «
these trials (which from a domestic tffetiooj
had not the good fortune to attend) ^^
by the highest living authorities ^™1
can refer, that when evidence is liidba«»
jury to charge a certain number of pfl*^."
there b proof that tbey hare been ^^^
a conspiracy, the declarations and tcti rf a
are evidence against each ; now, theparticsw
declarations I am about to bring to T*"^
deration are those of the great ^^^j^
conspiracy, as he probably will betliOBg«»
be by you, namely, Thistlewood; '^^^I^SI!
declarations to be taken into joureonadefr
tion as it respecU all. The ^>*"*"*5J
was taken into custody and examined at » aj
hall ; I was handcuffed to Thistlewoed W»
the last times I went. Thistlewood t* ■«
to say to the privy council, that a ""<|^!°:
name of Edwards had led me to the a^
and that it was through him I <«**fL
You will he so good as to recoUeet tWtw
appears in evidence upon the exa»iM»w^
this man in chief, and that he has bees flw
cross-examined, but that there is noi«||»
suggest that he has been at wy"*?7j-.
which Edwards was present, or «*»'JJ* fj
saw him or heard his name heft>«; JJJ'Jr
course of the case has been to ***«^2^
to point at Edwards, to complain thijBBJwj
was not called, to suggest thai n '^^
were here, it would turn out **JJ*|J^
great deceiver and deluder, 8»^ !** {vj, a^^
cent men into the great calamity is ''[J*.^
are now involved . The instmction ^^^
from Thistlevrood was, « if I was «k« 'T
led me into that business, and look ae*^""
1513]
lUchard-TiddJbr High Treason.
A. D. 1820.
iuii
meeting, tfiat I was to aay, it was a man of tlie
name of Edwards. I said, how cait 1 tell soch a
falsehood as that, when you know very well I
never saw the man f Oh, he said, that is of
DO consequence at all; if you are asked by the
privy council, what sort of a man he ifi», tell
them he is not much taller than yourself, of a
fair completion, and that he used to wear a
brown great coat." Gentlemen, if this be not so,
how was this man, Monument, to hare given
you this testimony? he swore positively, before
you, that he never beard of Edwards till This-
tlewood mentioned him; that he never was
introduced to him at any meeting, public or
private, and never heard of him till he was
handcuffed to Mr. Thistlewood at Whitehall ;
iie has had no opportunity (being closely con-
fined) of knowing that there was such a person,
or that any person h^d suggested that Edwards
was a guilty person ; and yet, if this part of
the story is not true, and Thistlewood did not
say this, he has introduced something which
dovetails expressly with every thing said by
every body in eVery stage of the proceeding ;
then you will ask yourselves whether that does
not add something of intrinsic credit to the
story told by Adams.
This witness^ on his cros^-examination, says,
** I unwillingly joined in the plan to assassinate
ministers, and through fear, as it was said by
Brunt when he called upon me on the 22nd
of February, that any one that was any ways
concerned with them and did not go, should
be destroyed .'* He says, he was not concerned
with them before, and that he has told you all
he can recollect; that he knows nothing about
a proclamation or a plan to mise rebellion and
levy war, but only the plan to assassinate mi-
nisters ; then he was asked, whether Tidd did
not tell him in the loft that he had been de-
ceived, and persuade him to go away with him,
and leave the party, and he says, ** No, he did
not ; I wish for his own sake^ as well as mine,
that he bad."
It IS submitted to you, whether the testi-
mony of this witness does not afford confirma-
tion to the prisoner Adams ; and the way in
which this is put is, though both are accom-
plices, does not the account grven by Monih<
ment of that which had been already deCei^
mined on, of that which led to the operations
of that particnlar night, — that they were to go
to a mews in the Edgeware-road — that they were
there to assemble^ that they were to proceed
tb lord Haitowby's — and tnat they were to
proceed to that noble ear^s, because there was
to be there a cabinet dinner — confirm the evi^
dence of Adams ? They say that is a story
ifHrich Monument could not have told here unless
it was true, on any suggestion of the prisoner
Adams ; for Monument was taken into custody
iii Cato*street, and has remained in custody
cfver since, without any-possih^ty of commu-
nicating witii him ; and Adams was taken at
his lodgings, and has been confined at another
place, without the possibiNt^rof communicating
with him, and therefore, each may derive cre^'
drt to the story he tdls, by the story told by
the other; but they say further, that the testi-
mony of Monument, if it stood alone, would go
to prove all that is alleged, so as to constitute
t^ie crime of high treason, imputed by tliis in-
dictment, for that it communicates, that the
conspirators were assembled for the purpose of
that which has been called the West^end job;
or the despatch of the cabinet ministers ; that
it was represented that a large body of them
had alreaay gone, and that, ^erefore, no great
strength was wanted for that purpose for which
they were first to be employed ; that it had
been represented by one of the conspirators,
Thistlewood, that great events were at hand,
and that the people were very anxious for il
change ; that he had been deceived by persons
who had engaged to farther his projects, but
had now persons on whom he could rely ; that
the witness had been introduced to Brunt and
to Tidd, and had thus become acquainted with
the transactions. It is not suggested that he
could have derived knowledge of all this, but
by the communication made to him, as be says^
by the persons he has named.
[A note UHU handed over^ and presenied to M#
Court].
Mr. Baron Garrow* — ^Is that from one 6f
the prisoners.
[It was handed to his Lordship,"]
Mr. Baron Garrowj^At is an application
from the prisoner, Davidson, to state some cir-
cumstances which he has omitted. Though
not eonvenient nor regular, Ood forbid that
he shall be prevented doing so. Shall I read
it fi^om your paper?
Daoidson, — ^If your lordship pleases.
Mr. Baron Ganvu?.— He says, ** There is a
circamstanoe, I forgot to mention, in my de'«*
fence, which I beg the indulgence of yoitr
lordship to call to mind. It is, that ray house
has not only been searched, but even pulled
nearly down, but no circumstances found sup-
porting a censpiraey, either directly or indiv
rectly.'' He addresses that to me in respectful
terms, requesting I will direct your attention
to it ; yen will consider this, as added to the
circumstances already stated in his defence,
that a most diKgent search has been made at
his house (we will take the fact to be so), and
that no' evidence to afford any charge of his
having been guilty of a conspiracy is brought
against him, as the result of such search ; it
may, therefore, fairly be taken that it is so ; —
the value of that is not at this moment to be
considered. '
I was observing to you, gentlemen, oft the
evidence of Monument, whether it does not
derive intrinsic value from the circmnstances
stated in Hy compared with circumstances of a
similar aatm-e; the two persons never having
bad, since this cause had its commencement,
in any of its parts, an opportuni^ of confer-
ritigtogetber. . Bvt, on the part of the prose-
15153 1 GEORGE IV.
cntion, they saT Ibrther, UMt the tettimooy of
MoDumeoty if believed, goes to prove the
whole, namelyy that there had been a conspi-
racy of a certain number of persons, of whom
these persons were part, by force of arms, and
by rising in the town, and by the destruction
or his roi^esty's then confideniial ministers, to
compel his majesty to change his measures, or
to brinff about a destruction of the constitution
by rebellion and revolution. They say, yoa may
infer this from the testimony of Monument,
if for the moment you were to forget altogether
the testimony of Adams, remembering always
that you ought to deal with the testimony of
Monument as you have been advised with the
testimony of Adams,— to receive it with care
and caution, and to receive it only as it is sop-
ported in such manner as to give to it the ef-
fect of truth, and not to convince you that it
is not the result of invention.
Now to support his evidence, they call be-
fore you Thomas Monument ; with respect to
whom it is but fitting I should state, that there
is not a single imputation on his character.
He says, ** I am a shoemaker, and live with
my brother; I recollect Thistlewood calling
upon him at his lodgings, accompanied by
Brunt Thistlewood said, he wished to speak
to mv brother; they went out together;" leav-
ing Brunt with the witness ; ** they returned in
three or four minutes; and Thistlewood and
Brunt went away together. On the 22nd of
February, Brunt called upon my brother in
company with Tidd the prisoner; nw brother
said, I thought I had lost you.'' Now these
brothers had had no opportunity, since John
was taken into custody in Cato-street, of com-
paring notes, and yet you will perceive there
u an extraordinary coincidence in the narrative
they give of the visit of these two persons to
John Monument. ''Brunt said something
concerning the king's death, which had made
an alteration in their plans ; my brother asked
him what the plan wa^ ; he said they had dif-
ferent objects in view. Brunt asked Tidd if
he should give an outline of the plan ; I did
not hear any answer to that; Brunt said, we
were to meet the following evening at six
o'clock at Tyburn-turnpike, and he gave the
pass word that we were to use, the letters
hfUyt; and if any of their party were there,
they would answer ty o, n." Mow so says the
accomplice John Monument ; and the accom-
plice John Monument tells you that was
so communicated in the presence of his
brother, when these persons were there that
evening. I have already told you these two
brothers have not been together since that
evening ; you will therefore ask, whether the
accomplice, when he gives that account, con-
firmed as he is by the other witness, is giving
you the language of falsehood or of truth?
" Brunt came the next afternoon between four
and five o'clock ; my brother could not go with
him as he had some work to finish. Brunt
then said, you must call on Tidd in Hole-in-
the-wall passa^e,and he will take you; I believe
afWUKam DaMUon and
[1516
my brother went about seven o'dock ; I did
not see him afterwards ; I did not go nysdf."
This man's character stands as fair in tUi
transaction as any man*s whatever. Now, ii
the account John Monument has been giring
to you, the language of truth or not ? if it were
necessary to prove the fact that John Monu-
ment was invited to go, that he was directed
to go to Tidd 's house; that he had tbewoid
hUUm given to him as the pass word; tint
they were directed to go to Tyban-tarppiU;
if they were to sink John Monumeot is the
bottom of the sea, they could prove the wUe
by that brother.
2W.— My lord, you have joit obeemd,
as to these witnesses, that they never sswcsdi
other ; now I can prove, by the evidesce of
the warden of the Tower of Londoo, that they
have been together an hour or two together io
each week.
Mr. Baron Garrow. — I am very glad jw
have made the observation ; if thai fact be i^
which was unknown to me, that iskes off the
effect of so much of the observation as apoiiei
to the similarity of manner in which tbej mfe
told the story, and it stands just the same as if
there was no such fact. This man iscoofinned
by a man who may have beard it fron his bro*
ther, but who comes here pledging bis oath,
his soul, and his salvation, and that which he
states is precisely that which his aooonpiice
brother has stated.
Davidton. — My lord, here is Mr. Underwood,
one of the yeoman warders, can speak to the
fact of their having been together.
Mr. Banm Garrow.-^We will take the fact
to be so. You will observe, gentlemeo, M
breaks in only on the observation, which had
struck me very forcibly ; as to Adams sod
John Monument it stands precisely the sane,
but you will take it with the circnmstance the
prisoner has mentioned, though it is not proved:
that I think is the whole of the evidence ot
Thomas MonumenL , .
They then call to you a witness, oertalDlyot
the highest importance, and that is Tbootf
Hiden ; he says, that previous to these tiiM"
actions he lived in Manchester-mews, and **
a cowkeeper and milkman there; be »!>»
" I have now the misfortune to be a pri*«f
for debt;" he is brought here by his Dajestr'
writ of habeas corpus ; " I went to priioa »
week ago, last Saturday morning; I^'^^TJ!^
prisoner Wilson very well ; a few days below
the 23rd of February he met me, and asked oj
if I would make one of a party to destroy «
his majesty's ministers at a cabinet dinner; be
said, every thing was ready, they were ^"^^
only for a cabinet dinner, and thai ^^^Jjjj:
got such things as I never saw ; that thw wej
covered with tarpaulin, and bound round wiia
coids, filled full of nails and other thiap> >^*
of them made of tin, and veiy strong indewj
he said the strength of them was so P^^
if they were set fire to and put under the *«»
14171
Richard Tiddjitr High TfMMM.
A. Dw 1820.
[1518
of the houses ia the street where we were then
walking, they would lift them up. He said,
that they were to be lighted with a fuse, and
put into the room where the gentlemen were
at dinner, and all that escaped the explosion
were to die by the edge of the sword, or some
other weapon, and that they were going to set
fire to some houses ; that they were to bum
down lord Harrowby's house, lord Castle-
reagh's the duke of Wellington's, lord Sid-
mouth's, the bishop of London's, and another,
that I do not recollect the name of ; that by
that means it would keep the town in a state
of confusion for a few days, and it would be-
come generaL I asked him, how many there
were to be? he said, I had no occasion to
be alarmed, there was a gentleman's servant
who had given them money, and if they would
act, he would give them a considerable sum
wore. I told him, I would be one. I had a
reason in so doing. After telling him that, I
wrote a letter to lord Castlereagh, and went
to his lordship's house, two or three times, but
did not get access to him. After that I saw
lord Harrowby ; I followed him to the park,
and there I spoke to him, and delivered him
the letter I wrote to lord Castlereagh." The
letter is nut into his hands, and is shewn to
him, and he says, ** this is the very letter."
And it is afterwards further identified as the
same letter, by the noble earl, when he is
called in a further part of the proceedings. He
saysy ** on the next day, between four and five
o'clock in the afternoon, 1 met Wilson; he
said, Hiden you are the very man I want to
see ; I said, what is there going to be ? he said,
there is to be a cabinet dinner to-night at lord
Harrowby's, in Grosvenor-square. I asked him
where I was to meet them ? he said, 1 was to
come up to the Horse and Groom, in John-street,
the comer of Cato-street, and there I was to go
into a public-house, or to stop at the comer
till I was shoved into a atable close by. I
asked, what time I was to meet them ? he said,
at a quarter before six or six o'clock ; he told
mci that there were to be four parties, one in
Cato-street, another in Gray's-inn-lane, a third
in the city or Gee's-court I am not certain
which, and .a fourth in the Borough. He said,
I had no occasion to be alarmed, for that all
Gee's court were in it." Being asked, of whom
the inhabitants of Gee's-court consisted? he
says, " I believe it to be generally inhabited
by Irishmen? he told me, that the Irish were
all in it, but they would not stir till the Eng-
lish had begun first, as the English had so
many times deceived them. He said, that
there were two pieces of cannon in Gray's-inn-
lane, that were easily to be got at by breaking
iji a small door; that our party was to go to
lord Harrowby's, in Grosvenor-square, and
there to do the grand thing/' that is explained
to be — to destroy all the ministers. *' After
the grand thing was done, all the parties were
to meet somewhere in the neighbourhood of the
Mapsion-4iOQse ; he told me I was to be sure
10 cMDe, or the grand thing would be over
before I came; I went to J(^n-street that
evening, between six and seven o 'clocks
When I came into John-street, by the comer
of the post to Cato-street, I saw Wilson and
Davidson the prisoner at the bar. I knew
Davidson well before ; I had known him a
long time before. Davidson said, you are
come ? I said, yes ; I was come, but I was
behind my time ; he asked me, if I was going
in? that Mr. Thistlewood was there; I told
him, no ; I could not go in, for I was obliged
to get some cream that I must get, if possible,
and I left them and did not go again. He
told me, that they should go away about eight
o'clock ; and if they were gone, I was to follow
them down to Grosvenor-square, the fourth
house from the corner on the lower side. The
last words Davidson said to me, were, come,
you dog, come, it will be the best thing you
were ever in in your life."
He iscrosSi^xamined,tand says, ''I did not
expect any plunder, for I did not intend to go.
I have known Wilson a good while ; I did not
think it at all surprising that Wilson should
address me in the way he did, for I had seen
Davidson the black before at a friend's house,
and he said to roe as he went out, Hiden you
do not come forward like the rest to support
the meetings, and I told him, no, I coula not,
and I have been denied to him by my family,
because I did not wish to see him. It was at
Clarke's house that Davidson said, Hiden yoa
do not come forward as the rest of us do, to
support the meetings ; I told him I did not^.
my business would not let me ; he told me,,
that the people that did not come forward to
support the cause, would be the first that tliey
should murder, and I said I would go for my
own safe^. I kept away from them as mncti
as I could ; I never went among them, except
twice, to the shoemaker's club ; I did not know
what their objects were, except what Wilson
told me on the day I have mentioned. He
told me, they had got hand-grenades, and
things pf that kind ; he did not tell me of any
other plots they had in hand, except about the
cannon, and what I have stated.'^ Then he is
asked, whether he knows a man of the name of
Bennett, and he says, ^ Yes, I do ; I never did
invite him to attend a private radical meeting ;
to the best of my knowledge I never did tell
him, that he might be called upon to take up
arms, and if he was called upon he must do so.
I will not swear, that I did not ; but I never
recollect saying such a word to him, and I
never made use of the words, radical meeting,
to him ; if I knew that I ever had, I would not
deny it."
Then, on his re-examination, he says, ^I
went twice to the shoe-maker's club, with Mr.
Clarke ; I saw Davidson and Wilson and Har-
rison there ; the club was held at the Scotch
Arms public house, near the Strand ; I vras
there on Sunday evenings ; Clarke called upon
me, and iiMittced me to go, and I said, I dare
say Bennett will go ; Bennett did go with me
and Clarke ; that was five or six months ago."
15100 1 GEORGE IV.
T9U rf WaSffm DmndMom amd
tl&M
il has hfm nggesltd lo you Uoit tbe^tettiflMf
of dus witness ouglit not t(» rceeiTe credit al
yoor hands. I have Usteoed with all the atten*
tton which it is my dntj lo do, ta the ▼eiy able
a^gunieat. I do noi say that as a word of
oowrse, or of compliment ; this is not the place
so to deal with these cases, bnt because tt is
dva to the great exertions made ibr these un-
happy men to aay that e^ry thing has been
done which great care, crreat leamiag, and
gfreat talest, coold do ibr them. But it is said,
that this evidence ought not to recetTe credit
as your hands. I have endeavoored to under-
stand this argument, and I stste, nnfeignedly,
under the solemn sanction on which I am
called to perform the solemn doty cast upon
me (the same sanction under which you are
called upon to discharge the duty lying upon
jmi) I cannot understand the argument. If it
IS suggested, that it is an extraordinary thing
that & man should communicate to another a
plot of an extraordinary nature, the answer to
the observation is upon the surface, — this
was a thing which must be done, if at all, by
nangr, and most. be done by canvassing many,
soma of whom may become accessaries to the
thing proposed, and others may decline to havo
to do with it } but a man does not purpose to
become an active member of a confederacy,
but wishes to be acquainted witb it, and
having got informalion of it, thinking there is
danger to his ow« life if he apfiarently or
avowedly testifies a disposition to retract, he
ia told that the persons who may retire shall be
QMatdered ; I cannot understand^ that a man
who shall not disclose such a combination,
shall be a person, vrho, when he comes under
the. exigencies and demands of justice, and
under the solemn sanction of his oath, to state-
this in a.oouK of justice, is not to be believed.
But in what situation does this witness stand ?
He has heard this, does he coooeal it, and; as
finr as depends upon him, allow is to have com*'
piete effect ? With an anxiety which does him
ra&nite credit^ — ^with aa anxiety to make that
which, for aught he knew, might be the only
eemmunicatioQ whieh stood between> the emi-'
nent peril) of the destruction of those eminent
men, and the aacpmpltshment of that blow ;
he heeamo ansioos to make the communica»-
tiiM to. one ofi his rnvjesty's administratiOHy
posbably morelE9i(nni.to hisLby name, because
naare. seen as the minister in the House of
Commons; he endeavours, to avail hraoself of
any op|iortuhity of delsvesing a lettev to lord-
GMdereagh, to whool^.aa we may suppose, he
made-iastthannee his preaant communicattioH,
for we cannot look at that letter, not being able-
Id see the noble lord to whom the letter was
ditectad; ha addresser himeelf to lord. Haiw
somhyv i9ith respect to whom, it would be dis-
lacing him to suppose snob at thing as. that ho
oould tamper with, or hold any improper iiw
tercousse ;^nobody suggests* or beiteves any
thing of the sort. This man, finding the diffi-
culty of commMiiioating with lord Castloceagh.
-^these axienot times when noblemen: in. ofllc«
are 109 eny of acoeas to ftaipottumite atrangeri,
whose business is mysterious, — he finds hit
way to the boose of lord Harrowby, nrgad by
the desire to communicate the information of
this grand stroke intended to be struck ; there
he watdies the person who, l^ the waiting^ of
tmt servants at the door, he soppooes to be the
master of the house, and he vray*4ays Mm ia
Ae Park, in order that he may aoake him the
medium of comnranication of his letter to an-
other of the cabinet ministers. My lord Hv^
rowby receives it, and with the eare Mid
tioD which belongs to all meo of bonoeu*,
a letter of this sort he does not proaogie ie
open when it is addressed to onotlier; bat
obserring that the man who makes tiHa
munication to him is albnd of beitig seen m
company, lord Harrowby says, I will oMet yed
t»-morrow; and, on the foilovring ^y, his
lerddnp passed him on entering the f^it,
and went down to the sbrubbeiy ; iw die neaa
tkase the letter had been opened, and bad heea
made the subject of communication. ''What itf
the comloct of this man f He discloses ttr
whole of the conspiracy, as k baa eosae to Yarn
knowledge, of the imminent peril and danger
which, according to him, is impending only by
a thread over the heads of these povsons, and
which would branch out^ immediately after
that catastrophe has been effected, inio aft
the wide-spreading ruin' which was intended;
is it to be said of such a man as this, that he i&
not deserving of credit ? that there is sooio-
thing vicious — something deptmved — some-
thing to cut down his credit ? if It be so^ 1
should beg to be inttodaced to the connast of
such a character, to learn who in society is a
meritorious meniber of it.
But it is seggested that he stands here prcK
bably with a degree of itrflneiioe on his mlBd x
that is treated with ao uncommon, though not
an improper delicacv by the leaned connsel,
they are obliged t^ deal with it widi so much
delicacy, that it is almost lost. la he a witness
coming here to earn a reward? N«, ilhat
would be high treason against the chancfer of
erery man of honour in society; but it is- said
the man thinks he has done the stale 90 miodi^
service, and has so maoh sserif with these
nobbemea^ whose lives and whoae fiunihes he
has saved, that he probably thinks he shall
derive, at some ftitore period of hiaKle, some
reward for the benefit which he has %ee»
the- instfument of Providence in eoniemngf
upon them. Dbes that enable l»m to iavetot a
fidse story? haa that enabled hia to t^ die
story Adorns has Said, or Movramoiit his told,
without commoaioaAion one ^iridlr tiHe other f
did that enable him, befofe the police officei*
turned theis atteutiDtl to dM^ stoMe la Ca«o>
street, or the- piequet* under the comeaand of
lleutanaat FitzeKhfeaos' toraed tbefr steps to-
ward that^ piMev \o» invent 'the plot fot the
assassiuaciott of sit thmw petsons, to get all'
this ammunition together in that place ? and
did this nrilkmao and' dsSiyman find out my
loid Casttonaghj'— No, he did ndi,. but ho
1521]
Richard Tiddjar High Trgason,
A. D. 1S20.
L1532
attempted it, and .failing, he did find oiit my
lord Harrowby to make to bim a communica-
tion of all this ; in no other way can I see bow
any inroad is to be made into the testimony of
Hiden, to whom, under Providence, probably
every one of us assembled here to-day is under
no small obligation.
The next witness called before you is John
Baker ; he says, '* I am butler to the earl of
Harrowby ; I recollect, on the 18th or I9th of
February last, issuing cards of invitation to tht
cabinet ministers to dine at his lordship's house
on the 23rd ; before that time the cabinet
dinners were suspended, in consequence of
the late king's death, and that was the first
after the king's death ; the dinner was pre-
pared, and the preparations went on till after
the dinner hour ; about eight, the dinner was
countermanded ; up to that time, I and all the
servants expected the dinner would take place ;
the archbishop of York*s house is adjacent
to lord Harrowby's; I observed carriages
takingup there between six and seven o'clock."
llie next witness called is Richard Munday,
who says, ** I live at No, 3, Cato-street; on the
23rd of February last, when I came from
work in the afternoon, I saw Davidson walk-
ing to and fro in the gateway, and I saw him
running away after the transaction took place ;
the stick bad a place in it as if to receive a
socket; I went into the st&ble about half-past
eight, o'clock ; Ellis and Smilhers were with
me; I observed a man with a gun on his
shoulder ; I did not know him ; I then went
up a ladder which led to a loft ; I saw a bench
with arms upon it, and I heard a clattering
of arms ; I suppose there were about four or
five-and- twenty men ; I said, we are officers ;
seize their arms. Thistlewood, whom I imme-
diately saw, seized a sword, and retired to the
inner room ; he stood fencing with it, endea-
vouring to keep any body away that approached
him ; Smithers approached him, and Thistle-
wood stabbed him, and he died immediately;
after this a pistol was fired, and the lights
were put out instantly ; I heard a voice from
the corner where Thistlewood was, call out,
kill them," using a vulgar expression, *' throw
them down stairs ; I joined in the cry, and got
down with them ; I got out into John-street,
and met the soldiers, and returned with lieute-
nant Fitzclarence ; upon returning to the stable
door, I saw Tidd endeavouring to get away
from the stable door ; I said to somebody, lay
hold of him, and, as I spoke, he held up his
arm, and then I saw a pistol ; I laid hold of
that arm, and turned him round, I fell upon
the dunghill, and he upon me ; the soldiers
but I had seen him, between that, lighting a | came up soon afterwards, the pistol went oflf,
candle with another candle in his hand. I butwhetherinhishandornot, lam not aware;
saw him push the stable door open and go into
it, and I saw Harrison at the door at the time ;
Davidson's coat flew open as he stooped with
his hat over the candle, and I observed a cross-
belt round him, and another belt with two
Sistols and a sword, or something I thought to
e a sword ; I heard a nailing up in the after-
noon, and I looked up and saw some sacking
being nailed up over the railing over the door ;
I thought it was to keep the place warm, being
cold weather, but it would keep any person
from looking into the room ; the stable had been
for some time empty; the cows were taken
away before Christmas ; when I passed by I
saw two men go in and three come out."
If Iliden's evidence wanted confirmation —
if the presence of Davidson at this place at
this time, needed to be confirmed, the testi-
mony of Munday goes the full length of that
confirmation.
George Caylock is called, he says, '' I live in
he was secured, and I conducted him into the
public-house ; he was searched, he had a leather
belt round his waist, and a ball-cartridge in
his pocket; before I had finished searcliing
him, Bradbum was brought in; I searched
him, and found a string twisted five or six
times round his waist, and soase ball-cartridges
and six balls loose in his pocket ; Wilson, and
the black, Davidson, were afterwards brought
in, but I did not search either of them ; David-
son cursed and swore against any man who
would not die in liberty's cause; that he
gloried in it," and he sang part of that popular
song which has obtained so much celebrity,
* ScoU wha' ha' wi' Wallace bled ;' « Wilson
said it was all up, he did not care a damn, they
might knock him on the head now. I returned
to the loft, and there were some soldiers there,
and three of the prisoners, Strange, Cooper,
and Gilchrist, and one who has been a witness.
Monument; I found two swords myself, and
Cato-street; I saw Harrison there on the 23rd 1 1 saw some pistols found, and a gun or two.
of February ; I had known him before ; I saw
him go into the stable, he told roe he had taken
two chambers there, and was going to clean
them up ; I saw from twenty to tive-and-twen-
ty other persons go in and out of the stable
that evenmg."
Then Ruthven the officer is called, he says,
** I am one of the constables of Bow-street ;
on the 23rd of February, I went to Cato-street ;
I went first in the afternoon, and then again
at six o'clock; I went into the Horse and
Groom, and saw Cooper and Gilchrist there,
with a mop-stick or broom-stick, which he left.
there ; Gilchrist came back for it, but I had it;
VOL. XXXIII.
Then he speaks of the hand-grenades, and
other things found there, which I will enume-
rate by and by ; he is asked whether, on search-
ing Tidd, he did not say there was nothing but
a tobacco-box ; and he says, ** No ;" that was
in answer to a question put to him by the
prisoner Tidd.
llien the Earl of Harrowby is examined, and
his lordship says, ** I am one of his majesty's
privy council, and one of his majesty's minis-
ters ; cards of invitation were issued, by my
direction, for a cabinet dinner, on the 23rd of
February; the members of the cabinet, with
their respective offices, are the lord chancellor ;
5E
Ift33] 1 GEOBGE IV.
TrMo
Damitrntttnd
[im
lord Westmorekuid^ Ihe lord fiirf Mai ; the
taii of LiYerpoo), first lord ot the Treasury;
Mr. Vansittart, the chancellor of the Ex-
chequer; lord Caatlereagb, the secretary of
state for the foreign department ; lord Bathurst,
secretary of state for the colonial departmetit ;
lord Sidmouthy the secretary of state for the
hone department ; my lord Melville, first lord
of the Admiraltv; the duke of Wellington^
master-general of the ordnance ; Mr. Canning,
president of the India hoard ; Mr. Robinson,
president of the board of trade; Mr. Bragge
Bathurst, chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster;
Mr. Wellesley Pole, roaster of the mint ; the
earl of Mulgrave ; and myself, as president of
the council, fifteen in number ; in consequence
of his late majesty's death, the cabinet dinners
were postponed ; the noblemen and ^^ntlemen
I haTe mentioned, are all privy coottallors, and
compose what is called the cabinet council.
I recollect riding in the Park on the day pre-
ceding that on which the cabinet dinner was
to take place ; I was accosted by a person near
Orosvenor-gate ; he gave me a letter;'' and
On the letter being shewn to his lordship, he
replied, ^ that is the letter, — it is addressed to
lord Castlereagh ; the person told me it con-
tained intelligence of (freat importance to his
lordship and myself, and desired I would have
it communicated to lord Castlereagh ;" by the
rules of law, we cadnot inquire into the con-
tents of the letter. ** I asked him whether he
had put his name and address to it? he said
he had not" (as I observed before, lord Har-
rowhy did not propose to open Uie letter) ; '' he
expressed a wish to have some further conver-
sation with me ; I said, if I was to commnni-
cate vrith him, 'it would be necessary I should
know his name and address, and, upon that.
he gave me a card containing them ; when I
knew what were d)e coDtents of the letter, I
made an appointment to meet him in the Park
the next morning at eleven o'clock ; the letter
was produced by lord Castlereagh at the
council ; I met the same person the next morn-
ing in the young plantations, near the ring ;
I appointed that spot, because he was ex-
tremely apprehensive of being seen with me,
when I met him the day before near Orosve-
nor-gate ; in consequence of my having seen
this man, the dinner did not take place ; pre-
parations were made for it, and went on until
I wrote a note from lord Liverpool's house,
between seveti and eight o'clock, which must
have reached my house about eight ;^ the pre-
parations went on past the usual hour of hold-
ing the cabinet dinner, so that none of his
lordship*^ establishment would be informed
that it was not to take place until between
seven and eight ; " that was the first commu-
nication I made to my servants that it was not
to take place.^
The next vritness called is James Ellis, one
of the officers of the patrole at the Bow-$treet
oflRce. He says, ** I went to Cato-stneet on
the eveninof of the 28rd of February, with
Kuthven ; I went into the stable about half-
past eight o*clock ; I saw a man, whom I be-
lieve to be Davidson, abovt hslf way betweei
the foot of the ladder and the door of fin
stable ; he had a carbine, or something of dM
kind, in his right hand, and a swoid it bii
left side ; he appeared as if he was vattisf
sentinel ; he had white cross-belts oo ; thoe
was another person in the fortber stall of (he
stable, nearest the ladder, whom I did mt
know ; when I entered the stable, I took
Bavidson hy the collar, turned hiiabdf roind,
and looked iir his fiice, and I saw he wis •
man of colour ; I took him into costody in
about Bye mitHites afterwards; be wss ifam
dressed in exactly the same way nlM
observed him before; he had awhitecrase-
belt, a carbine, and a swoid; I foUsatd
Ruthven op the ladder, into the loft; I o^
served a number of people fklliDg btck to tbe
back part of the room ; there appeared to be
about four or five-and-twenly altogether j sow
of them were apparently attempting to cater
a small room adjoining ; as I weatap, Tbiith-
wood brandished his sword at ne; he vat
advancing rather towards me, when I (old Ua
to desist, or I would fire, at the saiM tine
holding up a pistol with one hand, and vj
staff with the other ; upon that, he retreated
back towards the door of the little loon;
Sraithers followed him, and Thistlewood Mde
a push, and stahbed him in or near bis rigM
breast; he fell back, and I fired at Thistle-
wood, but without effect ; Smithen «^W"*'
against me and fell ; a general nsb in eoa-
fiision then took place, and I was pmbed den
the ladder, into the stable ; I then tXimm
to get into the door-way, into Cato^^eet; I
remained in the doop-way for a few seeoad%
when two or tliree shots were fired ^ * ■*!
standing under the ladder ; I then atteaiptel
to go outside the door, when some *ots «««
fired from the window of the little room, dol-
ing into Cato-street ; they were fired u^aw
the door ; I then heard a ety of stop bin; ^
saw Davidson running, and I paisaed v^
and took him into custody ; when I ^^
up, I eaught him by the collar, and **.■•*]}
cut at me, but I was too close tohiia,Jw
Gill, another officer, came up, and «*"7 *
disarming him; he had the carbine udtte
cross-belu when I took him; after I^^
him in the custody of others, I retainadtott^
stable, and assisted in securing tw>o«v"a
others."
They then can to you Robert Chapi»«» **
of the Bow-street patrole; he sap, "^Vi
appointed to go to Cato-street on theyw*
February; I went to the Horse and Oieajjj
with Lee, the constable ; I saw ^''*2'"f
Cooper come in, and imother maa, ^^J*
believe to be Gilchrist ; they stood otoewi|
us for some time, and we Aen v»ent aw^
Davidson had a larg^ drab great cm* W5«
then passed on to Molyneaux-«treet, and tba»
towards Queen-street. IsawthewagaiaJ^
ing backwards and forwards; Cooper «»*
should go in, and have some beer; and, «l"^
\S26]
HkkariTidd/vr High Tmuon.
A. D. 1820.
C1AS6
passed, they looked as in the fooe, as if observ-
ing who we were. After this, when we were
at the Queen-etreet end of Cato-etreet, I heard
the report of a pistol ; in consequence of Uiat,
I ran up Cato-street, and persons were then
running very fast out of the stable, and there
was a Bring; two short men ran down the
•tteet, and, as I had just overtaken them, I
heard a piece go off, and I turned round, and
beard somebody say, stop him ; I saw a man
with his hand up ; I went up to him, and he
struck at me with a sword ; Ellis laid hold of
liim by the coUar, and he and I took him
Against the wall ; he had also a carbine ; the
man was Davidson, but he was dressed quite
. 4iiferently then to what he was when I saw
him before; we took him into a chandler's
ahop ; he had a eouple of pistol flints in his
|)ocket."
On his cross-examination, he aays, " I did
«ot go into a publio-house with Davidson ; he
remained in my custody from the time he was
•overtaken till I went back with him to the
stable ; he was not taken into any publio*
jboiise; then Benjamin Gill came up, and took
4be carbine ; he also strack Davidson on the
eword-hand, and look the sword from him ; I
•aw that done." Then he is asked, whether
the carbine was not at some distance from him
iwhen he was taken ? and he says, « No^ I think
not ;" thii was to contradict the testimony of
Authreo. On the testimony of the witness
Chapman, and of lientenant Fitzclarenoe, who
says 4hat he conducted him to Bow-street, and
that he was not in a pablio-hoose while in his
custody, it is supposed, that Ruthven has pui^
fiosely or accidentally made a mis-statement ;
how that is I am at a loss to say. Ruthven
states this fact, and it rather stands on the tes-
limony of lieutenant Fitadarence and of Chap-
man, that he was not in a public-house, but
only in that small shop in Cato-etreet, but each
apeahs only to the time Daridson was in dieir
feepective custody.
On his re«examination he sayt, ^ I oooduoted
bim to a chandler's shop, and afUrwards to the
alable, with a file of soldiers. I afterwards
gave him np ; and whedMr he was taken into
a publio-house, or not, i cannot tell, but I do
not think that he was ; I do not know one
way or the other."
William Lee is a Bow-street patrole ; he
says, *^I went, on the 23rd of rebroary, in
company with Chapman, about hal^past six,
near the door of the Horse and Groom. I
observed Davidson, Gilchrist, Cooper and
Harrison ; in a short time we walked away,
and Thistiewood loUowed us; he came ana
stared us in the face ; and I said, it was very
rude to stance us in the fece. Chapman answer-
ed, I suppose the gentleman thinks he knows
us* Thistiewood said, it is a mistake ; and he
tttfned on his heel sml went away. I and
Chapman had been sent as officers less known
than eome others. I took a turn and came
afBJv into Cato-street, and then 1 saw David-
son ieave the stable, and come to the comer ;
at that time, Gilchrist and Coq>er were under
the gateway, I will not be sure of Harrison
being tliere at that moment, but I saw him
there soon afterwards ; they were talking to a
man dressed like a baker ; at half-past eight I
entered the stable with the party that accom-
panied Ruthven and Ellis. Ruthven and Ellis,
and one or two more, went up the ladder. I
heard a firing and confiision up there, and they
were hastled down again ; the lights appeared
to be put out; there were several afterwards
fell down the bdder. Ruthven desired me to
slop vnder the gateway; there were some
shots fired from tl» window of the loft ; shortly
afterwards the miliUury came and entered the
stable.''
The next witness they call to you is a per-
son of the name of Benjamin Gm, who is
one of the Bow-street patrole ; he says, '^ I
formed one of Westcoatt's party that went
to Calo«etreet. I cannot state exactly what
time we arrived. I went into the stable;
Rnthven and Ellis were there before me ; there
was a light in the stable. I saw a man stand-
ing at the bottom of the ladder, of a dark com-
plexion, short, thick and stout ; he had book
arms but I cannot say what Ruthten, Elli?,
and Smitben went np, and I followed Nixon ;
he was oa the ladder; he was near the top,
and I was aj close to him as I conld possibly
get. I heard the ttgoMl of a pistol or some-
thing in the loft« Ellis came tumbling down ;
be knocked Nixon down, and Nixon fell upon
me in the comer ; there was a rush from the
loft ; I got near the door, and by a sudden
rush I was pushed into Cato-street ; when I
got there I saw Davidson coining out (^f the
door with a carbine; he was running out and
he discharged the carbine right at me, and
passed me. I then saw that he was a man of
colour? he had also a large sword ; I ran after him
and cried out, stop him, stop htm I I had veiy
neariy reached him when he made a back cut
at me with the sword^ and then he advanced
forwards again. He was stopped by Ellis. I
struck him with my truncheon on the wrist, and
made a grasp at the blade of the sword with
my left hand. I found it very sharp ; it cut
my fingers, and I let go of it again. I think
it was fastened to his hand, or he would ha?e
dropped it when I struck him. I think it was
twirled round his wrist bv a cord ; the iWord
fell, and I ptdced it up. I took the carbine out
of the other hand. EHis and another man had
f)% hold of him when I picked up the sword ;
never lost sight of him after I saw him with
the sword ; he was taken over to a little shop
in Queen-etreet. I took the carbine with me,
and left the swoid with Ellis. The sword
and the carbine are both forth coming, and I
shall know them again." The carbine is then
produced to him. He identifies that and the
lon^ sword, which was produced as being that
which was found upon the person of Davidson,
with which he cut at him, which appears to
have a lealJiem thong round it. The carbine,
he says, was the fame as was fired at him ; that
1527] 1 GEOEGE IV.
Trial of WiUiam Davidson and
11538
he tried it, and found, when he took it to Bow-
street^ that it was one which had been recently
discharged, for there was the moisture pfo-
duced by a recent discharge.
Then John Muddock was called, and he
stated, ''I am a soldier in the Coldstseam
regiment of guards ; I was one of the party
that went to Cato-street ; I recollect seeing a
man near the stable door ; I saw him the next
day at Whitehall, and I found his name to be
Tidd ;*' then he pointed him out ; '^ he pre-
sented a pistol at lieutenant Fitzclarence ; he
fired it off, and I saw seijeant Legg secure him
afterwards ; after thb I went towards the
stable door, and I saw a person cut with a i
sword at lieutenant Fitzclarence ; he went in 1
again, and I did not see who he was, and ;
afterwards Mr. Fitzclarence attacked them, and
went in at the door, and I followed him in ;
after I had got into the centre of the room, the
prisoner Wilson presented a pistol at my
breast ; it flashed in the pan but did not dis-
charge ; I made a stab at hiin with my bayonet ;
I secured him, and took him to a publio-house,
where I looked at him by a light; I now see the
same person at the. bar.
Tlien William Legg is called ; he says, " I
am a seijeant in the Coldstream*guards ; I was
one of the party that went under the command
of lieutenant Fitzclarence on the night of the
23rd of February to Cato-street ; I observed a
man standing with his back against the wall,
between the gateway leading out of John-street
find the stable door; he had a pistol in his
hand, and he levelled it at lieutenant Fitz-
clarence, who was about a yard and a half at
4he ^ead of me ; upon my observing that, 1
knocked the pistol aside with a pike, and
seized the muzzle end of the pistol with my
left hand ; a scufHe upon that ensued between
the man and me, and the pistol went off in the
scuffle ; whatever the pistol was loaded with,
tore the sleeve of the jacket of the right arm ; as
soon as the pistol went off, he let it go easily,
and I secured him, and delivered him over to
the police officers ; that man was Tidd ; I saw
him afterwards, and I have seen him since ; I
then went into the stable, and up into the loft ;
the persons who were in the loft had sur-
rendered when I got there to part of the
piquet; I assisted in securing some of the arms
that were taken in the loft.'^
Then Lieutenant Fitzclarence is called, who
says, '* I am a lieutenant in the Coldstream-
^uards ; I was applied to on the evening of
the 23rd of February to send a piquet to
John-street; I accompanied that piquet; when
I got to John-street, my attention was attracted
by the report of fire arms; I brought my
piquet.forwards towards Cato-street; on get-
ting to the archway leading into Cato«>street, I
met a police officer, wjio . was calling out
^ soldiers, soldiers 1 the stable door V I made
towards it, and the moment I got to the door
I met two men, one of them presented a pistol,
and the other cut at me with a sword ; we ex*
f^hanged several ^uis ; he seeing the body of
the piquet coming op, ran into the stable, sod
I followed him ; on entering tiie stable, I cause
up to one man, who said, ' do not kill me, and
I will tell you all,' it turned out afteniaids
that that was Monument ; ** I gave \m in
charge, and then returned and took out another
man, and the soldiers took him away ; I thea
led the men up into the loft, and therelfoond
three four or five men, and a large quaotitj of
arms, consisting of blunderbusses, pistols, and
pikes ; I assisted in securing the p^soas in the
loft, and the arms."
Upon his cross-examination, be sajs, "I
took Davidson into custody ; he was taken to
Bow-street, having been first brought into the
stable in Cato-street; I do not know that ii
proceeding from the stable he was taken into
any public-house, or any other house; 1 viH
not be certain that he was not taken into the
Horse and Groom ; Tidd and another peeoa
were there ; but I think," lieutenant Filr
clarence added, '< he was not to my knovledjei
in the Horse and Groom, nor in a pabiic-
house, till he was carried to Bow-street''
Thenext witness called is William Westcoatt,
who says, *< I am one of the Bow-8b«et pat-
role ; I went to Cato-atieet on the 33ni of
February ; on going up I saw logs, one (]f the
prisoners, at the foot of the ladder."
Then John .Wright is called, who says, ''I
am one of the Bow-street patrole; I veotap
to the foot of the ladder in the stable in Cato-
street; I saw a stoutisb man standing there; I
took from him a butcber*8 knife and asvoid;
there was wax-end twisted round the handle
of the knife ; that knife is in the posseaiottof
the officer; immediately afterwards I ni
knocked down, and received a stab in my tight
side, and that man made his escape fromaie;
Ings was immediately afterwards brought bad
in custody/'
John Champion, who is also one of the
Bow-street patrole, says " I was at the suUe
in Cato-street on the night of the 23rd; I saw
Ings at the foot of the ladder; on tke officeis
appearing, he said, ^ look out above iheie';he
afterwards made his escape; Brooks afienranb
came up, bringing him in custody; ve not
him to Mary-le-bone watcb-hoase, sod
searched him there ; we found two hsTeisat^
slung across his shoulders under his great cot^
a tin^ase nearly full of powder, three }isx»^
balls, a knife case, and a belt round his breast i
the knife-case was made of olotb, for ft ^
knife ; there is a knife wrapped rouod vitb wit*
end, which fits it, and which is in it now.
Then W^illiam Charies Brookes iscaNj
he says, " I am one of the Bow-street patwj;
I met a man running in John-street on the
night of the 23rd ; he presented a pistol at oe
and fired it; the ball went thrwgh my
clothes, bruised my shoulder,' and graied dJ
neck ; I staggered into the street, and Uiemaonft
on ; he was afterwards laid hold of by Moayi*
watchman ; I searched him in the watcMjwjJ
and took from him two haversacks, a beK***}
his body, and a tin case nearly foUof po«dtf >
1530]
Richard Tiddjor High Treasdn.
A.D. 1820. »
[1530
I asked him how he came to fire at me, a man
he had never seen before ;^nd he damned me,
and said he wished he had killed me, as he
^vanted to do.''
They then called Samnel Hercules Taunton,
another of the officers, who says, **on the
morning of the 24th of February, I went to
Brunt's lodgings, to apprehend him ; I took
him in the front two-|^ir of stairs room ; I
found there two rash baskets, an iron pot
and a pike-staff; 1 asked him about the back
room, and he denied its being his apartment ; I
then called up the landlady, and asked her
whose it was ; ^he, in his presence, said the
lodgings were let in his presence to a man, but
ahe did not know what his name was ; I asked
Brnnt who he was, and he said, he had only
seen him once at a publio-hotse, and he did not
know who he was ; I then went to Tidd's lodg«
ing, in Hole->in-the-wall passage, and found
some articles of ammunition ;" which are now
lying on the table, and enumerated in that list
which I shall by and by state to you.
Daniel Bishop, another Bow-street officer,
teUs you that he apprehended Thistlewood on
Thursday the 24th of February, between ten
and eleven in the morning ; he says, ** I found
him al the house of a Mrs. Harris, No. 8,
White-street, Moor-fields ; he was then in bed,
with his breeches and stockings on, and his
coat and waistcoat by the, bed -side ; in the
pockets I found three leaden balls, a ball-carl*
ridge, two flints, and a small silk sash ; I took
him to Bow-street, and then to the Secretary
of State's."
On his cross-examination, he says, that se-
veral of the patfole went with him to. appre*
hend . Thistlewood, and that they surrounded
the house before they entered it, for fear of
mischief. This was all the evidence given to
you yesterday.
Then, gontleroen, they have this day again
called berore you, Rotfaven, the officer, who
says, '' there are now upon the table the arms
and ammunition found in Cato-street; there were
six more hand-grenades than there are here,
which have been opened in the course of the
investigations; the pike staves were ferruled
at the time they were found ; but some of the
ferrules have dropped off, in consequence, as
I suppose, of the greenness of the wood ; some
of the pike-heads are files sharpened, and
others are bayonets ; the poles are bored for
the pike-heads to screw in ; the hand-grenades
were all fitted with fuses." Then he points
out the haversacks and the belt, the knite and
the knife-case, found upon Ings. He then
verifies a list, which he says he made out, of
the various articles ; thirty-eight ball-cartridges,
firelock and bayonet, one powder-flask, three
pistols, one sword, six bayonet spikes and
cloth belt, one blunderbuss, pistol, fourteen
bayonet-spikes and three pointed files, one
bayonet, one bayonet-spike and one sword
scabbard, one carbine and bayonet, two swords,
> one bullet, ten hand-grenades, two fire-balls,
one large grenade and bayonet, rop^ladder,
one sword-stick, forty ball-cartridges and one
bayonet, three loose bails;" these were aH
found in the lofl. *' In the stable, in the
pocket of Bradbum, six ball-cartridges, three
balls and some string put round him to act as
a belt; the pistol which it is alleged that
Tidd fired, the pistol which it is alleged that
Wilson attempted to fire, blunderbuss, sword,
belt and scaobard, one pistol, one sword,
twelve sticks with ferrules. In the pocket of
Tidd, two ball-cartridges, and round him a
leather belt; two ball-cartridges fiicing the
stable, and ten ditto in Newnbam-street ; one
musket cut down, and one sword from David-
son, one haversack, cross belts, one pricker,
bayonet, scabbard, cartouche-box, and a belt
round his body ; two haversacks, one belt and
tin." The remainder of the enumeration of
the articles I would read to you, if there was
au^ thing in it that tended to the benefit of the
prisoners; but my learned brother suggests,
that probably you have so good a recollecticm
of the enumeration of the articles which are
exhibited before yoo, that you may not perhaps
think it necessary that I should go through it
again. .
Foreman of the Jury, — No, my lord, it is not
at all necessary.
Mr. Baron Oomni;.— -Then, gentlemen, thi*
being the enumeration of the articles, the wit-
ness says, '' the stick that was found in the
public house was the one left by Cooper, and
afterwards asked for by Gilchrist."
John Hector Morison is then called again,
and a sword being shewn to him, he says,
'* this is the sword that was brought for me to
grind ; my directions were, to grind it on both
sides, and to make the point as sharp as a
needle ; it is particularly sharp." I asked him
if that was the one he called a scimitar, and
he says, " they are both of a similar shape ;'^
then he says, '' since it left me the edge has
been made much keener by sharpening it with
a steel or a stone, I cannot exactly say which .^
Then Benjamin Gill is called again, and
selects the carbine and sword taken from Da«
vidson, from the arms which are upon the
table; he had stated, that he believed there
was a string attached to the sword taken from
Davidson, and the one produced has such a
string ; '* the carbine was not loaded when I
took possession of it, because he had dis-
charged it at me before I took it to Bow-street,
it was quite damp."
Iluthven is again called, and be says, ^^ the
greater part of Sie fire-arms were loaded when
we took them ; we had them drawn for the
purpose of being produced here ; they were
ioaaed with ball, with the exception of one
gun, which had large shot."
Then Mr. Aldous, the (yawnbroker, is called
again, and having looked at the blunderbuss
produced to him, he states, that he believes it
to be the same that was taken out of pawn by
Davidson, on tbie 23rd of February. Being
asked by the the priatoner Davidson whether
1S31] t GEORGE IV.
Trial qflPttliamDa^idioi^ and
nsss
li« did not i^eoUect biftMjriiog, wbeii lie fdodf^
«d it, tb«t it was not bis owo» he says the
•prisooer might make that observatioDy but he
does not recollect it.
Taunton* the officer, is then called again,
nnd he ennmerates the articles found in the
rush baskets at Bnint's; he siysy ^Mn one
basket there «t«tn aioo paper% with ropei^m,
tar» and other ingredients ; those^^ he snys, ^are
what are eaUed fire4Mlis ; there were also some
steel filings in a paper, nbont hnlf nn onnce ;
in the other basket, which was wrapped up in
4he bhie apmn, there wereienr grenades, three
papers of rope-yarn, tar, end otfwr iogredienls»''
that is, Baoce fire-balls ; ^ two bags of powder,
one pound weight each, they sm mode of
flnanel (" ihese are made up in the best ma»-
laer they can be made for cartridges for cannon
by a peraott not hvring a mould for the gun,
nod petfoetly answering the purpose of a move
legolar cartridge ; '' five flannel bags empty,
•ae paper of powderi one leather bag, sikty-
three balls, one iron pot|'* it appears that tar,
€t some such substance hae been heated in it,
'^a pike-handk;'' these were alt the things
that were found at Brunt's ;' he says, ** the
haud-grenades found in Cato-street, and those
found at Brunt's, are of the ftinie description ;"
then he savs, ''at Tidd's, there were found in
A hayenact^ 434 hallSy 171 baU-cutridgei, 69
hall-cartridges without powdar in theni, thine
fMninds of powder in j^eper^ tnd ako in a
ooarse eanfass cloth (en grenades, ^evnn bags
of powder, one pound eick^** of the same sort
with those found at Btunt's ; ^ ten hag9 empty,
a small bag with a tin powder flask with some
powder, stzty^^eight balls, four flints^ twenty^
eeren pifce-himdlieB^ of the same dnsoription as
those mnd in Cato-street^ forrukd ana bored,
and a box containing ' 965 balUcartridgoa,''
which, he ai^, are made up in parcels of five
each ; then, upon a question being put by one
of you, gentlemen, whether that box was etreng
enough to remoi« them from plnce to plaoe,
fie says, '' it was tied up strongly when I found
it under the bed ; it was strong enough^ cer-
lainly^ to be removed/'
• Then they call Serjeant Hanson, who says,
^lama seij^eant in the royal aitilleiy, and
acquaintBd with such things as are now before
me. The flannel bags of gunpowder, con»
taining" one pound each, I suppose were meant
ibr cartridges for a six-pound gun, they wouKl
answer that purpose; they are made difier*
ently from what a military man of experience
would make tbeas, be would make them in a
monkl fitted to the gun. The ingredients of
those fire^mlls are neariy all alike ; they am
made of oaknm, 4ar, resio and brimstone ; one
was withont brimstone,^' that he supposed had
been intended for the bottom of a lMUid-gre«
node; " tfa^ wooM be eflectusA in setting a
building on fire, and if one of them was thrown
into a hay loft with two or three loads of hay
and straw» it would most anufedly bum it
down, or dnvwn into eny building and resting
on wcbdy it «o«dd.sel it oo fire ^ it wodid bum
for three or four minvtes. In the
nades I have opened, there is a small boa of
tin, containing about three ounces and a hilf
of gunpowder, vith a fose brazed into it; I
weighed the gunpowder in oae^ nod they afl
appear to be Uie same, that is, aaore than
ctent for a niuMaeh slwU ; fint there is
yarn, then paper, then more ropB»fnin» then
the tin-box, with a number of pieees nf
tied tight round it. I found as i
fivo pieem of iron ; if these were tbsoi
a room where fifteen persons were
it would be dischaiged in about half a
and piebably be attended with dealii
annetiea to all the pemons in the loon.
he opens one, and gives you a desctiption of
its content! ; he says, "the powder is veiy
good; the hand-grenailes are wot anadeasa
military man would make then, Imt Hiot am
constructed so as to he very effectwnl and ^^
stractive; the regular hand-igrenadee have a
shell which can only be obtained nft a
der's ;" the one he opens has nuiy four
of iron in it, but he says he fomnd in
twenty-^ve ; they vary according to the dm
of the pieces.
This is the whole of the evidence ob the part
of the preeecntion. You have been addressed
by the learned ooonsel for the
the subject of the case which
submitted to you, and yon have sinee
nddtened by the fmsoners themsalvei. i
aot at present state to you at any kngth tiie
observniioes which have been made hf ibe^
or by the other, but shall follow the
chief baron, who presided at the <nilf trial at
which I have been present hare, hy desiring
you, upon whom the speeches of coumel
most peooHsuly calculated to m^e a deep
lasting impression, to give the fodiest efieet
all the observations that were addieesed to
I diall raeommend to you to pay the wtmost
attention to what has been said. I haene a
reason for not foing much at laofe into the
observations whii^ yon have heard, wlodb pen-
bably yon wttl give me credit for beUeiaug is
not one oreatid by a feeling olh<
humane towards the priscnere at tftm
On the part of the prisonem there hnare been
called to yoa as witnesses two pereooa to foela;
the first of these is Mary Badcer, who leKi ye«B,
she is the dai^ter of the prisoner Tidd ; that
she knows Edwaeds and Adams ; that
about a fortnight l>efare the afihir in
left at her father's lodgings some hand^greimdw
and powder ; she says, ** AdaoM left the huge
grenade; Edwards asked, if he mighit .lenve
them for a little while ; they were not to re^
main there, they vrere to be called for again ;
Edwards took them away once to finish them,
iml brought them hack again; this wm
albont a week before the Cato-eaeet aftir ;
they were taken away again on the 23id by
Edwards, and l»onght back on the t4tii|
about an homr before the officer eame; the
person who brought them hack was an
stmngerte «ie ; there w«8 a ooided boa.
1533]
Rkkard Tidd for High Trtaim.
A. D. 182a
tl/K»4
Other tblttgB, left at oor bouse, whiekwaem,
to m/'kiiowtedge, uocordled during the tiae it
remained, wbkh was till the morniDg cf the
34tb, when the officers took it away ; what it
contained I do not know/' Yon wiU piobably
not wonder, that the learned oounsel fiw the
Grown did not address any qaestUm to the
witness, becanse it was otidoubledly trae, as
was staled in the replyi that if the case had
fenained short on the part of the proseeution,
muoh confirmation would be derived from the
testimony of this unhappy penon, oalled in
Mder to effeet the security of her near relatiTe;
I shaU make no further observation upon it;
that is undoubtedly well justified.
Thomas Chambers is the next witness ; he
eays^ *^ I live at No* 3, Heathcook-coort, in the
Strand ; I know Adams ; I remember the day
when the people were taken up in Cato-street|
lie ealled upon me twice, about a week before,
in company with Edwards ; Edwaids asked
me, in the presence of Adams, if I would go
along with them ; I asked them where ; he said
I was not such a fool as not to know there was
something on foot; I replied, I did not;
Adams sud, we are going to kill his mnes^s
ministerB, and we will have blood and wine
Ibr supper ; Edwards replied, by God, Adams^
you are right, it shall be so." He sirfs, ^ on
the Monday before the Catcvstreet disoovery^
they both came ; they bad a beg with them ;
they asked me to let them leave it there; I
asked what it contained, and Adams said, only
a few pistols and such like; a man named
Tunbridge was there at the time* I refheed to
let them leave it, and I nee er saw them afte»*
floBse questions are addtessed to him en
«TOss-«SBmtnallon, and in answer to them, he
says, ** I do not knew what book I was swoni
upon ; I never took an oath hut once, belbre I
came here the other day ; this is the thtvd tiuM^
k is a Prayer-book, I sbeuld suppose. I am
a churchman ; I Mieve In Christianity, and
have always said so ; I always believed in the
Bible, and was brought up to the church ; I
sever saw Paioe's worksv I know both Uie
prisoners at the bar ; I have known Davidson
Sttoee about the time of Mr. Hunt's proeession;
I have onfy known Tidd in the trade> we are
brother shoemakers ; I cannot say how long I
have known him, whether twelve or nine or
six months. I dnd not paiticularly knew him
at the time of Hunt's procession.'' Upon
being pressed as to how long he had known
him, he says, ** it mi^t be at some of the
meetings in Smithfleld ; I attended every rneel^
ing that was held openly in the air ; I carried
bannen ; I cannot say but that I might have
walked in the processiOD with some of the pri-
«onen who are indicted • I know lugs and finint
and Wilson, and I know H^urtison very well ; I
do not know Bradburn so well, hut I do know
him." llien he is asked vriiether he went to any
of the Smithfield meetings in company with any
of these persons, and he says, ^ I cannot say,
Aey might be there; I had no weapon at the
SmithAeld meeting ; I carried no pistol in my
pocket, nor do I know that any body else had
any ; I have known Thistlewood ever since Mr.
Hunt's procession ; he has been at my place
repeatedly since, for I took home the ^ags,
and he has been there to fetch them, and to
distribute them to those who were to take them*
i have seen him sinoe, on one Sunday evening,
at the Black Dog in Oray's-inn«lane. I know
the White Don in Wych-street very well, I
have attended meetings there ; there is no name
to the meeting, except that it is a meeting o^
Mibrroers; I had no number or section. I
saw Thisdewood at the Smithfield meeting,
when Mr. Hunt was in the waggon ; I wa«
always in the vraggon ; I cannot say who else
Was diere, there were thousands I believe ; I
do not think I saw Davidson there»" Then he
is asked whether he thought they were sucfar
ferocious monsters as were going to commit
assassination, and he says, *'Yes, but I did
not consider they would get fools enough to
do it ; I considered myself a fool, but not s»
big a fool as that; I never heard a man say a
word against his majesty's ministera, except
those men, Edurards and Adams ; I thoumit
the thing so preposterous and absurd, that
no man would oe found foolish enough to do
it. I first met with lags at a shop where
pamphlets were sold ; I enfy read Mr. Colv*
bett's wo^ ; I have got plenty of them."
Tlien they called another witness, John
Bennett; he says, **l live at No. 4, Little
Park-lane, New-street, Mary-4e-bone ; I am a
bricklayer by tiude; I know Hidea, he ban
oaltod upon me, and asked me to accompany
him to privute radical meetings ; he has en-i
duaiROufed to persoada me to accompany
him more than ten times ; he did not tell bm
any thing was to be done there, but only ra«
quested me to go with him, and I might sit
and see and hear, and say nothing unless I
^ose ; I never did accompany him, nor evet
went to any radical meetings, either private oe
public.''
This is all the evidence called on the part
of the prisoners to any facts.
They then proceed to call witnesses to the
respective characters of the prisoners. For the
ptsoner, Davidson, the first witness they caU
IS Isaac Cook, who savs ^ I live in Chariotte*
street Blackfriars'*road; I have known David*
son about six years ; about six years ase
he worked as a journeyman for me in the
cabinet Hue, and he has since occasionally
called at my house in the way of business ; at
the time he worked for me, he was a very honest
hard-^rorking industrious man, but I have not
known sufficiently of him since to speak to kiM
character.''
For the prisoner Tidd, they call Stephen
Hales, who keeps a grocer's shop at No* IT^
Bell-court, Gray'84nnr>lane ; he si^ ^ I have
known Tidd about fifteen months, and during
that time I never saw any thing in km condnot
treasonable, or that lo^ed Hke conspiracy)
he wes a very piadeot and industrioas maa^
15351 1 GEORGE IV-
,THal of fVUUarn Davidson and
[1536
always at hii work when he had any to do ;
and when he bad none he took a walk with
his family, or employed his time in reading."
Then William French is called, and he says,
" I am a carpenter and undertaker, living at
No. 18, Union-court, Holbom ; I have knovm
Tidd nearly three years, he was a lodger and
tenant of mine ; during that time he has borne
the best character ; he appeared a very indus-
trious and honest man, and was always a
punctual paymaster; I never wished for a
Detter tenant."
Samuel Lands says, '*I live at No. 11,
Charlea-street Hatton-garden ; I am a boot*
maker; I have known Tidd turned of three
years ; he has borne a very good character to
the best of my knowledge ; he always appeared
to be an honest and industrious roan ; he has
worked for me the whole of that time, and has
deserved my good opinion."
Then on the behalf of Davidson, Robert
Wood is called, and he says, " I am a tinman
and braxier, living at No. 5, £Uiott's-row near
Lord's Cricket-ground ; I have known David-
son upwards of three years, and during that
time he has appeared to be a very industrious
sober man."
This is the whole of the evidence which has
been laid before you in the course of these
two laborious days, upon this most important
and anxious trial ; and before I proceed to any
other subject, I would observe upon that which
has been the last topic of evidence — the cha-
lacter of the prisoners ; I think you may take
it upon that which has been proved by the
witnesses on their part, that they have received
from them unexceptionable characters — then I
address you in the language of all judges upon
such subjects, by saying to yon, that if the
case imputed to the prisoners remains in any
doubt, you ought to give them the full benefit
and advantage of character, and that ought to
turn the scale in their favour ; but if the case
admits of no doubt whatever, character ought
noty cannot, and it would be most preposter-
ous that it should operate to find a man not
guilty, where the evidence is clear against
him.
In the course of this inquiry, it has been
suggested to you, that, with all the evidence
which you have heard from the testimony of
witnesses, pure and impure, it is impossible for
any men, who expect to have any attention
paid to their observation, to hesitate in admit-
ting fully, broadly, up to the fullest extent, that
a conspiracy of many persons, characterized by
those who have spoken of it as of a most
diabolical, detestable nature, such as is a dis-
grace to any civilized coublry, has taken place.
It has been admitted, that it is impossiole to
deny that the persons included in tnis indict-
ment have each of them had their respective
shares in that conspiracy ; but it is said, we
must not confound criiAes, that it was a con-
spiracy which in point of moral guilt, in point of
diabolical turpitude, in point of cold-blooded |
wickedness, nothing can oy possibility exceed ; •
and the gentlemen have, in a mamier aljil
nobody could doubt for a single momeDt «ii
a candid and fair declaration of that nhck
they were feeling at their hearts, stated, that
they could not for a single momeat be tk
apologists of such crimes as those ; bat dut
horrid and detestable as they were, tbef did
not amount to the crime of high treasoa ww
charged. What is the conspiracy, then, wliitk
these gentlemen ask you to adopt in the place
of that which the prosecutor says was a cos-
spiracy to subvert the government, to depes
the king, to levy war, to produce rebellioBaiii
insurrection in the country? Wkatisittke^
give you in the place of this? why, acw-
spiracy to destroy by the most destractivend
horrible means by which human life has em
been taken away by any assassins in anj boe
or in any country, fifteen persons, whose onei
and stations have more than once been itatsd
to you ; but feeling that it would be impo«-
ble to induce any men of your ooder^aod-
ing to believe that was quite all, beaoseit
woold be difficult to induce any man or bdb-
ber of men, who had no common intereit, m
common cause of complaint, no comoxHi lo-
timent of malice or revenge, by any sedndtoo,
by any temptation of reward, by any po«Ue
means to procure their accession to ssdi a
transaction — ^to engage in it merely for ^
purpose of taking off such men as tbo«— I
speak of those fifteen persons only as v« ^
them in the evidence-— this is not the phc^ if
I had the honour of intimate aoqoaintasce
with any of those noble personages, for me to
introduce that as a topic tor vour consideiatioi
—I speak of them only as the erideooeiDtlni
case and the history of the ooontry pnxM
them to you ; were those the only penoos vh>
were to be destroyed according to ike testi-
mony which bears so strongly on the esse (bit
which the gentlemen say cannot expect any cre-
dit with you, but that which the wimessAdasB
has told you was the construction of bis ovo
invention, and not the invention of the cof*
spirators). — Were those fifteen per»n$tb««2
piersons who were to become the victitis «
these attempts ? No ; there was one otter,
and that was another who, when the naiatB
pronounced, wHl furnish a strong clae tt i*-
certain whether the destruction of mioi^^
and the plunder of houses wras the only o^
in view, or whether it had ulterior objeeuot
wide-spreading destruction.
You will not fail to recollect that the fire-
balls, which were to light up the illumioatioij
of the metropolis, to intimate to the friends ot
liberty that now was the time for them to co^
forward, for that their tyrants were destroyed,
and that a provisional government was sitiu^
were to destroy, among others, the boose »
the bishop of London. J believe I may ay w
that person, that of all the learned and ex-
cellent inen who have ever presided in the«e
of London, there never was a man, and I oe'
lieve I may venture to say there nenx w
exist a man, so utterly incapable of givaV "*
16«T1
ItkA^rd TidAJor Wgh Tmm.
A. D, iwa
[15St
•UghtesI offiRM to any bumftB creature ; or i^
I may U9« ao expretaion which sometimes haa
been employed upon sueh subjeetSy of giving
uneaainess evea to the worm under his foot —
the creature of benevolence— €t man whose
character and conduct, in public and private
life, have conciliated the esteem and affection
of all who know him» and of whom, I believe it
may be truly said, it is impossible he should
have one enemy ; and yet this prelate, with his
interesting infant family, and every thing that
ia dear to him in this world, were, according
to the account you have heard of that which
was to be accomplbhed on the 23rd of Febru-
ary, to be included in that which it is admitted
was one of the purposes of this conspiracy, to
destroy the lives of ministers and to burn the
houses.
But was there no ulterior object ? yes, it is
admitted there was ; there was an object of
pillage and plunder, and it was said, they were
to kick up a row, for they were too poor to wait
longer. Gendenen, forget for a moment that
there was such a man as Adams in the world—
forget for a moment that there was such a roan
as John Monument in esustence, take the ac-
count you have heard from Hale, from Hiden,
from lieutenant Fitzclarence, from the officers,
from lord Harrowby, from his butler, from wit*
nesses upon do one of whom the least stain is
attempted to be fixed ; look at the apparatus
upon your table, and at the ammunition which
has been carried away to a place of safety,*
and ask yourselves, what more was there of
conspiracy here i and had it for its only object
the destruction of the lives of ministers, and
some plunder? Men accommodate their
means to their object ; then according to oiw
diaary experience, we may expect to find these
persons going forth, if plunder is tbtir object,
as pluaderers usually ao, in all the possible
security arising from the stillness of the night,
aad they will not add murder to plunder, un«
lass mnrder becomes necessary, in an attempt
to prevent detection ; but these men are to cut
aff the heads of fifteen of his raajest/s cabinet
miaisiers, and to plunder; and it was said to
you, ''oh, the carrying the haversacks, with,
the accompaniment of the butcher's knife, was
aot lo cut off and bring away the hand and the
heads of his majesty's roinislers; that was a
wicked diabolical invention of Adams.*' If
yoa ask, say the leanied gentlemen, what they
were all for, they were for the carrying away
tilt plunder. You have seen these things,
gCBtleaMn, what was the plunder which might
Have been expected at the house of one of his
majesty's ministers? probably an extremely
Talnable service of plate to the amount of four
or five hundred poinds or more, much of it in
aiaasrve articles. We shall find persons going
eat to plunder with the means of carrying away
the plunder when they have got it, but shaU
* The gunpowder and other comhustible
naUer had heea removed out of court, at tha
cqmI«MO0 (9f the evidenoB fi>r the foroteciition.
VOL. xxxiir.
we find them encumbered with things which
will. not enable them to carry it away; shall
we find the party with only two haversacks
over the shoulder of one of the men ? and yet
that Is the only object to be accomplished.
What is to become of them afterwards ? The
project is to relieve their dire necessities ; they
are in want, they can wait no longer ; why ;
there is no article they could have found any
where \ess convertible to the immediate pur^
po'^e of life, than a service of plate off a nobler
min's sideboard, unless the crucible was air
ready prepared to melt it down, and some per-
son ready to sell the ingots produced ; but bor
sides that, they would want theaccommodatioa
for carrying away plunder. What was re-
quired for the destruction of the cabinet min«i
isters of the king ? Were the articles on 
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American Libraries
TV News
Understanding 9/11